Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Mclean07

Thank You to the Scottish People

Recommended Posts

Gordon Brown the liar. Still waiting for a federal Scotland that was promised. The Vow signed by Labour and the Tories was utter Bolloc*s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, gdevoy said:

You always seem to equate anti-SNP with unpatriotic and anti-Scottish. But you insist the SNP is not the same as the independence movement.

That seems quite paradoxical to me. Alistair Jack us a Tory but he could still be a Scottish patriot.

The hootsman is a pro tory unionist rag.  Brian Wilson hates the SNP and is against the sxottish parliament and believes in irish unification  he is an absolute hypocrite of the highest.

What part of that sounds like a sxottish patriot?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brian Wilson and George Galloway cut from the same cloth. If the current Labour party in Scotland are so good why are they third behind the Tories. There is no point in harking back to the 1930s,1940s etc as most people in Scotland today weren't even born. What matters is the now. To be honest there are more important issues right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, gdevoy said:

Anybody who still see Salmond as an asset after the court case is unhinged. He was publicly exposed as nothing more than an inveterate sex pest. Even his own defence council had to admit he could have been a better person.

If Salmond ever attains a position if power in the SNP again they are toast.

He was found not guilty, I fail to see how he could be an inveterate sex pest and be found nor guilt and acquitted in all such charges.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, gdevoy said:

Anybody who still see Salmond as an asset after the court case is unhinged.

If Salmond ever attains a position if power in the SNP again they are toast.

Agree with that, he's had his day and won't be in any position of real power again.

Nicola has proved to be Scotland's best asset will be at the top until 'she' decides to step aside, nobody else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Beaker71 said:

He was found not guilty, I fail to see how he could be an inveterate sex pest and be found nor guilt and acquitted in all such 

Being the kind of person Salmond is would get anybody sacked from any job for gross miss conduct. The fact he was the boss of his organisation just shows what an unsavoury person of very low moral character he is.

But being of low morals is not a criminal offence in this country. Hence he was acquitted in court. By a majority of the jury so not everybody agrees with my view that he is not a criminal. Something to be born in mind by those who want to bring him back into public life. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Beaker71 said:

He was found not guilty, I fail to see how he could be an inveterate sex pest and be found nor guilt and acquitted in all such charges.

He wasn't acquitted of all charges, one was not proven. The guy is a sleazy sh!tebag. Using your wife to keep a saltire in her handbag at Wimbledon, then waving it as if you are a big hero, wow, big tough guy. If he attempts a political comeback the SNP should slam the door on him. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Wrangodog said:

He wasn't acquitted of all charges, one was not proven. The guy is a sleazy sh!tebag. Using your wife to keep a saltire in her handbag at Wimbledon, then waving it as if you are a big hero, wow, big tough guy. If he attempts a political comeback the SNP should slam the door on him. 

They will he is finished politically, but will absolutely be involved somewhere in the independence campaign but not officially.

And it may have been an SNP fued as McLean and other staunch unionists wish to portray.  But Evans who started it all takes a the coin from the elite in London, so either by deliberate interference or by being fooled into it, she was at the heart of this from the beginning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, gdevoy said:

Being the kind of person Salmond is would get anybody sacked from any job for gross miss conduct. The fact he was the boss of his organisation just shows what an unsavoury person of very low moral character he is.

But being of low morals is not a criminal offence in this country. Hence he was acquitted in court. By a majority of the jury so not everybody agrees with my view that he is not a criminal. Something to be born in mind by those who want to bring him back into public life. 

Quite simply the guy is tainted now and whatever party you support know this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, killie1961 said:

Quite simply the guy is tainted now and whatever party you support know this

But so many Nationalist are desperate to get him involved again. I’m very disappointed in Alex Neil. Thought he was better than that.

FE99A937-8EC3-4EDE-92AB-6D6111AC26EA.jpeg.2bd5f6ebb34978af4b05de9d9fad640c.jpeg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mclean07 said:

But so many Nationalist are desperate to get him involved again. I’m very disappointed in Alex Neil. Thought he was better than that.

FE99A937-8EC3-4EDE-92AB-6D6111AC26EA.jpeg.2bd5f6ebb34978af4b05de9d9fad640c.jpeg

 

Literally who writes this pish beyond you.  The press have gone from AS is a sexual.predator to.. oh f**k that didnt work so lets go all theres a split in the SNP line again.

Aye because that horsepiss worked last time disnt it.

Its laughable how you lap this s**te up with glee and then repost it ad nauseam on here.  Both of you think this actually is real and works against independence.

Quite sad for you nor us, we just laugh at it and you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mclean07 said:

FE99A937-8EC3-4EDE-92AB-6D6111AC26EA.jpeg.2bd5f6ebb34978af4b05de9d9fad640c.jpeg

 

So basically just the same as every other successful politician from Thatcher to Blair. Nothing to see here.

It's the sexual nonsense that will be the death of his public persona. Too many women in powerful positions jthese days just willnae tolerate it. Maybe 30 years ago he could have shrugged it off but not in today's Scotland.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, gdevoy said:

It's the sexual nonsense that will be the death of his public persona. Too many women in powerful positions jthese days just willnae tolerate it. Maybe 30 years ago he could have shrugged it off but not in today's Scotland.

What sexual nonsense, the false allegations you mean?

Aye, s**t sticks all right, so it's worked in that sense!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Beaker71 said:

Literally who writes this pish beyond you.  The press have gone from AS is a sexual.predator to.. oh f**k that didnt work so lets go all theres a split in the SNP line again.

Aye because that horsepiss worked last time disnt it.

Its laughable how you lap this s**te up with glee and then repost it ad nauseam on here.  Both of you think this actually is real and works against independence.

Quite sad for you nor us, we just laugh at it and you.

Haha the wee man is persistently funny, gotta give him that. When you live in a Twitter bubble, it's gonna f**k with your head.

Conspiracies round every corner! :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Scooter said:

What sexual nonsense, the false allegations you mean?

Aye, s**t sticks all right, so it's worked in that sense!

I think most of the allegations were substantiated. Rotas were changed to make sure Eck wisnae left alone wi any wimmin. But it was all hushed up at the time.

The jury found, by a majority decision, that what he had done did not constitute a criminal offence. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, gdevoy said:

I think most of the allegations were substantiated. Rotas were changed to make sure Eck wisnae left alone wi any wimmin. But it was all hushed up at the time.

I wouldn't be so sure. There's a lengthy blog transcript from a guy Cairns(?) who attended court. I won't go into all the detail and I will also state he does appear to be an AS supporter so there may be a question of balance however, in nearly all circumstances the defence witnesses when questioned by the defence discredited the prosecution evidence and the prosecution chose not to cross examine - seems a peculiar position to take by the prosecution counsel if they were trying to substantiate that an alleged incident occurred?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Beaker71 said:

He was found not guilty, I fail to see how he could be an inveterate sex pest and be found nor guilt and acquitted in all such charges.

Same as OJ Simpson wasn’t guilty of murder .....technically 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Bonbon19 said:

Same as OJ Simpson wasn’t guilty of murder .....technically 

It's not the same though, is it? Unless you have a grievance with the Scottish courts and justice system.

S'pose it all comes down to one's preconceived notion of the guy. They found nothing to substantiate any of the allegations so was acquitted. But in some folks eyes he's guilty, just cause of who he is, and that's why all this bulls**t chat is continuing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Scooter said:

It's not the same though, is it? Unless you have a grievance with the Scottish courts and justice system.

S'pose it all comes down to one's preconceived notion of the guy. They found nothing to substantiate any of the allegations so was acquitted. But in some folks eyes he's guilty, just cause of who he is, and that's why all this bulls**t chat is continuing.

It is the same though , money and a good defence team , plus an ineffectual prosecution team in both instances won the day . Simpson’s prosecutors  blundered on a few aspects and in Salmonds case the prosecution didn’t cross examine their own witnesses . All justice systems make mistakes , not that I’m accusing ours of doing so here . 

As his defence counsel said on that train the man isn't a sex pest but was a bully and acted inappropriately towards women . I wouldn’t let any female in my family work with him , how about you ?

I’ve  known people like him in my profession who got away with a similar outlook and unfortunately they got away with it because of their position. I’m sure there are many female organisations and unions who can verify this set of circumstances. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Bonbon19 said:

It is the same though , money and a good defence team , plus an ineffectual prosecution team in both instances won the day . Simpson’s prosecutors  blundered on a few aspects and in Salmonds case the prosecution didn’t cross examine their own witnesses . All justice systems make mistakes , not that I’m accusing ours of doing so here . 

The case against Salmond was weak as ****, based on collusion and the ‘coaching’ of witnesses.  If you watch the material provided by whoever was spying (the correct term I’d venture) on his defence council on the train, he apparently mentions his surprise AS was the one up in court.    In every respect, it bears no relation to the trial of OJ Simpson.  

Besides, if AS had been convicted, you’d be comparing him to Harvey Weinstein, rather than a dubious reference to OJ Simpson.  

For what it’s worth, I think the trial was more similar to that of Charles Stuart Parnell..

Edited by RAG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I get the feeling that the Political Arena forum is a bit like a cockroach, even after a nuclear war it will survive. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, RAG said:

The case against Salmond was weak as ****, based on collusion and the ‘coaching’ of witnesses.  If you watch the material provided by whoever was spying (the correct term I’d venture) on his defence council on the train, he apparently mentions his surprise AS was the one up in court.    In every respect, it bears no relation to the trial of OJ Simpson.  

Besides, if AS had been convicted, you’d be comparing him to Harvey Weinstein, rather than a dubious reference to OJ Simpson.

My point was / is that the cases were both meant to be slam dunk cases and for various reasons the result was not one that was expected , that’s why my reference wasn’t dubious in every respect . And the case wasn’t weak according to the procurator fiscal , or else it would never have been brought before a court of law . 
Salmonds poor behaviour and judgement would never compel me to compare him to Weinstein whose behaviour was so reprehensible , so you’re assumption is incorrect .

Edited by Bonbon19

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Bonbon19 said:

My point was / is that the cases were both meant to be slam dunk cases and for various reasons the result was not one that was expected , that’s why my reference wasn’t dubious in every respect . And the case wasn’t weak according to the procurator fiscal , or else it would never have been brought before a court of law . 
Salmonds poor behaviour would never compel me to compare him to Weinstein so you’re incorrect on that one . 

I don’t think the AS case could be described as a ‘Slam Dunk’ - well if you approached it with an open mind based on the facts presented.  The publicity around the Weinstein case was refernced in court as a reason the AS stuff ended up going to trial, following the many years of delay where the accusations had sat in a drawer, just in case AS made his political comeback.

In that respect its very similar to that of Charles Stuart Parnell - wikipedia it.

Edited by RAG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Bonbon19 said:

My point was / is that the cases were both meant to be slam dunk cases and for various reasons the result was not one that was expected , that’s why my reference wasn’t dubious in every respect . And the case wasn’t weak according to the procurator fiscal , or else it would never have been brought before a court of law . 
Salmonds poor behaviour and judgement would never compel me to compare him to Weinstein whose behaviour was so reprehensible , so you’re assumption is incorrect .

Salmonds case was being portrayed as a slam dunk by the British establishment media.  More in the hope of influencing the public into making sure a guilty verdict was obtained.

They lost, a semblance of justice was done.  A very wily politician has been damaged beyond repair, but all they’ve done is poked the bees nest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bonbon19 said:

My point was / is that the cases were both meant to be slam dunk cases and for various reasons the result was not one that was expected ,

It absolutely wasn't a 'slam dunk', unless you were part of the group who were wetting themselves at pronouncing him Guilty before the actual trial.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

The Killie Trust

KFC Supporters Association

Young Kilmarnock

FC Kilmarnock

Kilmarnock FC (Official)

×