Watch in full: Alex Salmond gives evidence in Holyrood inquiry, this is a masterclass in laying out a case, the position of SNP Leader Nicola Sturgeon is now untenable

The Woman without a Shred of Decency and Honour, Angry bitter SNP Leader Nicola Sturgeon accuses Labour MSP Jackie Baillie of being Alex Salmond's "chief spokesperson" by spreading misinformation, the truth is the SNP is rotten at the core, and it is “poisoning Scotland’s democratic institutions”, Sturgeon is willing to destroy everyone and everything including the SNP to escape responsibility, as Conservative Ruth Davidson says, "Is saving your own skin worth all the damage you’re doing?"

Dear All 

Former SNP Deputy Leader appears on TV in relation to the Alex Salmond scandal, at 83 years of age, Jim Sillars hasn't lost any of his mental capability. He is as sharp as a tack. I met him during the Brexit campaign at an event I organised in the Palace of Arts, he has a remarkable grasp of politics and is someone who is an engaging speaker. In my time, I have met some really engaging speakers, and Jim Sillars ranks up there will the likes of Gordon Brown and Alex Neil. They bring a style which educates and entertains you, they have the gift of craft of being able to interweave facts and personal experience. A good political talk should be like a good play, it should have pace, correct tempo and of course, a few funnies.

In an interview with the Scottish Sun, Jim Sillars said: 

“I for one, I’m a member of the party, I am not voting for them. I believe that there’s a fair degree of political corruption now loose inside the higher echelons of the SNP. And my conscience doesn’t allow me to vote for people I find highly dubious.”

If you have watching the news, other people have also sprung out the work to denounce what has been going on. The catch all phrase which best sums it up is #SNPCorruption. Jim Sillars is not alone, SNP MP's Kenny MacAskill and Angus MacNeil have also spoken out, only today, SNP MSP Alex Neil came right out and said that:

“If it was proven there was a conspiracy – everybody involved in the conspiracy I think would be getting their jotters.” 

You might say he was hedging his bets, but fact he has came out is as significant as others. You could if you were so minded use the term 'conspiracy', because it is a word in common usage which describes what happened to Alex Salmond. The Scottish Government led by Nicola Sturgeon deliberately tried to railroad him through and illegal process. And they knew they were trying to railroad him through an illegal process once it was told to them. There then followed a cover up after Salmond won his judicial review. From the attempt to stitch him up, that led to the criminal trial, because I suspect that the people involved panicked. This led to the 'hunt' for women to make allegations against Alex Salmond. The approach seem to be 'more the merrier' or to give it its legal name the moorov doctrine. The doctrine is based on multiple people who give evidence against an individual accused of a crime who don't have any connection. In the Salmond criminal trial, this method was used because the Crown Office thought that 'volume of evidence' would trump 'quality of evidence'. The Crown thought that so many charges would generate even a single conviction, thus those involved in the conspiracy against Alex Salmond would be safe, Alex Salmond would be destroyed and they would be off the hook, and their part covered up forever. 

But they didn't think this through, like the guy who keeps the hole, they just dug themselves in deeper. They didn't reckon on the jury, a jury most made up of women, who sat and listened to these women who occupied high positions in Scottish public life. The Crown Office failed to deliver for Nicola Sturgeon's SNP Government, the verdict she wanted. Since the Alex Salmond verdict, you may have noticed that: 

1/ The Crown Office hasn't gone back for a retrial, why is that?

2/ None of the 'alphabet women' have gone public, even although some people have worked out their identities and how close they are to Nicola Sturgeon.

3/ None of the 'alphabet women' have taken out a private prosecution.

4/ None of the 'alphabet women' have sued Alex Salmond.

5/ None of the  'alphabet women' have sued the Scottish Government. 

Does any of this make you sit and ponder? 

As Labour MSP Jackie Baillie said at First Minister's Questions (FMQs), the SNP is rotten at the core and “poisoning Scotland’s democratic institutions”. She is of course right, the SNP came up with a strategy which was to infiltrate and control power at all levels of public life either directly by joining groups or getting obedience. So, what do I men by all levels of public life? I mean they occupy seats in community councils, councils, NGOs, third sector charities, MSPs and Westminster. The SNP have formed a massive 'spad' army to watch the people in government departments, to watch and report disloyalty. I would say it's like Nazis Germany or Stalin's Russia, control by fear. Fear of loss, fear of losing their jobs by not being faithful to the regime run under Sturgeon. What the SNP are doing is simply to the work undertaken by Beria. Lavrentiy Beria is someone of historical interest during the second world war, his methods can be seen in how the SNP operate in Scotland, but Beria isn't a person who got away with his crimes. After a trial, he was shot through the forehead, regarded by Stalin as his 'Himmler', he was drunk on power and possibly mad. He was responsible for what was termed 'the purges'  in Russia, deemed later as an act of terrorism.  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lavrentiy_Beria   

Although Nicola Sturgeon and Co will never go as far as having anyone shot, there are many of the Scottish public and beyond who believe that Sturgeon wouldn't have any problem jailing an innocent man. In her recent party political broadcast on the BBC, which is a disgrace, she used the Covid 19 briefing to attack Alex Salmond again. Which brings us to Jim Sillars' letter to Leslie Evans, Permanent Secretary of the Scottish Government, and someone who doesn't have a future, Leslie Evans. And it appears she is someone who isn't bright enough to turn Queen's evidence and spill her guts. I am reminded of something said by Nicola Sturgeon's husband, Peter Murrell, wrote in a text: 

 “The more fronts he is having to firefight on the better for all complainers.”  

Now, it seems:

 “The more fronts Nicola Sturgeon is having to firefight on the better for all complainers, Alex Salmond, disgruntled SNP and indy members and the opposition party.” 

Here is the full Jim Sillars' letter and then I will get back to you at the bottom. 

"JIM SILLARS LODGES FORMAL COMPLAINT AGAINST THE FIRST MINISTER 

25th. February 2021

Ms. Leslie Evans

Permanent Secretary

Scottish Government

St. Andrew’s House

Edinburgh EH1

Dear Ms. Evans, 

FIRST MINISTER IN BREACH OF THE MINISTERIAL CODE ON 24TH FEBRUARY 2021 

I wish to lodge a complaint of breaches  of the Ministerial Code by the First Minister on Wednesday 24th. February, 2021. The substance of the complaint, and the facts it is based upon, are set out below. 

As the complaint could be seen as being in the context of matters being examined by the Parliamentary Committee of Inquiry, to which you have given evidence, you may think it inappropriate for you to be the official dealing with this complaint. If that is so, then I request that the next person in seniority should take this as addressed to them.  I would like to be informed of who will deal with this complaint, should it not be you. 

In her daily press briefings on the pandemic, the First Minister has consistently refused to answer questions on issues other than Covid-19.  Yesterday, however, instead of refusing to respond to questions on matters irrelevant to the purpose of the press briefing on Covisd-19, she deliberately chose to do so. Not once, but five times.  It can be seen here: 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/mOOOspr6/coronavirus-brefing-reaction-24022021. 

You will note “coronavirus briefing.”  The national broadcaster was in no doubt of the purpose of First Minister’s appearance. These briefings have all along had only one purpose. The timings show her response to questions which were asked as the briefing continued. I have had them  double-checked as to times: 

30.20 Question from James Matthew (SKY News)

First Minister spoke for 48 seconds on what can fairly be described as the Salmond issue.

32.57 Question from Peter Smith (ITV)

First Minister spoke for 5m 16secs on Salmond issue

52m 49scs Question from Simon Johnson (Daily Telegraph)

First Minister spoke for 1m 36scs on Salmond issue

1h. Question from  Michael Blackley (Daily Mail)

First Minister spoke for 52 seconds on Salmond issue

1h 02m “Question from Richard Percival (Daily Express)

First Minister spoke for 59 seconds on Salmond issue. 

In total, she spent over 9 minutes of a meeting called to inform the public, through the media, including BBC television,  of the government’s continuing action on the pandemic crisis, not to express her views on clearly  separate matters arising  from the Parliamentary Inquiry.  

Of course, the First Minister was not to know that the first question from James Matthew was not about Covid-19 and government policy in dealing with. But she did not, as on previous occasions, refuse to answer and re-state the purpose the briefing was convened for. Nor did she do that when the second question came from Peter Smith, and the others.  The only conclusion that can be drawn from her action from 30.20 on, points to it being no accident; a deliberate choice. 

When I state “the Salmond issue” above I mean what can be seen from the BBC iplayer – a sustained attack on Mr. Salmond on matters relevant to the Parliamentary Inquiry, but not remotely connected to a Covid briefing.  

The complaint is, therefore,  based on the attacks on Mr. Salmond in a forum that had been arranged by the Scottish Government  to inform the public on a subject, the pandemic, a matter of serious public concern, in which maximum publicity would be given to the words of the First Minister.  It is a gross breach of her duty to use that Government sponsored forum, for a public attack on Mr. Salmond in matters not related to the purpose of a briefing to which the media had been invited.  

I submit that it is a breach of the Ministerial Code to allow, and then use, a public health Covid briefing to launch an attack on Mr. Salmond in the context of matters arising from the Parliamentary Inquiry.  By her conduct as recorded by the BBC, she is in flagrant breach of the Clause 1 of the Code, and Clause 10 governing the conduct of Ministers and the Presentation  of Policy. 

It is not for me to question a decision by the First Minister to make a public attack on Mr. Salmond. But if she wished to do so, then she could have arranged a press conference on the subject, which would have been  the proper and legitimate forum in which to do so. Abusing the Government Covid briefing was neither proper or legitimate.  That is where  the Code has been breached. 

However, there are additional breaches of the Code which are quite extraordinary, unique in their gravity, and a matter of deep concern for all who understand the implications of what the First Minister said in those 9 minutes. 

During her attacks on Mr. Salmond she said: 

​“The behaviour complained of was found by a jury not to constitute ​criminal conduct and Alex Salmond is innocent of  criminality, but that ​doesn’t mean that the behaviour they complained of didn’t happen ​and I think it’s important that we don’t lose sight of that”  

Unlike the First Minister, who did not attend Mr Salmond’s trial, the jury was there for every second. They saw Mr.  Salmond,  cross examined, precisely denying  that the alleged behaviour happened. The jury saw and heard prosecution witnesses under cross examination. The jury’s conclusion, with a majority of women on it, was to acquit Mr. Salmond.  If as the First Minister states the jury’s verdict means that the complaints they had before them in evidence did in fact happen, then the only logical conclusion you can draw from her words is that the jury was wrong in its verdict – 13 times.  

Those were weasel words employed by the First Minister, and any reasonable person would draw more than an inference from them that the jury was wrong. The First Clause of the Ministerial Code (1.1) states that “Scottish Ministers  are expected  to maintain high standards of behaviour and to behave in a way that upholds  the highest standards of propriety.” The First Minister’s comment on the trial verdict, breached those standards. 

I have been in public life for over 60 years, and in the course of it studied how heads of state and governments in the democracies have behaved in office. I cannot recall one single incident when the head of a government so egregiously questioned the verdict of a jury, or event thought it a proper and legitimate discharge of their duty to do so. 

It is vital to the health of a democracy that Government more than any other part of our society maintain a scrupulous distance between it and intervention, even post-trial intervention, in our criminal justice system. That is the standard reflected in Clause (1.1) of the Code. Clause 1.3 states, inter alia,  that Ministers “should uphold the administration of justice.”  The First Minister, knowingly, breached those parts of the Code with her comments on the trial.  

I submit that there is overwhelming evidence that on several counts the First Minister has engaged, deliberately, in grave breaches of the Ministerial Code.  

Jim  Sillars" 

Hi, glad you made it through, the key part for me is: 

​“The behaviour complained of was found by a jury not to constitute ​criminal conduct and Alex Salmond is innocent of  criminality, but that ​doesn’t mean that the behaviour they complained of didn’t happen ​and I think it’s important that we don’t lose sight of that” 

Is Sturgeon actually saying that an attempted rape actually happened? To me, I am struggling to understand her warped mentality because there is no such thing as non criminal attempt rape. Rape is a criminal offence, attempted rape is a criminal offence, is Sturgeon saying that Alex Salmond is really guilty and that the jury just got it wrong? The jury got it wrong on all 13 charges? So, what were the charges because you need to understand them and then think over what Sturgeon has alleged. 

https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/alex-salmond-court-case-charges-full-2441107  

Finally, Alex Salmond made a joke when asked about his meetings with David Cameron, he responded, 'he disnae call, he disnae write', it seems that there are plenty of people geared up to complain about Nicola Sturgeon and her dodgy corrupt government. You can understand why now the Nicola Sturgeon and SNP are shutting down political campaigning by opposition parties. Sturgeon doesn't want people on doorsteps talking about the corruption of her SNP government or the fact they tried to put an innocent man in prison. 

Ruth Davidson sums it up well when she said at FMQs: 

"Is saving your own skin worth all the damage you’re doing?" 

Apparently yes seems to be the answer, Sturgeon thinks she can ride out the storm, but she is mistaken, because its too late, people know what happened, people know the players, people know what they did, and that they did it while holding political office, and as part of Nicola Sturgeon's inner circle.

Yours sincerely 

George Laird                                                                                                                                The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University 

The End of the Road for SNP Leader Nicola Sturgeon, after an attempt to suppress Alex Salmond's evidence by the Crown Office provokes outrage, the Crown Office is ordered to release evidence of the Alex Salmond 'conspiracy' by Holyrood using their powers to compel, as matters develop, are we seeing possible suspension of the Scottish Government, and an official UK Government investigation, Sturgeon appeared to think she was answerable to no one, is she in for a rude wake-up call in the very near future, Holyrood election 2021 must be postponed

Dear All 

First up, the last two months have been a bit hectic for me. In a previous blog post, I expressed the need to take some time off away from activism, mainly because I had other things which I wanted to crack on with. One of them was updating my skills, to get my cgi projects back on the go, the second was a personal matter, well personal to me at least. Just as I was just about to step back, I was head hunted to the campaign of former Labour MP Paul Sweeney. As some people know, I did both his Westminster campaigns of 2017 and 2019, one was successful and in the other he was squeezed out by the national swing of the SNP. The 2019 campaign was a physical nightmare for me, in fact, it was the hardest campaign I ever fought due to health problems, that one nearly wrecked me. I started the campaign late because I was recovering from an operation, I left the campaign early because I had to get another operation. And the bit in the middle was just agony, even something as simple as getting in and out of a vehicle was awful. 

The second item that popped up was my involvement in an admin task running a process which slightly overlapped the campaign to get Paul Sweeney a high place on the Glasgow list. This was a real learning curve for me because when you have no experience and no training, and the handbook doesn't tell you what to do and when, you feel rather adrift. Add to that your liaison goes on unexpectedly holiday, you have very much that floating in the Atlantic ocean, no land in sight. Adrift with other survivors who expect you to build a new ship that floats and get everyone to safe harbour. I can't tell you about the specific admin task I was involved with because it is still ongoing, however, my part came to a successful conclusion based on the rules and principles of due process. 

Now, let's back to scandal, and as scandals go, the Alex Salmond scandal probably is the most toxic and nasty that has ever been seen both side of the Scottish border in the last 20 years. I struggle to think of something nastier. We have had the Natalie McGarry criminal trial, a close pal of Nicola Sturgeon and Humza Yousaf. We have had the Mark McDonald scandal which is now possibly seen as an injustice by some. We have had the John Swinney scandal of the SNP sexualisation of children, teaching kids with a big banana and Nutella, the correct way to shag someone up the arse. We have had the Derek MacKay scandal, Mackay, the Lgbt heir to Sturgeon, who sent 270 text messages to a 16 year old boy who he thought was cute and had nice hair. People called out Derek Mackay for allegedly grooming this young boy, and people speculated on what Mackay's endgame was for the boy. Did the homosexual SNP Finance Minister Derek Mackay, in his 40's want to ride a 16 year old boy's ass? We know that Derek Mackay is still living even although he doesn't turn up for work as am MSP because he still puts in expenses claims. Whether he claims for bananas and Nutella is anyone's guess! 

That said, these scandal, all pale into insignificance when you read and understand the Alex Salmond scandal. Alex Salmond has stated that he was a victim of an operation to damage him and imprison him, and he is not talking in a general sense of 'the bastards are out to get me'. 

This next part is from Alex Salmond's submission: 

"My position that the evidence supports a deliberate, prolonged, malicious and concerted effort amongst a range of individuals within the Scottish Government and the SNP to damage my reputation, even to the extent of having me imprisoned. That includes, for the avoidance of doubt, Peter Murrell (Chief Executive), Ian McCann (Compliance officer) and Sue Ruddick (Chief Operating Officer) of the SNP
together with Liz Lloyd, the First Minister’s Chief of Staff. There are others who, for legal reasons, I am not allowed to name."

These people aren't minor players in the SNP, they control everything along with Nicola Sturgeon. Here is Alex Salmond, not only naming these bastards, and that is what they are, they are bastards but also saying they were actively in attempting to imprison him. Alex Salmond was found to be innocent by a jury made up of mainly of women. And let's be straight women can see through shite quite easily and they aren't slow to speak up. In any conspiracy, they are weak links, and that includes this bunch named by Salmond. To me, the weak links of the group named to allegedly imprison him are Ian McCann, he is the SNP Compliance officer, who also ignore members' complaints and Sue Ruddick. I can see Murrell and Lloyd going down with the sinking sink, but if the ante was raised to possible prison time, well who knows about Liz Lloyd. As a Geordie, she may not find time in a Scottish women's prison to her taste. One thing about the conspiracy to jail Alex Salmond is that finally Westminster is starting to realise that there is a major problem in Scotland. 

The problem is, the SNP Government is corrupt, the Scottish Crown Office is corrupt and the Scottish parliament has been compromised. For some reason which I can only assume is linked to either, madness, arrogance or contempt, Team Sturgeon has wrong thought that they are answerable to no one. I think they convinced themselves that they could pull off whatever diseased shit they fancied and there wouldn't be consequences. If you happened to have sailed past twitter today, you might have caught an intervention by Conservative MP,  Liam Fox.  

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NIXC6a2O0bg  

That is quite interesting as things go, do you how an explosion works? Firstly, there is a thing called pre-detonation. The small explosion just prior to the big bang, has Liam Fox just delivered a pro-detonation before Westminster drops the nuclear bomb in Scotland? Many people have been contacting Ministers of the UK Government to express concern and asking for official investigation into the Scottish Government, the SNP and the Crown Office. Couple of other interest people also caught my eye, Jim Sillars who gave an interview telling people not to vote SNP because of what he described as 'highly dubious' people in the higher echelons of the SNP. But, the guy who really peaked my interest and yours too is Paul Lever. Your first thought was who is Paul Lever?  Paul Lever is a Former Chairman of the Joint Intelligence Committee. Former British Ambassador to Germany. Author of Berlin Rules: Europe and the German Way. 

He said: 

"Most of us in England don't follow Scottish politics closely. But the stories in today's press about Salmond/Sturgeon and the trolling of Charles Kennedy suggest that the Scottish National Party is a pretty nasty outfit; and that the governance of Scotland is a mess." 

Nicola Sturgeon and her little band thought that there was no such thing as 'oversight' on them. I am now beginning to suspect that Sturgeon is now going to find out different. Personally, I favour suspension of the Scottish Government, removal of the Lord Advocate, anyone under investigation has their government and parliamentary security passes revoked with immediate effect. Control of Scottish Government transferred to the Scottish Secretary, and the SNP HQ and the homes of all persons of interest searched under warrant, all phones, and electronic devices confiscated for forensic examinations. The SNP under Sturgeon have been living a delusion that they can do what they like, and get away with it. I further suspect that this particular belief has no foundation on which to risk your career and liberty. 

After a feeble SNP coordinated attempt to have Salmond's submission removed by what seemed to be female SNP press officers who work for SNP MSPs. We had the Crown Office step into pull that Alex Salmond submission from the Holyrood website. The bogus claim used was that the submission could identify complainers. There you have two instances one, a shabby deception trick, which Wings over Scotland called out the SNP women as "liars". And the utterly corrupt Crown Office acting out with their remit to suppress the truth in order to protect Nicola Sturgeon. A Court of Law, Lady Dorrian has already made plain that evidence can from Alex Salmond can be produced as long as it conforms to the Court order protecting the 'alphabet women'. You should take the time to read the Wing's post on the SNP Press officers trying to bury the truth, 8 of the 'spontaneous' tweets all with more or less the same identical wording appeared within a 6 minute window around 3 pm on 22 February. 

https://wingsoverscotland.com/a-litany-of-liars/   

To add a little humour, 3 in a bed, SNP MP Angus MacNeil took to twitter to call out, and say that the Scottish Prosecution service “looks crooked” following their censoring of Alex Salmond’s evidence which accuses Nicola Sturgeon of breaking the ministerial code. It isn't a case of looking crooked, they are crooked. We factually know this when the Crown Office ran a malicious prosecution of people connected to Rangers FC. You may also remember that I blogged on the Cadder Case which was removal of human rights by the Crown Office and people's rights replaced by 'gifts'. I wrote this blog post circa 10 years ago. 

http://glasgowunihumanrights.blogspot.com/2010/10/peoples-champion-peter-cadder-no-law.html  

Apparently since his own experience of being 'stitched up', it has led Alex Salmond to the conclusion that he should have spent more time keeping his eye on the ball as First Minister. What happened to the Crown Office after the UK Supreme Court ruled on the 'Cadder Case', well basically nothing, the same human rights deniers just kept working. Imagine, the very people who we place absolute trust, and it has to be absolute, couldn't work out they were acting illegally. Think about that for a moment, and think about what type of culture and ethos must be floating around that organisation back in 2010. So corruption wasn't just a new thing which sprang to life under the Salmond scandal. It raises the issue of why wasn't the then SNP Justice Sec on top of this breach, and ensuring it was fixed? What was going on was patently wrong, you cannot replace human rights with the Crown Office regulations, even a first year law student could drive a coach and horses through that weak argument. 

After the Crown Office attempt to suppress evidence which frighten the parliament, it seems that Scotland's prosecution service is being ordered to release material Alex Salmond claims will show he was the victim of a high-level plot to destroy him. The Holyrood inquiry into the Salmond scandal is relying on its use of the parliament’s power to compel the production of documents held by the Crown Office. I personally don't think that Nicola Sturgeon has grasped the fact that it's too late to continue this cover up. I will be blunt, Sturgeon is fucked, fucked all roads, no going back, no escape possible, no one to chuck under the bus to save herself. What is incredible about all the twists and turns of refusing Salmond a candidacy was instead of a complicated scheme with too many working parts, involving too many people, costing too much time and money, all she needed to do would be to rig a selection panel. Is it that simple you may ask, well, yes, because the panel can use subjective opinion. Of course, it would be a tad embarrassing to sideline Salmond, but in retrospect, all the blame could have been foster onto a small group of people who would have been arm's length from the leadership.  

Now, we have MSPs wanting to see all the correspondence it holds between three senior SNP officials, including Nicola Sturgeon’s husband, and the First Minister’s top Government aide, Liz Lloyd. Already the inquiry has used its powers to obtain text and WhatsApp messages obtained by Mr Salmond’s defence team for his criminal trial. Messages that don't look good for Nicola Sturgeon's husband Peter Murrell. His explanation to the Inquiry reading what he wrote, I found less than convincing.  

What we do know is Alex Salmond has claimed the Crown Office has been holding back evidence which he says supports his claim of a high-level plot by SNP figures to ruin and even jail him. He further claims the Crown Office has acted in this way to shield "some of the most powerful people in the country". The interesting part, well everything is interesting and there is so much of it but Salmond singled out Ms Sturgeon’s husband, the SNP chief executive Peter Murrell, the party’s chief operating officer Susan Ruddick, its compliance officer Ian McCann, and Ms Sturgeon’s chief of staff Liz Lloyd as important to what happened against him. It has been alleged that the SNP staffers were sent out to 'find' people, and we are talking women to testify against Alex Salmond. This sounds rather odd, and it sounds rather sinister, why would SNP staffers be sent out like this? 

Well, I would suggest it was to do with credibility, you see the 'alphabet women' all come from a very close group around Nicola Sturgeon. 

If additional women could have been found with no connection to Team Sturgeon, then it would have bolstered their efforts in the criminal trial to imprison Salmond. I have met Salmond, many times while campaigning, he treated people who turned at events well. He was what you would expect a leader to be, open, approachable and friendly. If he had ever done anything even remotely odd, it would have been noticed, and importantly commented on. Salmond loved campaigning, he loved being among the rank and file, he loved being on the doorstep. I am not a fan of Alex Salmond, I think that is widely known as my indy posts show, however, I would never see him denied his rights, or remain silent if he was railroaded by an unfair process or attempt to have him falsely imprisoned. It takes a real sick and depraved character to do that. I am convinced from what I have read that that Alex Salmond was the victim of a conspiracy, I am convinced the Scottish Government is corrupted beyond the elected politicians, I am convinced the Crown Office is corrupt and needs new leadership. 

Finally, watch the Lord Advocate refuse to answer questions at Holyrood when he appeared to make a statement. Listen to his replies, look at his demeanour, listen to his tone. I would fire his arse, he isn't a stupid man and as a former Dean of the Faculty of Advocates, he must be aware what he is doing. I think his appearance should also form part of the basis why there has to be formal investigation by the UK Government. This needs to come quickly, the Holyrood election of 2021 should also be suspended until September by the UK Government. There is a saying, if so many people say you are drunk, you need to sit your arse down. In this case, so many people are saying the Scottish Government is corrupt, this government needs to be suspended. 

Yours sincerely 

George Laird                                                                                                                                The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University 

Dangling At The End of A Political Rope; Scottish Government Permanent Secretary Leslie Evans is looking highly likely to be the first political casualty of Alex Salmond inquiry, the question is, who will the hangman be, UK Civil Service or Team Sturgeon, one thing seems certain, when the trapdoor opens Evans is falling through it, is the smart play to jump first with her big fat government pension or spill her guts and use the Nuremberg defence?

Dear All 

President Harry S Truman made famous the quote, 'the buck stops here', Truman kept a sign with that phrase sitting on his desk in the Oval Office. The phrase refers to the notion that the President has to make the decisions and accept the ultimate responsibility for those decisions. In Scotland, the odious SNP leader Nicola Sturgeon isn't someone who accepts responsibility, far from it, she is the type of delusional leader who shrinks from accepting any  responsibility. Sturgeon is the type of person who would rather seek to blame someone else, and as we have seen from the Alex Salmond, she set herself up to be removed from what transpired early on. Of course, many people don't believe Nicola Sturgeon was someone who was sitting on the sidelines watching events. Gordon Dangerfield in his blog has come out and said that far from being a spectator, Sturgeon was someone on the pitch leading the team. 

Dangerfield wrote: 

"I don’t think Nicola Sturgeon was being truthful when she made this statement to the Scottish Parliament on 10 January 2019 about the complaints against Alex Salmond: 

“I did not know how the Scottish Government was dealing with the complaint, I did not know how the Scottish Government intended to deal with the complaint and I did not make any effort to find out how the Scottish Government was dealing with the complaint or to intervene in how the Scottish Government was dealing with the complaint.” 

I think it’s inconceivable that Nicola Sturgeon did not know of the complaints against Alex Salmond as soon as they were made in November 2017. 

I think it’s inconceivable that Nicola Sturgeon did not then direct personally the development of the unlawful procedure which was devised by her civil servants specifically to target Alex Salmond. 

And I think it’s inconceivable that Nicola Sturgeon was not closely involved in the unlawful handling by her civil servants of the complaints against Alex Salmond from the moment they were made." 

Gordon Dangerfield is not alone in doubting the word of Nicola Sturgeon. Many people have outright called her a liar, both inside Holyrood and outside. As the SNP Government seeks to delay and obstruct the Salmond Inquiry, the truth is that Nicola Sturgeon, her husband Peter Murrell and Sturgeon's Chief of Staff are very much tainted goods. You can certainly understand why the Scottish Conservatives have been saying for some time that Nicola Sturgeon must 'carry the can' for the Alex Salmond affair. And, just like you see in the movies, Nicola Sturgeon as the 'arch baddie' has no problem in pulling people in front of her to take the machine gun bullets. Just look at the 'mug' John Swinney who is fronting for her, now totally without honour, and a fucking disgrace to public office. At this point in the scandal, underlings are being lined up for the chop. Reports suggest that the Scottish Government’s top official, the Permanent Secretary Leslie Evans is a likely first casualty of the inquiry. The question is, does Sturgeon sack her, the UK Civil service sack her, or does Evans jump with her big fat pension? On that question, your guess is as good as anyone else's. One thing, I would suggest is that any chance of a public honour by the Queen or her heirs is a rather remote possibility. 

The notion of sacrificing underlings isn't a new concept, and as the SNP is staggering unoriginal, this is a road which they will probably travel down because, they are playing for time. They are like cornered rats desperately searching to prolong their existence by any means possible. The buck should stop at Nicola Sturgeon, but we shouldn't forget the scandal wasn't possible without the supporting players to aid her. Everyone of them who joined in the attempt to firstly stitch up an innocent man and then attempt to jail him should face criminal charges. Criminal charges, trial by jury and if found guilty, then these people should serve time in prison. I am sure that there are a stack of laws which could be applied here such as misconduct in public office. 

Misconduct in public office is defined as: 

A public officer acting as such; wilfully neglects to perform his or her duty and/or wilfully misconducts him or herself; to such a degree as to amount to an abuse of the public's trust in the office holder; without reasonable excuse or justification. 

Then of course, you have the issue of did people working against Alex Salmond attempt to pervert the course of justice? 

"If someone perverts the course of justice, they deliberately do something that will make it difficult to discover who really committed a particular crime, for example, destroying evidence or lying to the police. He was charged with conspiring to pervert the course of justice." 

What we have seen is that evidence given by various people connected to Nicola Sturgeon has turned out to be false. We know that various witnesses have been professional 'coached', and even then they haven't told the truth. The great thing about the truth is that it is simple, you repeat what actually happened. When you lie, you have to remember a complete new narrative and then try to overlay that over the truth. As we have seen in the Salmond scandal, sometimes the overlay doesn't work, it didn't work in the criminal trial against Salmond and it didn't work in the Salmond Inquiry. 

As well as SNP Leader Nicola Sturgeon needing to resign, her husband, SNP chief executive Peter Murrell, and her chief of staff Liz Lloyd are said to be headed for career changes. You could say, what they really are looking for is an escape route while in power, and controlling the levers of power, Nicola Sturgeon can hold off the dogs. Once she releases that power, there is no guarantee that the very "machine" that was turned on Alex Salmond wouldn't be turned on her and her gang. You can see their problem, how do they jump off the burning boat when the waters are full of blood and are shark infested? You can understand what the SNP plan is, it is to attempt to get to the short campaign as an island in the sky from which they will attempt to make this election about independence. This strategy is just another act of deception, done for several purposes, one of which is to try and get a pro Sturgeon supporter in place as a replacement leader. And, yes, we are talking about Angus Robertson, former Westminster MP. Could you imagine the irony and the virtual spitting in the faces of Scots if Angus Robertson and his vile odious wife became the new SNP power couple? Robertson's wife, Jennifer Dempsie has to be blunt, got a history. 

An extraordinary part of the scandal which you should home in on is that Sturgeon told the Holyrood parliament that Alex Salmond first told her about the matter on April 2, 2018, and that the Government’s procedure for handling formal complaints had stopped officials from telling her. What was left out of that statement by Sturgeon was the Scottish Government’s draft policy did initially allow Sturgeon to be told by her officials. This part is the nub, this was only changed after Ms Sturgeon and Ms Evans held a previously secret meeting about it on 29 November 2017. The procedure was then as if by a miracle rewritten on December 5, 2017 to say that the First Minister should only be told of complaints once an internal investigation had concluded. The November 29 meeting was omitted from the Scottish Government’s official timeline of events given to the inquiry, so we have had lies being told, and also evidence withheld. You can make your own mind up and guess why the November 29 meeting was omitted. The open record states that on November 29, 2017 “the first respondent [Ms Evans] met with the interested party [Ms Sturgeon] to discuss development of the proposed procedure”. 

You can see why Leslie Evans is being lined up to be pushed under the bus, she is the weakest link, she is also someone who also could be in very serious trouble. She is like the lamb who is waiting to be staked out for the wolves while pondering her fate in the holding pen. Why is she not staked out already, well, it's too early, but given the mentality of Sturgeon's poisonous mind, you would imagine it's already been discussed how to use her as a shield. I don't know if you ever saw the movie, Robocop 2, there is a scene as the end, where a Sturgeon like character fears for their safety from jail. One of the underlings, then dreams up a scenario and says, 'don't worry sir, if there is evidence, we will find it', which is code that something will be manufactured against the patsy. Do the SNP already have 'patsy' evidence on Scottish Government employee Leslie Evans? 

I would think so. 

Conservative MSP Murdo Fraser said: 

“The First Minister’s inner circle including her husband and senior officials have serious questions hanging over them in relation to their own conduct. However, Nicola Sturgeon cannot use them to hide behind. She must stand up and take responsibility for the SNP Government’s failings as they investigated her predecessor. She promised to be fully co-operative with this inquiry but has been obstructive at every turn. We see yet more questions over what she knew and when about the allegations against her friend and political mentor of over 30 years. She seems determined to fool everyone by failing to be transparent. This whole affair stinks to high heaven and the truth must be heard. Whatever is concluded from this inquiry, it is imperative that is Nicola Sturgeon who carries the can for the shambolic failings of her Government. If she’s found to have broken the Ministerial Code, then she must resign.” 

Liberal Democrat MSP Alex Cole-Hamilon added: 

“You would have to be a very bold civil servant to decide not to notify the first minister of these allegations, at a time when the changes to the complaints procedure which took her out of the loop had not yet been completed.” 

No one seriously believes that Nicola Sturgeon didn't know, of course there are people who are delusional, but as they are either too stupid, part of the cover up or just indy daft, they are the fringe. In every single major scandal Nicola Sturgeon's default fallback is that she knew nothing, are we to believe with her Stasi watching everyone, that she knew nothing all the time? Remember the Sturgeon's SNP collects information on people within the party and also their political opponents. And all of this is collected to be used against people. They call using it 'deployed', because they see people as enemies. This type of military jargon is apparently used a lot by them. 

Finally, I wouldn't want to be in the shoes of Leslie Evans, you see she must have known or should have known that the SNP leadership couldn't be trusted. She should have never acted the way she did, and now there is a reckoning coming. She is now an island in the sky, no friends, no help coming her way, who is ending her career? Will the hangman be from the UK Civil Service or Team Sturgeon? The UK Civil Service will no doubt make her end quick, Team Sturgeon on the other hand, well they will probably be like John C Woods, the Nuremberg hangman who fouled up so many executions. When the political trapdoor opens Leslie Evans may find herself dangling on the end of the political rope being slowly strangled. Who knows, maybe Nicola Sturgeon will sit and watch it with a bowl of strawberries and cream? 

Yours sincerely 

George Laird                                                                                                                                The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University 

The Dreghorn Conspiracy; Alex Salmond accuser rushes to tell BBC Reporter Glenn Campbell that the Holyrood inquiry ' is more traumatic than High Court trial', as the heat turns up on Nicola Sturgeon, up pops a Salmond accuser, is this an SNP coincidence, this however is one 'Lady Di' tribute act interview that will convince no one, dark clothing, speaking low, messages on point, remember what Woman H said, “I have a plan so that we can remain anonymous but see strong repercussions” is that the kind of thing a person might hear about in a conspiracy?

Dear All 

The Trial of Alex Salmond, Part 3, yes, having failed to stitch up Alex Salmond in an illegal Scottish Government investigation, having then proceeded to try for a second bite at the cherry via a criminal trial, we are now in Part 3. If this scandal was a trilogy, we would be calling it, Naked Gun 33⅓: The Final Insult. It seems that Alex Salmond's alleged plotters are back to try and fire another bullet at his head. In their first attempt, their allies in the Scottish Government showed poor gun handling skills resulting in a negligent discharge. After reloading, they then failed to send rounds down range to hit the target. In the latest attempt, having had their 'weapons' taken off them, they are reduced to fire blanks. You can also hear their madness as they wave their 'pop gun' about screaming, 'I've got a gun, and I am going to use it'! I don't know why, but the press are still entertaining this nonsense that the 'alphabet women' are somehow victims. Well, in front of a jury of their peers, mostly comprising of women, their 'stories' were shredded, they weren't believed, and they never secured a single conviction against Alex Salmond. 

In political circles and the press, the identity of everyone of the 'alphabet women' is known, what most of the general people don't know is their identity and how close they are to Nicola Sturgeon. These women aren't victims, they 'self id' as victims, which if they didn't have a court order protecting them, they would be ridiculed openly. When I first heard of the allegations against Alex Salmond, I was shocked, but my initial reaction was not to believe the allegations. As I and everyone else continued to read what transpired, the more and more my gut feeling said this was a 'work up'. For nearly a decade, I blogged how the SNP was run as a 'rat ship', and I said eventually the 'rats' would turn on each other. If the Salmond scandal is about anything, it is about this very thing. I blogged on how the SNP was a 'rat ship', I blogged on how the SNP Government is corrupt, I blogged on how SNP Leader Nicola Sturgeon was a horrible nasty individual, who couldn't be trusted and shouldn't be trusted. I was of course, mocked, abused, had the SNP attack dogs set on me, called all sorts of names, had mega abuse thrown at me which ended up in Court. Here we are in 2021, the very people who mocked me, abused me, hated my guts, and even one guy said of me and my blog, 'George Laird is a genuine cunt'. Of course, I see this as genuine praise now, because these people are effectively now saying what I previously did. 

And just for the record, no one came along to say, 'sorry, we got it wrong about you'. 

The SNP is a 'rat ship'. 

So, here we are at Naked Gun 33⅓: The Final Insult, the trial using media, from 'self id' victim aka Salmond accuser. One of the women who made sexual assault allegations against Alex Salmond has decided in the wake of things going bad for Nicola Sturgeon to come to her aid. So, to highlight their main points, they are saying: 

1/ They are a victim (jury didn't believe that)

2/ They are "upset" (because the plot failed?)

3/ They want to remind people that Alex Salmond is guilty (No, he really isn't)

4/ They want you swallow their media crafted piece by claiming they are a women's champion (No, they really aren't)

5/ They want to smear the members of the Salmond Inquiry (that would be pro UK MSPs) 

What the BBC doesn't point out is which member of the 'alphabet women' this is, because some of them are well versed in media manipulation tactics. 

This, 'I am a victim' interview is rather clumsy in my opinion, but you have to remember, the Salmond verdict left the 'alphabet women' with nothing. They are like a kid in a primary class room trying to construct a head using a balloon, water, wallpaper paste, newspapers and paint. The end result wouldn't end up on a movie set as a prop, just something to take home to show the family. In the absence of real evidence, we have emotional constructed pap from her, to attempt to rope you in by saying the inquiry is making it "significantly harder" for women to come forward with complaints. Is the Inquiry at fault? Is the Salmond jury at fault? Is the Scottish Government at fault? Is the Crown Office at fault? Is Police Scotland at fault? You see for the most part, Salmond's accuser misses out the bulk of these people so she can home in on a specific group. Just as she was specific in complaining about Alex Salmond, she wants to point her finger and apportion blame. You see 4 pro UK MSPs want to get to the truth of how the Scottish Government attempted to rig their process to find Alex Salmond guilty. 

So, why does she have any objection to that taking place? 

Is this alphabet woman, thinking that accusation equals guilt? 

Is she saying that it's okay to rig an illegal process to 'get' someone but since it failed, we really shouldn't talk about it? 

I wonder how a reporter like Glenn Campbell could sit and listen to this nonsense, could just sit there and not push back? When Campbell asked did you speak to other accusers, she deflected the question, and he let her away with it. What happened to the days of proper investigative journalism? Do you remember the glory days of 'World in Action', 'Panorama', and 'Weekend End', it appears that this 'alphabet woman' gets a free pass to spew because they have pulled out their #metoo pass. So, as well being a 'false victim', a defender of women's rights, we get treated to a glimpse of their mental state, get this, the 'ongoing Holyrood inquiry into the saga has been more traumatic in many ways than the criminal trial.' Is it more traumatic because after a jury found Alex Salmond to be not guilty, the spotlight now has shifted onto her? Let's face it, although there is a court order, some of the 'alphabet' women are known to the ordinary public. People know who these women are, what these women did, and they know the part played by the SNP in this stitch up of an innocent man. So, let's get a sense what some people are saying about the Salmond Affair. 

Neil Mackay of All Under One Banner tweeted: 

"These proven false-victims of Alex Salmond are continuing to perpetrate their vendetta, bolstered by their allies in the Scottish Govt and COPFS, and platformed by the Anti-Indy Media." 

Some people might say, Neil is talking about a conspiracy. 

Denise Findlay tweeted: 

"Worth remembering that despite a 22 strong team, 700 interviews of 400 women. Not a single ordinary SNP member came forward with a complaint #JusticeForAlexSalmond". 

We know that both the Police and SNP did a trawling operation in order to attempt to find victims, the police investigation is a matter of record, the SNP trawling operation hasn't received the publicity it deserves.  

Findlay also tweeted:  

"So the women are using anonymity and continuing with the political smears. That is not the purpose of anonymity. They women had their day in court. Alex Salmond was a victim of ‘an unlawful and biased process’. He is the inky ‘victim’ here. #JusticeForAlexSalmond". 

One has to why, in the light of information leaking out all over the place, why now attack the Committee? Why not before, well the Spectator case makes it possible for the Salmond Inquiry to publish Salmond's evidence on the record. On the record matters because before that Nicola Sturgeon was gung ho for appearing in front of the Salmond Inquiry. In the wake of the Spectator case, she is postponing her evidence. You have to ask yourself why is she doing this? Could a reason be that her story to the Inquiry now requires to be changed? It is my firm view that Nicola Sturgeon should go before Alex Salmond. After all, what has she got to hide? If her evidence to the Inquiry hasn't changed,  why postpone? 

Since the 'alphabet woman' can't attack the evidence with counter fact, are we to be surprised that instead she is attacking the Committee? Attacking the messenger is a well known tactic deployed to distort the truth, some call it, 'playing the man instead of the ball'. She accuses members of the committee have taken the experiences of the women and "exploited them for their own self-serving political interests". What about the 4 SNP MSPs and Andy Wightman, what is her opinion of them, does she think the Sun shines out of their rear end? 

Why aren't the 4 SNP MSPs asking the difficult questions? 

The 'alphabet woman' said: 

"It is utterly absurd to suggest that nine women could be persuaded to lie to the police, to perjure themselves in court." 

Is it? 

Is it any more absurd that the Scottish Government being corrupt? 

Is it any more absurd that the Crown Office being corrupt? 

The SNP Government has hampered the Salmond Inquiry at least 60 times in the course of its remit to find the truth. Adam Tomkins has calls it right when he tweeted about the SNP: 

"They’re a tainted party and a tainted government. Now the SNP are trying to taint the election, too. The stench of corruption in Sturgeon’s Scotland grows." 

Given the 'alphabet woman' is attempting to portray herself as a 'Champion of women's rights', we have to ask, why is she so silent about this? Well, the reason could be is that she has hitched her star to the SNP bandwagon, or one of her relatives has hitched their star to the SNP. Why do people hitch their star to the SNP bandwagon, well it could they are getting something out of it. So, what does this 'alphabet woman' get out of it? Or are we to believe that they are just a "concerned" citizen? 

Her piece that effectively those serving on the committee are basically just dirty bastards is somewhat enlightening, because it just reeks contempt. Note how she covers all her bases during this interview. She has to get in key buzzwords and hooks which tends to suggest there is a possibility that she is media trained or worked in that field. To recap what she is trying to plant in your mind: 

1/ She is a victim (jury didn't believe that)

2/ She is "upset" (because the plot failed?)

3/ She says effectively that Alex Salmond is guilty (No, he really isn't)

4/ She is a women's rights champion (No, she really isn't)

5/ She want to smear the members of the Salmond Inquiry (that would be pro UK MSPs) 

Just as timing in comedy is everything, it seems that timing in smearing is also crucial. There is another notable thing to mention as well, time, there will come a time when there will be a change of government. There will come a time when a pro Salmond regime takes over the SNP, if that regime is in government, there may have 'unfinished' business with many people who were involved with the Salmond saga. All the mechanisms currently protecting the guilty will be removed. Sturgeon and her gang won't be around to protect them, in fact you could opine that just as the SNP Government came after Alex Salmond, the same legal processes could legally done to them. I doubt that they will go the way of discredited fit up internal investigation, but certainly criminal investigations might prove useful. Sometimes, a sledgehammer is needed to crack a nut. So, if any of the 'alphabet women' have anything to say, now is a good time to spill your guts. I wouldn't place my future in the hands of Nicola Sturgeon, because she has already shown her true colours. If Sturgeon is willing to betray her mentor and alleged friend of 30 years, you know all you need to know about her loyalty to people. And she is already apparently looking for an exit as mentioned by others! 

Finally, remember this text message when someone says there was no conspiracy in the Salmond scandal: 

“I have a plan so that we can remain anonymous but see strong repercussions”. This is the text message from Ms H.

Some people it seems aren't very good at remaining anonymous.

Yours sincerely

George Laird                                                                                                                        The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University 

The Open Challenge of Cllr Paddy S Hogg, dear Paddy, time is so precious, it's so precious, that a person cannot waste a minute of it, as Sean Connery said in the movie, Thunderball, 'the little minnows, I throw back into the sea', when you are in public office, remember it's about public service, clearly you have a lot to learn, if I had the time, I would humour you, but I am rather busy at the moment to listen to you, rabbit nonsense in my ear

Dear Mr. Paddy S Hogg 

If your intent was a geninue open challenge, you wouldn't have 'queered the pitch' by starting off saying: 

"Mr Working Class Laird." 

And then expect that I would entertain you, also it seems on your Facebook page you're putting yourself forward to stand as a list candidate for Holyrood. Do you have a campaign manager? The reason I ask is because if you did have a campaign manager, they would have vetoed any idea of you contacting me. So, if you are doing it off your own bat, you obviously haven't got a grasp of what is expected of a political candidate standing for public office. Are you aware of the Nolan Principles for standards in public life? The principles require you to act in a certain manner. 

The Nolan Principles 

Selflessness.

Integrity.

Objectivity.

Accountability.

Openness.

Honesty.

Leadership. 

Right at the start, you decided by a conscious effort to look down your nose at me. As I understand it, you are a former SNP Cllr, which may explain the dripping contempt you exhibit in the first sentence. You could even wait to at least get a little bit into your piece before letting your mask slip. So, where was your selflessness, objectivity and leadership? Is abusing me by looking down your nose at me because I am working class in keeping the Nolan Principles? 

I think above covers the four words in the first sentence. 

"Why don't we host a chat together and I will prove to you that the 7 states who did not close down and Sweden had a slightly LOWER death rate from Covonavirus than all the USA states who did lockdown." 

This is where you get it wrong, there are multiple factors in why some people get covid, your argument could also be used to say, 'if you walk about on a battlefield, you might not get hit by a bullet'. The fact is, the danger is always there. So, citing 7 states who did not close down and Sweden is just a nonsense argument. I could point you in the direction of Thailand, a country of 70 million, with people wearing masks outside, social distancing taking place and a death toll of 81 deaths. Sweden death toll from covid, 12,464 out of a population of 10.4 million. 

"Use these 7 states and SWEDEN as your control and you have a science data analysis that tells any person with a functioning brain cell that lockdowns have NO bearing on covid deaths." 

That is your view, and you are entitle to your view, but as I mentioned above, you lose your argument because you deny that the opposition could have a valid point in their argument. " any person with a functioning brain cell", well that just drips with contempt. Is it your contention to be taken seriously as a list candidate for Holyrood? You appear very closed minded, you don't respect other people's point of view, and you don't understand leadership or are indeed a leader. 

"I am NOT a covid denier. Nor a flat earther." 

No, you're just Paddy Hogg, the Lanarkshire councillor charged after allegedly organising anti-lockdown protests. The first question is, did you organise anti lockdown protests? Do you think, you are somehow above the rules? Did you understand the rules on public gatherings? What exactly is your defence if you did organise anti lockdown protests? Is it the classic, 'I didn't like the rules'? 

"My sister almost died of the damned virus. And a dear friend did." 

Do you think your activities help or hindered the spread of the virus? 

"Are you unaware of the Great barrington Declaration? 53k scientists and medics AGAINST lockdown signed this declaration." 

Firstly, yes, I wasn't, but they are like you, they can't speak with absolute certainty. Here is a quick tip, just because someone has a degree, doesn't mean they are competent or in full possession of the facts. What we don't know about covid and how it mutants could fill a reference library. So, if all these people have a view why isn't being rolled out in all countries? What exactly is it that governments around the world don't trust? 

"Are they crackpots?" 

I am supposed to know the mental stability of 53,000 people that I have never met? Is that a serious question, is that your level of debate? How many of the 53,000 do you know and can speak to fact of their mental condition? Is it none? You appear to be to be suggesting that because they agree with your point of view that should be enough to convince anyone, is that the case? So, what about all the people working in governments, are they all to have their points of view dismissed? 

"Im happy to debate via skype with you anytime on the science which I have checked in forensic detail." 

Let's just stop you there, what degrees do you have and what in? If you think I am buying into you saying that, "I have checked in forensic detail", you are sadly mistaken. You are just offering an opinion, a general opinion, nothing more. Maybe you can clear something up in forensic detail for me. I found this: 

"Cllr Paddy Hogg has left budget meeting before voting. This is a failure to represent the residents of Cumbernauld East." 

Found this on an SNP Facebook page, so can you explain to me, if this is true? Did you leave a budget meeting before voting? And can you tell me, how your conduct lives up to the Nolan Principles? Where exactly was your leadership there? Maybe instead of challenging people whose opinions you don't like, your time would be best served 'doing the day job' and I suppose acting in a manner expected of someone who is standing to be an MSP. 

"Let's talk about the veracity of Vitamin D in assisting people PREVENT covid. Let's talk on the veracity of PCR testing and see what you really know. I read Dr Kary Mullis's autobiography. He invented the PCR test. Cmon Mr Laird let's hear you and I talk about this and see who knows their subject matter. Email me on patrickscotthogg@hotmail. This is an OPEN CHALLENGE Paddy S Hogg". 

Finally, I am not an expert on covid, but let me remind you, neither are you. I do to my credit however have a track record of being right in what I think needs done in society and what should be expected of people in public office. You list an email address, as patrickscotthogg@hotmail, is that .com or .co.uk? I am not an expert on email myself, but one thing that I can do as a working class man is put it correctly down on paper and digitally. You wanted to hear from me, I hope this blog post helps, you need to get your act together. Personally, I don't think you make a good public servant because you appear to me to be selfish and irresponsible. Act your age!

Update to Paddy.

https://tinyurl.com/3j54xnld

This is about how Sweden is doing badly now regards Covid, remember your Swedish argument, well that's fell right on its arse! I think the expression I have to say to you is that, 'you've made a right cunt of yourself here Paddy', are you sure you want to go to Holyrood as a possible list MSP?  

George Laird                                                                                                                        The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University

The Net is Closing In; SNP leader Nicola Sturgeon refuses to say if she would quit for lying to parliament at FMQs, Labour MSP Jackie Baillie states that the Sturgeon's 'forgotten' meeting was in fact a "prearranged event", former Chief of Staff to Alex Salmond, Geoff Aberdein has allegedly submitted written evidence and has witnesses to that effect, Aberdein and Sturgeon's Chief of Staff Liz Lloyd must now be interviewed under oath at the Salmond Inquiry

Dear All 

I think everyone is aware that the Holyrood Inquiry has been setup to fail, I think the term which will be universally adopted is that it is a 'whitewash'. There isn't a search for truth because we know that key witnesses aren't going to be called, Geoff Aberdein and Nicola Sturgeon's Chief of Staff, Liz Lloyd. The SNP Government has deliberately obstructed the work of the Inquiry by  refusing co-operation and material on at least 58 separate occasions. The integrity of the Inquiry has been compromised by the Lord Advocate because the Scottish Parliament Corporate Body has been advised by the Crown Office. The Crown Office has told the SPCB that it is not in the public interest for the content of the censored Salmond submissions to be published. Yes, you read that right, The Crown Office has acted maliciously and is in no sense an impartial body is instructing the Parliament. The Crown office is also allegedly mired in the conspiracy against Alex Salmond, and it has been involved in malicious political prosecution against Alex Salmond's allies. You read their stories in the press, Mark Hirst, whose case was flung out of court because there was no case to answer. The former British Ambassador, Craig Murray, still being persecuted for allegedly supplying jigsaw evidence to identity the Alphabet women.

Craig Murray is innocent, he, like Mark Hirst is a victim of malicious prosecution! 

Everything is being done to enact a cover up, this cover up is more dirty than the most celebrated one in political  history which was 'Watergate'. Watergate saw the downfall of a corrupt leader, President Richard Nixon. Scotland's Watergate centres on the attempts to destroy an innocent man, Alex Salmond, when that Scottish Government's attempt failed, those closely connected to Nicola Sturgeon tried to escalate matters in an attempt to jail him. Team Sturgeon/ Alphabet in the post criminal trial continues to smear Alex Salmond. They even roped in an NGO, Rape Crisis Scotland to use as a vehicle to continue their smears hiding behind a Court anonymity. The Chief Executive is Glasgow University Graduate Sandy Brindley, I remember her from the uni campus. I didn't think much of her then and I don't think much in her judgment in the Alex Salmond affair now. 

In a press release dated,  September 7th 2018, Rape Crisis Scotland seemed all a glow over getting additional £1.5 million funding from the Scottish Government. Shirley-Anne Somerville, Cabinet Secretary for Social Security and Older People popped into the Rape Crisis Scotland offices and said: 

“The Scottish Government has taken many actions to take forward our commitment to preventing and eradicating violence against women and girls. This includes investment in prevention work, frontline services and improvements in the justice system, as well as the introduction of landmark legislation on domestic abuse, abusive behaviour and sexual harm. We want to encourage everyone to feel able to come forward if they have been a victim of rape or sexual assault, and to be able to access the right support when they need it. That is why we are committed to supporting rape crisis centres and why we are providing additional funding of £1.5 million over the next three years. That funding will start next month, allowing them to ensure that more people can receive support and as well as helping these services plan for the future. I am delighted to have this opportunity to visit Rape Crisis Scotland to thank them for all that they and local rape crisis centres across Scotland do to support people.” 

I suppose some people might raise an eyebrow about this additional £1.5 million funding, and the coincidence of Rape Crisis Scotland being such an enthusiastic cheerleader for the Alphabet women. Given that funding was 3 years ago, one would have to ask, will Rape Crisis Scotland be in line for another massive heap of cash delivered to their doorstep in 2021? And who in the Scottish Government if that happens will authorise that cash injection? Will it be SNP Leader Nicola Sturgeon or will it be delegated to someone else sitting around her Cabinet table? 

And to be clear, because it needs pointing out, Alex Salmond is innocent of all the charges made against him, presumably that didn't flag up as relevant in Sandy Brindley's mind. One thing of interest, great public interest is names of Salmond's accusers, to that end, The Spectator Magazine is going to court in an attempt to challenge the ban on naming them. The press have been derelict in their duty, the impression give by them of the Alphabet women is that, they are spread across a wide Scottish Government Network and the Scottish National Party. The actual circle is rather small, in fact, it is surprisingly small according to people in the know. In a trawling operation conducted by Police Scotland of over 400 people, the Salmond accusers came from a very small group close to Nicola Sturgeon. If you are accused of something, you have the right to fight those accusations, and you should also should have the right to introduce evidence, not just to clear yourself, but to establish the possible guilt of others. In the Salmond case, part of his evidence was prohibited from being used. Despite this restriction, Alex Salmond still won his case because the jury did found in his favour, a jury which the majority of whom were in fact women. 

I don't normally watch First Minister Questions, despite being a political activist, because it is a joke. It normally it isn't worth anyone's time, but the recent one however was interesting because of the questions being asked by Labour MSP Jackie Baillie. Jackie Baillie, in reference to the infamous meeting with Geoff Aberdein on 29 March 2018 said that the First Minister’s written submission to the inquiry said that the Sturgeon/Aberdein meeting was an impromptu “head-round-the-door-in-passing” event. This is the meeting that Nicola Sturgeon claims was so irrelevant that she forgotten all about. But that claim is disputed because Jackie Baillie stated: 

“It was the case that the meeting was pre-arranged, and for the specific purpose of discussing the complaints made against Alex Salmond.” 

What Jackie Baillie said is very definite, there no double meaning, she is saying categorically that the Sturgeon claim of impromptu “head-round-the-door-in-passing” event is false, and that the meeting was pre-arranged. This is important as I mentioned because Baillie didn’t say “allegedly” at any point of that sentence. And Jackie Baillie isn't a stupid woman who is prone to making wild public accusations, quite the opposite in fact. Apparently someone has said that they know from a very well-placed source, that Geoff Aberdein’s written evidence sent to both the Fabiani committee and the separate Hamilton investigation states the meeting was prearranged. The Aberdein evidence further allegedly states the purpose of the meeting was known by those who attended it. The Fabiani committee has blocked the Aberdein evidence from being accessible to the public. To be more accurate, the 4 SNPs and independent MSP Andy Wightman blocked it. It is also highly significant that Aberdein says that his evidence can be corroborated  with evidence from other people. 

If a Minister deliberately lies to parliament, they must tend their resignation. If they give false information to parliament, they must apologise and correct the error at the earliest opportunity. Nicola Sturgeon has had plenty of opportunity to amend the record before parliament and has not done so. In fact she has doubled down on her claim that she first heard about the Salmond allegations much later. I never believed that Geoff Aberdein just turned up at Holyrood to have a chat with an old friend, and then in wandering about Holyrood aimlessly, just stopped by Sturgeon's office. None of that to me rings remotely true. Are we to believe that Aberdein just stood in Sturgeon office talking about the weather with her and the price of fish? We are to swallow that in passing, Aberdein then asks Sturgeon to meet Alex Salmond a few days later, and she and her advisors don't ask the purpose of the meeting? 

Does Nicola Sturgeon and her Chief of Staff Liz Lloyd think the people of Scotland are that fucking stupid? 

Aberdein has submitted evidence, and he also has witnesses, but we do know his evidence is being blocked, both Aberdein and Liz Lloyd are not being interviewed by the Committee. It seems that every piece of evidence and witnesses which connects Nicola Sturgeon with misleading parliament is being excluded. The Salmond Inquiry at Holyrood is a farce, the question I suppose is when is the right time for pro UK MSPs to walk out of this whitewash. So, please watch the video, and the rather pathetic response of Nicola Sturgeon who refused to answer Jackie Baillie's question. This time, listen for Jackie Baillie saying that the Aberdein meeting with Sturgeon was prearranged, that means Sturgeon's written evidence of it being impromptu “head-round-the-door-in-passing” event would if true therefore be a lie. Geoff Aberdein's evidence must be allowed in the Salmond Inquiry, and he and Sturgeon's Chief of Staff Liz Lloyd must give evidence under oath. Those people who Aberdein is alleged to have cited as witnesses, they must also testify under oath before the Salmond Inquiry. 

Finally, the more you read, the more you realise that the SNP under Nicola Sturgeon has made Scotland a failed State. The Scottish Government is corrupt, the Crown Office is corrupt and the Holyrood Parliament is rotten from within under SNP control. We can only hope that justice prevails sooner rather than later, we should also hope that The Spectator Court case is successful. If that fails, we can only hope that enough decent people vote for pro UK parties to remove the SNP from power, or that there is a hung parliament which can force Nicola Sturgeon out of public office. Of course, it isn't just Sturgeon, she is just the poster child for the Salmond scandal, no everyone who was involved in the cover up needs to go, and there needs to be prosecutions. That's right, jail time, no probation, years in prison custody.

Yours sincerely

George Laird                                                                                                                        The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University