Status anxiety

Nicola Sturgeon protests too much about Alistair Carmichael

Her indignation about the leaked memo is hypocritical

30 May 2015

9:00 AM

30 May 2015

9:00 AM

I couldn’t believe it when Nicola Sturgeon called for the resignation of Alistair Carmichael, the former Scottish Secretary, over his role in the leaked memo affair.

As readers will recall, the Daily Telegraph published a confidential document during the election campaign that purported to be an account of a conversation between Sturgeon and Sylvie Bermann, the French ambassador, in which Sturgeon said she’d prefer David Cameron to Ed Miliband as Prime Minister. Carmichael has now owned up to leaking the document, which originated in the Scottish Office, but this isn’t the cause of Sturgeon’s outrage. No, Carmichael’s sin was denying all knowledge of the leak when asked about it at the time. For this, apparently, he should ‘consider his position’.

Politicians pretend to be shocked by each other’s behaviour all the time, but this is a particularly shameless example. There’s more than a smidgen of cold calculation behind the white heat of Sturgeon’s indignation. The reason she singled out Carmichael’s alleged dishonesty, rather than his breach of confidentiality, is because she doesn’t want anyone to focus on the substance of the memo. Why? Because it was almost certainly an accurate account of what she said to the French ambassador. More fundamentally, it’s hypocritical of the SNP leader to complain about duplicity, given her party’s conduct in the run-up to the referendum.


I’m thinking of Alex Salmond in particular. On almost every critical point raised during the debate about Scotland’s future, Salmond was deliberately misleading. I’m not just thinking of his claim that he’d received legal advice reassuring him that an independent Scotland wouldn’t need to reapply for membership of the European Union. When the Information Commissioner ordered the Scottish government to respond to an FOI request to disclose the advice it had received, Salmond’s ministers spent £19,452.92 of public money appealing the decision, only to admit later that the ‘advice’ was a figment of Salmond’s imagination. So the First Minister misled the Scottish people on this point and spent taxpayers’ money to try to conceal the fact.

Then there were the SNP’s fictitious claims about the economic impact of independence — and I’m indebted here to the blogger Kevin Hague, who has devoted years to unpicking the SNP’s rhetoric. For instance, there was the assertion that Scotland sends more money to Westminster than it gets back, thanks to North Sea oil.

If you factor in its share of oil revenue, Scotland has been a net contributor to Britain’s coffers in three of the last 15 years. For the other 12, oil hasn’t been sufficient to offset the fact that the Scottish government spends £1,450 more and raises £250 less per person than the rest of the UK. This makes Salmond’s claim, repeated ad infinitum, that ‘oil is just a bonus’ and Scotland could get along perfectly well without it, even more absurd. If you add the £1,450 and £250 together, you get a per capita gap of £1,700, which means that, without North Sea oil, its deficit would be £9.1 billion higher than it is as part of the UK. It turns out that oil revenue is critical to offsetting the deficit gap, which is presumably why Salmond wildly over-estimated it in the SNP’s white paper on Scotland’s future. In it, he claimed that revenue from North Sea oil in 2016/17 — the first year of Scotland’s independence — would be between £6.8 billion and £7.9 billion. In fact, it’s likely to be around £600 million.

If you deduct the £600 million from the £9.1 billion, that means Scotland would be facing an annual deficit gap of £8.5 billion in its first year of independence and there’s no reason to think that would change over the next ten to 15 years. In order for Scotland to be better off out of the UK, oil revenue would have to increase by several thousand per cent, or the Scottish economy would have to grow by a faster amount than the rest of the UK — around 15 per cent faster. For Scotland to wash its own face would mean massive public spending cuts. Far from imposing austerity on Scotland, the British government is saving Nicola Sturgeon from having to find Greek levels of savings. Who would have thunk it?

The SNP is, by some margin, the most dishonest party in Britain. For its leader to call for Alistair Carmichael’s resignation because he leaked a memo is laughable.

edinburgh

Got something to add? Join the discussion and comment below.

Toby Young is associate editor of The Spectator.

You might disagree with half of it, but you’ll enjoy reading all of it. Try your first 10 weeks for just $10


Show comments
  • Chris

    Spot on Tobes.

  • El-Del

    The most amazing aspect of the SNP’s coverage in the media is the lack of scruntiny this dishonest rabble receive. Their actions at the Holyrood Parish Council almost never match the hyperbolic rhetoric, a point well made by the IFS re their General Election manifesto.

    • RolftheGanger

      “Another squirrel, quick, look!”

  • G Maclaren

    And the £60,000 money being raised by the so many thousand people to challenge him in court is wrong then, These thousands are wrong just as Sturgeon is wrong. I don’t think so. This man is discredited and cannot remain in office. If you say it is ok to do this then it will become the normal thing to do in politics. Corruption at any level must be cut out the same as with FIFA today. FIFA were allowed to commit this for 24 years before the FBI took action do you want the corrupt doings of the Scottish office to continue for 20 years before anybody takes action. Spectator you are well out of line and the thousands of people and Sturgeon calling for his resignation are correct. Spectator get into the 21 century for goodness sake, corruption is wrong and will not be tolerated by anyone except the Spectator of course. Just on your comments again your happy to pick a blogger that has a history of picking holes in the SNP pity you didn’t speak to the thousands of SNP voters who put in 56 of the 59 seats in Scotland. You just don’t get do you, people who voted are who matter not bloggers with a chip on their shoulder or papers like yours. Next you will be telling us that The SNP don’t deserve to be in power well look at the election result before you make that statement. I couldn’t care less what you say sturgeon said or as you think she said as you and also as the Scottish office weren’t there neither of you can say for definite what was said and the main thing is that she has brought it up and I don’t see all the other head ones in the LIB Dems doing that. I don’t think you will have considered why seeing your investigation is so narrow minded and concentrated on Sturgeon and Salmon that they did not turn to condemn Carmichael. Could it be that they are instigated in this whole sorry mess. Its a pity that you don’t investigate further along those lines but as I said earlier the Spectator maybe has no beef with corruption but only the silly mentality of hitting back at possibly the two people that have done the most for Scotland And I am not thinking of the Lib dems Scottish leader and Carmichael when I say this. A Poor und biased report from the spectator here which tries unsuccessfully to buck the mass of public opinion which has happened in Scotland recently to deliver a fresh outlook on politics and will not be hindered by a paper which tries to mock two SNP Individuals on the hope of garnering praise for someone whose only intent was the by his interfering in that process by leaking something that was or was not said in the hope to destroy the correct electoral process and also maintain his own survival as the only Lib Dem mp in Scotland.

    • The Forests Of Azure

      Seriously, get over it. Just because a bunch of people are gullible enough to believe the a publicly confirmed liar like Nicola Sturgeon and then proceed to hand money over to a nationalist crown funding stunt that is little more than a SNP publicity exercise doesn’t mean they are right.

      I couldn’t be bothered reading the rest of your diatribe, i wager it is nothing but a load of SNP propaganda that has no basis in fact or reality.

      • G Maclaren

        Propaganda or not you cannot overturn the requests of the many who want to see his resignation. You are worse than Carmichael if you stand there and say Sturgeon is a lier when there is no in the media evidence for this which cannot be said Carmichael when it is all exposed in the media but you are maybe blind to that fact now.

        • The Forests Of Azure

          Get over it. Just because some poor saps are suffering from nationalist extremist groupthink doesn’t make them right.

          When you call for the resignation of Salmond and Strurgeon for lying about EU membership, currency, oil income, the referendum being “once in a generation” etc etc ad infinitum then i might listen to you. Until you do that, you are nothing better than an SNP cultist peddling nationalist propaganda.

          So tell me, when does the fund start to have Salmond and Sturgeon removed from office? Can I donate?

          • Andrew Morton

            I suggest you start one and then raise a relevant legal action. Good luck.

          • The Forests Of Azure

            ah schrod kat has crawled out from under his rock…. been meeting up with an strange men recently?

          • Andrew Morton

            Schroedingers Cat, being an entirely different person, will be annoyed to hear that I have supposedly been pretending to be him/her. As I post under my real name, I’m not quite sure why I would also want to post under a pseudonym.

            You should try it yourself then we’d know that you have the courage of your convictions. All that we know at present is that you’re a Tory tenant farmer.

          • The Forests Of Azure

            Oh no Andy you are one in the same, you were outed on wings over scotland one day when i popped in to laugh at the deluded rev.

          • Andrew Morton

            I fear you are being confused by my avatar on Wings which is of a cat. No relation to the Schroedinger’s one though. Now go and have a lie down.

          • The Forests Of Azure

            No, one of your colleagues called you scrod kat and you responded. As you well know the schrod kat avatar is the photo that is paired with your current avatar. I have spent enough time conversing with you lot to know that many of you run multiple profiles, i ain’t stupid.

          • RolftheGanger

            Well, you do a remarkable good imitation of being daft as a brush.

          • Andrew Morton

            Apparently you are. Your memory is mistaken.

          • The Forests Of Azure

            Go away fly.

          • RolftheGanger

            Not till he encountered you again.

          • The_greyhound

            Legal action? Rentokil would be more appropriate.

        • The_greyhound

          Sturgeon is a liar. To her credit she’s a poor liar (probably because she’s somewhat thick), unlike her bloated, barefaced, compulsive liar of a predecessor.

      • G Maclaren

        If you happen to read the funder wording in the goal it denies it is snp publicity stunt as you say possibly lieing but that is not the point here. Look here for you to read is that part of the goal Quote This campaign is not supported by any political party but by residents of Orkney and Shetland who are disappointed in the behaviour of their MP and want our politics conducted honestly and without smears. It is not an SNP campaign. unquote

        • The Forests Of Azure

          It isn’t an SNP publicity stunt……
          Just how thick do you think I am??? and you wonder why your dream died last september

          • G Maclaren

            The Forests Of Azure G Maclaren • 6 hours ago

            Seriously, get over it. Just because a bunch of people are gullible enough to believe the a publicly confirmed liar like Nicola Sturgeon and then proceed to hand money over to a nationalist crown funding stunt that is little more than a SNP publicity exercise doesn’t mean they are right

            You said it not me I only reply to this Your quote above proceed to hand money over to a nationalist crown funding stunt that is little more than a SNP publicity exercise unquote I don’t think you are thick but you made the comment of publicity not me and I stated that the fund raiser says it is not a party campaigned.

          • The Forests Of Azure

            of course the snp have nothing to do with it…

            wee tip, not everyone is as easily fooled as you nats think.

          • Andrew Morton

            Surely the issue is ‘Did Carmichael lie in office?’ Something which he has himself admitted to. Everything else is whitabootery.

      • Andrew Morton

        Not that you’re biased. Oh, no.

        • RolftheGanger

          I think some SNP lassie jilted him!

    • WendellGeeStrikesAgain

      As ever with Nats, it’s one rule for them, another for everyone else. The rest of us fair minded Scots couldn’t care less anymore.

      The delusion from SNP followers is now at a cult like level. It makes Scientology look positively sane.

      • G Maclaren

        Where do you get this rule for one bit, surely it is one rule for MPS who can lie with impunity, if that effects the other party getting in at the election due to changing the voters view of the so called facts this wrong as is in this case of Carmichael slur. Cult which you say is the SNP party followers, what definition would you like to give to the other parties in Scotland which were tossed out at the Election I could suggest Dinasaurs, extinguished species, protected species or there is more pandas in Scotland than all the other parties mps combined or maybe you think that my cult definitions of them are carrying it a bit to far. As for Scientology I think the comparisons there are stretching things a bit far seeing that as far as I understand Scientology don’t have any MPs standing for election at the moment but I am prepared to be corrected about that

        • The_greyhound

          “one rule for MPS who can lie with impunity”

          shocking. Deeply shocking. Consider for instance the lies and thefts committed by MPs on expenses.

          Angus MacNeil, Angus Robertson, Stewart Hosie and Alex Salmond, for instance, all exposed previously as thieving from the public purse via their expense claims.

          And each of them recently returned as an SNP MP.

          .

      • Andrew MacGregor

        Yes, the one rule for the SNP is that they put themselves in front of the electorate and get them to decide based on knowledge in the public domain. The LibDems, Labour and Tories don’t. End of story. So stop the lies, grow up and educate ypurself beyond your blinkered hatred of all things SNP. You might find you are actually complicit in assisting a cover-up of child abuse.

      • RolftheGanger

        Yes a cult all round the world that has produced hundred of self governing countries – 140 added since WWII. Some “cult”

    • WarriorPrincess111111

      The SNP represent Scotland! They gained approximately 1.5 million votes overall. There are almost 80 million people in the whole of the UK. So the SNP represent a measly 1.8 % of the population! No! The SNP do not deserve to be in a position in Westminster!

      • Andy Ellis

        The UK population is 64.1 million, nowhere near 80. They gained over 50% of the vote in Scotland, which is what is important. If folk don’t like their electoral tsunami they can always vote to change the voting system! 😉

        • The_greyhound

          A lie.

          The SNP got under 50% of the vote in Scotland. 1,454,436 of 2,910,465 votes cast.

          Interestingly, 10% fewer than the same rabble managed to muster last September.

          • Colin Rullkotter

            Also interestingly, the opposing rabble managed to muster almost 30% fewer voters than they did last September.

          • Andy Ellis
          • Colin Rullkotter

            Where in those links does it state that the SNP got “over 50% of the vote”? In fact, the third one gives the exact figures, where you can see that they missed 50% by a thousand odd votes.

            Which was still the best result for any party in about sixty years. No need to exaggerate it!

          • Andy Ellis

            Give us a break! You’e honestly going to try and quibble about 1000 votes? There’s a reason the media (virtually exclusively britnat dominated) reported the figure as 50%, because that’s what it was.

          • Colin Rullkotter

            They reported it as 50%, not “over 50%”. As you noted, getting a majority of the vote would have an extra significance, so it’s not really splitting hairs to point out that this didn’t happen.

          • Andy Ellis

            OK, OK..I accept 50% (or 49.97%) isn’t a majority: I did actually think it was marginally over 50%…but will still settle for 50% rounded up by .03%! Somehow I have a feeling that given 5 more years of Tory austerity it shouldn’t take long to go higher 😉

          • Andy Ellis

            49.97%. Rounded up by everyone sane to 50%. The fact it isn’t “over” 50% by a thousand or so votes is hardly a biggie given the original 80 million quoted for the UK population huh? 😉

      • G Maclaren

        But unfortunately they are the second biggest party in opposition to the tories and as such carry quite a sizable voting weight. If the tories get out of control in their cutbacks to the Rich and undamnably rich. If some of the tories vote against the government siting it as unpopular policy Snp will be their to along with the tory dissenters to defeat their demand. This did not happen in the past with labour who happened to vote with the government hence the mess we are in now.

    • BillyShears67

      Well….looking at their truly appalling treatment of education and health, yes you can definitely say the SNP DON’T deserve to be in power. But since when did ANY of that matter to SNP voters?

      Not a jot.

      • G Maclaren

        Will come back when Scotland decides another party should be in power in Scotland instead of SNP If that’s ok. About reading books I am a worker no time to sit and read books And as far as educated is concerned I know what’s best for myself and its not that powerbase in England that’s all but corrupt You come back when you can prove that the latest offering out of the queens speech is the best for Scotland ok.

    • Jim2

      Can I ask, in all seriousness, why any of that is different to Alec Salmond telling Scots he had taken legal advice on the EU matter, spent taxpayers money attempting to cover up the answer, which subsequently turned out to be the opposite of what he said?

      • Andrew Morton

        He spent taxpayers money defending the principle that legal advice to Scottish government ministers should not be subject to FOI requests. A principle that the previous Lab/Lib governments had spent even more taxpayers money defending.

        • Jim2

          That’s not what I asked, but thanks for elucidating.

        • The Forests Of Azure

          No he did not. he spent taxpayers money to hide the fact that the legal advice did not exist.

          Your attempts at reinventing history are absolutely pathetic.

          • Andrew Morton

            Sorry, but you’re wrong.

          • Jim2

            So you can’t provide the answer?

            It’s not a difficult question……

          • The Forests Of Azure

            Clutching at straws I’m afraid.

          • Another gullible fool who swallows whole every lie fed to him by the British media. Snake-oil salesmen must think all their Christmases have come at once when they see you coming.

            It obviously conflicts with your mindless prejudice, but what Andrew Morton says is perfectly correct. The Scottish Government went to court to defend the principle of the confidentiality of advice to ministers. A principle that all parties subscribe to. Were you not blinded by unthinking hatred you would realise that the Scottish Government had no choice but to refuse the FoI request. If you were not a complete fool you would realise that the British parties knew the Scottish Government would have to refuse the FoI request. They knew because they would have been obliged to do exactly the same.

            The FoI request from Catherine Stihler was malicious. It was intended that it be refused so that the British parties could then peddle the very propaganda line that you have fallen for like a child being lured with sweeties.

          • The Forests Of Azure

            You do realise that no one reads your bile filled diatribes Peter. That being said, you do a great job of showing why a no vote was a good idea. Anything to keep fascists like you as far away from power as possible.

          • RolftheGanger

            And you deny the Ministerial Code of Conduct by which Salmond abided.

        • The_greyhound

          There hadn’t been any legal advice, so salmond wasn’t defending a constitutional principle, mere trying to stop another of his lies being exposed.

      • G Maclaren

        Never personally made any comment on that. So can’t comment about it. Time I logged off from all these people coming into this post prepared to say anything without foundation to try and turn round any definitive argument with crass replies. Not personally at you, understand just a statement of fact the way things are going now. Bye

        • Jim2

          No probs.

      • RolftheGanger

        Carmichael has admitted to a smear and self confessed to being a liar.

        Salmond was ambushed into some awkward phrasing in a tv interview, got investigated and was cleared by the relevant Holyrood investigation.

        • rollo_tommasi

          No it went like this.

          Nicola Sturgeon said in 2007 legal advice existed beyond doubt that Scotland would automatically join the EU. Salmond confirmed this by saying he had legal advice on TV to Andrew Neil.

          Six months later Nicola Sturgeon contradicted him and her previous comments by saying they had just commisoned legal advice.

          Salmond cleared by sham Holyrood investigation.

        • Jim2

          ….and instead of fighting an FOI, puffing out bluster and instigating a Holyrood investigation, Salmond couldn’t have come out and said;

          “Look, I believe people are wondering about legal advice-To be clear, I haven’t received any”

          End of story.

          Except he didn’t, did he?

          • rollo_tommasi

            Quite correct would have been much easier.

            Unfortunately the cult of personality has to show infallibility at all times.

    • The_greyhound

      The simlarities between the SNP and FIFA are indeed startling – both centred around around a lying senescent crook (salmond, blatter), corrupt, obsequious, deceitful parasites.

    • Mark Kilby

      “And the £60,000 money being raised by the so many thousand people to challenge him in court is wrong then”
      Hitler had millions of people cheering for him. Numbers don’t make an argument.

      • RolftheGanger

        It makes excellent evidence of widespread disgust with a liar and with Westminster’s despicable standards, given several thousand have donated..

  • edward howie

    The whole S.N.P. election strategy was built on lies, they wanted a Tory win in order to spread the it’s Westminster’s fault myth. There was never a hope in hell that they could have had any influence and they knew it, we voted no by a large majority to independence thus limiting the influence of the Scottish members elected to parliament and the majority of the U.K. electorate voted tory . David Cameron is right to exclude some E.U. citizens from voting in the in-out referendum, I wish we had for the general election and that the S.N.P. had been defeated as they are truly Scotland’s shame

  • The Forests Of Azure

    Couldn’t put it any better myself.

    However, as evidenced by the professional SNP cybernat below fact and truth are alien concepts to the SNP cult.

    The fact that Salmond was willing to lie to such an extent on the EU that thousands of people voted YES in the completely false belief that IScotland would have automatically entered the EU is beyond contempt. Thousands of people would have lost their jobs, and yet, despite the fact that the letter below demonstrates just how big Salmond’s lie was, even to this day his devoted disciples are either completely unwilling or unable to accept that they were duped.

    http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/S4_EuropeanandExternalRelationsCommittee/Inquiries/Letter_from_Viviane_Reding_Vice_President_of_the_European_Commission_dated_20_March_2014__pdf.pdf

    The admitted to the Daily Telegraph that it SNP used cult recruiting techniques to recruit disciples in the run up to the referendum and clearly these methods have left a generation of victims who are now so damaged that they don’t know the difference between reality and fantasy. All these cultists can perceive is SNP = good, A N Other = bad. Tragic, trully tragic.

    • Andrew MacGregor

      The SNP ‘admitted’ to the Telegraph? Christ almighty, you people are deluded.

      • The Forests Of Azure

        Seems Stephen Noon the head yesnp strategist let the cat out the bag.

        http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/10821784/Yes-or-No-Scotland-is-teetering-on-a-knife-edge.html

        The key words are:-

        “Now I know where I’ve heard all this before. I was a teenage evangelist, after being converted (briefly) to a particularly strident form of Christianity. The techniques we used were much the same as those described by the Yes Scotland strategist. The scale of commitment, the purposeful chats, the methods of persuasion have all been nicked from the Church. They’re doing evangelism, aren’t they? Mr Noon responds with a smile and a laugh that sounds nervous.”

        • RolftheGanger

          Every door to door salesman uses techniques pinched from the church by that nutty ‘logic’

          • The Forests Of Azure

            And my personal troll is back. I didn’t miss you.

          • RolftheGanger

            Typical Unionist – self obsession and nastiness!

  • orri

    Simply repeating a lie doesn’t make it the truth. If both parties to the original conversation deny that Sturgeon said any such thing then why insist that she did.

    At the same time the French feeling the need to intervene indicates that this whole episode had sufficiently damaged the UK’s relationship with France that they felt justified in doing so despite the convention that they stay silent.

    Perhaps it’d be worth your while reading the Official Secrets Act, Article 3 in particular, and having done so tell us whether you agree that the actions authorized by Carmichael constitute a breech of that or not.

    • The Forests Of Azure

      The french are embarrassed because in terms of diplomatic convention they should not be discussing internal UK politics, Sturgeon is embarrassed because the memo is correct.

      And by the way, your reference to the offical secrets act shows just how completely misinformed you are. Stick to propaganda, law clearly isn’t your field.

      • orri

        I’ve read the OSA , have you?

        Alternatively there was no discussion of internal UK politics and the leaked memo by implying that there was caused a diplomatic incident. Regardless of whether it was true or not that leak, which was potentially illegal, would have risked that outcome.

        • The Forests Of Azure

          Really??? So denying knowledge of a non-sensitive memo is
          a breach of the official secrets act?

          And discussing the outcome of the UK General Election isnt discussing UK internal politics?

          Get an education.

          • orri

            That’d be the memo clearly marked as being for limited distribution? The one that accused Sturgeon and the French Ambassador of doing exactly what you say? The one that resulted in a minor diplomatic intervention consisting of a denial that such discussions took place?

            Denying leaking it isn’t the breach. Authorising it’s distribution may very well have been. But then that’s why you asked the wrong question isn’t it?

          • The Forests Of Azure

            Seriously, you haven’t got the slightest clue what you are saying.
            Are you also suggesting that you have seen this memo yourself? You know the memo that Sir Jeremy Heywood said was “an accurate record of the conversation”, a statement that has been completely ignored by Sturgeon as she tried to create a diverson by setting her attack dogs on Carmichael.

            Tell me, why has Sturgeon not attacked Sir Jeremy? Is it because she saw what happened to Andrew Mitchell when he got caught lying about what a public employee said?

            Pastor Niemoller must be turning in his grave at the way the SNP conduct themselves.

          • orri

            The memo that has now been pronounced as an accurate record of what the person who wrote it thought he’d heard of the report of the conversation? Yes that one. The one that Carmichael himself now says we must accept does not represent what actually happened.

            The memo that the Telegraph published the contents of on 3rd April and which includes a request it’s circulation be limited.

            The one that regardless of how it was marked still counts under the following clause of the OSA

            …….

            http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1989/6/section/3

            3International relations.

            (1)A person who is or has been a Crown servant or government contractor is guilty of an offence if without lawful authority he makes a damaging disclosure of—

            (a)any information, document or other article relating to international relations; or

            (b)any confidential information, document or other article which was obtained from a State other than the United Kingdom or an international organisation,

            being information or a document or article which is or has been in his possession by virtue of his position as a Crown servant or government contractor.

            (2)For the purposes of subsection (1) above a disclosure is damaging if—

            (a)it endangers the interests of the United Kingdom abroad, seriously obstructs the promotion or protection by the United Kingdom of those interests or endangers the safety of British citizens abroad; or

            (b)it is of information or of a document or article which is such that its unauthorised disclosure would be likely to have any of those effects.

            (3)In the case of information or a document or article within subsection (1)(b) above—

            (a)the fact that it is confidential, or

            (b)its nature or contents,

            may be sufficient to establish for the purposes of subsection (2)(b) above that the information, document or article is such that its unauthorised disclosure would be likely to have any of the effects there mentioned.

            …………

            No actual mention of the document having to be labeled secret. As you seem to think accusing the French of discussing the internal politics of the UK is a bid deal can we take it as read that they might do so too?

          • The Forests Of Azure

            Dear oh dear oh dear. The relevant comments here are Sir Jeremy Heywoods. If Sturgeon is so sure she is right then she should challenge him, she hasn’t because she does not fancy the prospect of lying on oath and being found guilty of perjury.

            Once again, the official secrets act is completely irrelvant, and it is Section 3 not Article 3, at least get your teminology right.

          • Colin Rullkotter

            “Are you also suggesting that you have seen this memo yourself? You know
            the memo that Sir Jeremy Heywood said was “an accurate record of the
            conversation”, a statement that has been completely ignored by Sturgeon
            as she tried to create a diverson by setting her attack dogs on
            Carmichael.”

            This is a widespread misunderstanding. The “accurate record” that Heywood refers to was of the conversation between the civil servant and the Consul General, not Sturgeon and the Ambassador.

          • The Forests Of Azure

            We all know that she really said what the memo recorded.

          • Colin Rullkotter

            A few hours ago you said that Heywood’s report confirmed the allegations against Sturgeon. Now it’s been pointed out that’s not the case, it seems we don’t need the report after all, as “we all know” what she said anyway, via the power of faith?

          • The Forests Of Azure

            Who did the pointing out? A cybernat with an axe to grind?

            Sturgeon herself is a confirmed liar who was among her various sins willing to hush up allegations of wife beating for the good of the SNP and then went on to lie by saying she did nothing of the sort.

          • Colin Rullkotter

            Yes, yes, I’m sure she’s an evil monster. Now here’s the bit you referred to from Heywood’s report, about the “accurate record”:

            “He [the civil servant] confirmed under questioning that he believed that the memo was an accurate record of the conversation that took place between him and the French Consul General, and highlighted that the memo had stated that part of the conversation between the French Ambassador and the First Minister might well have been ‘lost in translation’.”

            So the report can’t pronounce on whether she said what was claimed, the author of the memo is doubtful that she did, and the French explicitly say she didn’t. Unfortunately for her, against all that we have your gut instinct, so it looks like she’s screwed.

        • Russell Morrison

          ORRI…..please be careful…..your opponent’s dad is bigger than your dad…..he’s told the whole playground many times now.
          Just appreciate that you’re dealing with a banker…………..( mind you, I never COULD spell !!)

  • Sideshow Bob

    The hypocrisy is startling. In the run up to the election Brendan O’Hara had admitted to using the term “hun” which is a derogatory term for Protestants and has been deemed so in a court of law.

    Sturgeon refused to act.

    And last week she gave 3m to fight sectarianism. You really could not make it up.

    http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/3-million-funding-to-tackle-sectarianism-1-3782553

    A populist party who will come away at the seams very shortly and forever be consigned to the dustbin.

    • The Forests Of Azure

      They want to stir up sectarianism to further their aims. To them all no voters are members of the Orange Order and therefore inherently evil. They want to create a Scotland in the image of Northern Ireland where us scots are split into nationalsits and unionists. It is the cancer of nationalism at its worst.

      • Andrew MacGregor

        What utter guff. We want to rid ourselves of the cancer of sectarianism as espoused by the Orange Order and the current leader of the Labour party.

        • The Forests Of Azure

          So thats why according to SNP cultists such as yourself all no voters are fascists who are members of the Orange Order….
          You are a complete hypocrite.

          • Robert Peffers

            I’ll just point out that I made no such claims and allow sane commenters to draw their own conclusions. However, as to your attempted, “hypocrite”, jibe. Nothing I have posted is in any way hypocritical. Anything I claim is backed up by either logic or evidence. I doubt you actually comprehend the meaning of the word.

        • Naw naw naw

          Just the Orange Order? What about the Republican bigots who march the streets, like the James Connolly society?

          Of course, they marched alongside Yessers in the run up to the devolution vote, so no problems with them then?

          All friends together

          • Andrew MacGregor

            Yep, just the Orange Order. They’re the idiots pretending marching tradition in Scotland as an excuse to promote sectarianism and violence.

          • Naw naw naw

            I see, just another bigot blaming the other side for all of societies ills

            You keep looking the other way when your Republican chums are having their “protest” marches

          • Andrew MacGregor

            Not at all. I despise all sectarianism. Whether Hindu caste, Muslim v buddhists etc. It’s got more to do with it being a fight over foreign lands imported here by a group of low brow knuckle draggers who need to move into the 21st century.

        • Kaine

          The current leader of the Labour Party is Harriet Harman. What sectarianism are you going on about?

          • Sk11ng

            And a recent leader Tony Blair has of course converted to Roman Catholicism.

          • RolftheGanger

            No. acting leader, the only one in position is Jim Murphy in Scotland – – till he demits office shortly.

          • Kaine

            You clearly don’t understand how the Labour Party constitution works. Harriet is leader, that’s why the deputy is independently elected, not appointed. Jim Murphy is leader of the Scottish Labour Party, for another couple of weeks or so.

            If you want to make allegations against people, it behooves you to be specific.

      • Robert Peffers

        Err! Excuse me Azure, but your logic is somewhat illogical. How can fighting against sectarianism be construed as stirring it up? If you want to stir up sectarianism then you take sides and thus upset the opposite lot. You do not attempt to suppress both sides equally.

        • The Forests Of Azure

          You still trolling after me? Has Rolfthegranger handed the troll baton over to you or something? Or wait a minute, is that Rolf with a new name? Bless.

          • Robert Peffers

            Why would I bother to troll after a troll? Especially one as inept and utterly useless as you seem to be. Since I popped into here in the passing I’ve not read a single post from you that is other than abuse, unsubstantiated drivel or bare faced lies.

          • RolftheGanger

            To which you can add paranoia and conspiracy theories!

    • Alexsau91

      The Nats also called Scots who backed Labour or the Tories ‘quislings’. A discusting slur. Nat thugs also attempted to run Nigel Farage out of Scotland. And far from condemning it, the SNP attempted to justify it.

      • The_greyhound

        Indeed “Quisling” is an interesting term, coming from an outfit like the SNP that supported the Germans in WW2.

        • Newton Unthank

          “Quisling” comes from the name of the Nazi collaborationist leader of the Norwegian “Nasjonal Samling” party. I don’t quite see how that resembles the SNP.

          • Bo’sun Higgs

            It doesn’t. “The_greyhound” is just another mentally defective troll who barely knows what he’s saying. Check out his earlier comments for some laughs, though I think some of the really racist rants have been deleted.

        • Sunset66

          Oh that old chestnut. Well in that vein how about Prince Philips three sisters marrying Nazi officers one in the SS close to Himmler. Or don’t forget half the cabinet thinking Hiltler wasn’t do bad and those labour Mps who thought Satlin was just misunderstood

          Of course you can throw in the Darien scheme that was only 300 years ago.

          Strikes me your political views are pretty dodgy so I would not throw names around

        • Robert Peffers

          Sheesh! Now we can write off anything else The_Greyhound post from now on. This claim was based upon anonymous information given to an MI5 Desk Officer that Donaldson was planning a Quisling style government if Hitler invaded. The Police raided his home and Donaldson was held first at Kilmarnock and then at Barlinnie for 6 weeks.
          After which he was released without charge and no arms, no ammo and no documents were ever produced. Donaldson was innocent. More than could be said of the British Aristocracy and the abdicated King of England. Remember too that Hitler’s Gestapo had an English Brigade who wore the cross of St George badge on their collars. Also go check out the Mitford sisters and the Mosleys.

          • Simon de Lancey

            I could have sworn that he was comparing Quisling’s Norwegian political party to the SNP; he’s not very comprehensible, is he?

      • jdmank

        facts dear boy facts,
        The people who challenged Farage were from “radical independence” party and the ringleader was English and they had absolutely nothing whatsoever to do the the SNP but why let the facts get in the way of a good rant eh?

    • Robert Peffers

      That, Bob, is utter claptrap. Of course Nicola refused to act of the Hun matter. To do so would have not only out of her remit but would have been taking sides. While that claimed 3m, (I assume you mean Pounds and not police officers), is to fight the problem and is neutral as it takes no particular side. It is also within her remit.
      I’ve quite honestly never come across a site with quite so many totally biased idiots all posting at the same time. It really makes the sane ones stick out like sair thooms.

  • Steve Larson

    If the faked smear had been targeting any other politician then Carmichael would have been forced to resign long ago.

  • Steve Larson

    A positive thing about Carmichael staying on is that it will finish the Liberal Democrats in Scotland.

    After this he will loose his seat in the next election.

    His constituency are not at all impressed with this.

    Not that that will be reported in the media outside of Scotland.

  • hippohead

    Really. Just a bit one sided then. I don’t care one way or another. But he lied and it was bare faced at that. It’s not that he lied although wrong but he got caught red handed. Unfortunately it our political system that elected MP’s can lie with impunity. I appreciate the spectator is shall we say a little to biased in its coverage but the above is just a rant nothing more

  • Andrew MacGregor

    It is depressing. That people like Toby Young are allowed to present drivel like this as reasoned argument.

    Carmichael was found to have contravened the rules. That is fact. He is also potentially guilty of breach of law and international treaty.

    Salmond was and is guilty of none of those. He wasn’t found to have lied, broken convention, law or treaty. That is a fact.

    Now, the crucial part. Despite the long-winded nonsense by a partisan anti-Scot vitriolic little sneak above, Salmond has put himself up in front of the electorate with the full facts known to all. Carmichael hasn’t.

    These facts make it an article of little or no worth and Toby Young should donate any fee to charity.

    • The Forests Of Azure

      Whats depressing is that people like yourself have been left so comprehensively damaged by the YESNP’s propaganda campaign that you are unable to seperate fact from fantasy.

      Salmond is a confirmed liar, has been exposed as such and rewarded for that by fawning disciples such as yourself. I reckon that even if the alleged super injunction was revealed to the world you would still be grovelling on your knees in your complete adulation of the man.

      ps. love the wee suggestion that Toby should be silenced, you nationalists truly are the enemies of free speech.

      • G Maclaren

        What’s this unable to separate fact from fantasy Fact is the Scottish government have been active for 7 years now under the SNP. I don’t see gloom and doom fighting in the streets out of control economy or crime esculating. Fact is you are living in cloud cucoo land if you think the mass of pepole in this country are not happy with there lot now under the SNP. Fantasy is if you think that the majority of people are wrong for voting SNP into government, the same as the mass of people voted for a Tory government down south.

        • Alexsau91

          We are a United Kingdom. Signed and sealed by the Scottish electorate. Thus, the Tories did not simply win most seats in England, they won the most seats in the entire United Kingdom. They are your government just as they are ours. And Cameron is your Prime Minister.

          The SNP have run a devloved administration, where their job consists of little more than spending. If something goes well – the SNP takes the credit. Whenever something goes wrong, they blame Wesminster.

          • G Maclaren

            If you didn’t happen to notice the tories only got one seat in Scotland. If SNP only got one seat in England would it be right for them to govern England. Unfortunately they are our government and you must be happy with the way they govern it. So happens all the 56 seats hear in Scotland will dispell that notion and ultimately get Full fiscal autonomy to show that the purse strings are not tied at a Knot at the border of Scotland and England. Believe it or not the majority of people do not think that having one tory seat in Scotland gives Cameron the right to do as he pleases the same as that other tory industry destroyer Maggie thatcher did before him But you must be happy with that as well.

          • Jim2

            It doesn’t matter who got what number of seats in Scotland/England.

            Scots voted No to breaking up the United Kingdom a few months ago.

            We just had a United Kingdom general election..

            Straight forward enough, no?

          • G Maclaren

            Yes that was when the rumour mill of the three amigos and god knows who else including the queen and Obama got into it. Now is this straight forward how do you think it would go now instead of the country majority labour and now the majority SNP. Only a fool would be stupid enough to think that Scotland was not duped hence they kicked out labour. But I suppose the once in a lifetime independence vow holds. Sorry wrong. The Queens speech held a lot for Scotland did it No. So just look at the way things are building up now and the status quo in Scotland will change for the better. But you maybe want to live in the past well that’s gone with Cameron coming into power. Think about it and also think of the last Conservative governments attempts at destroying Scotland. Union what union .

          • Jim2

            In attempt to understand your mangled response, I believe you are driving at the fact that I am a fool, I was duped and I ‘kicked out Labour’?

            Oh, and the fact that it was a lie to state the referendum was once in a lifetime?

            Anyhoo, as I asked already;

            Scots voted to keep the UK intact.

            We had a UK general election.

            The party which gained a majority is our government.

            Fair summary?

          • jdmank

            One very important little point you conveniently forget to mention is what a previous government commits to does not hold subsequent governments to honour such as the devolution bill is written in stone and can never be repealed,yes it can and no matter what the present Westminster government commit to it does not make one jot of a difference to a new administration,if it wants to reverse a previous governments policies there nothing we can do about it,
            Alex Salmond said “in MY opinion” not a commitment by the SNP, in his opinion, his is not the only opinion and we can disagree with that opinion since last time I checked it is STILL a free country, but I’m sure the Tories will have that little inconvenient oversight in hand.

          • Jim2

            Are you talking to yourself, or just misread my comment?

            You’ve addressed a number of points which I never mentioned…..

          • jdmank

            The Tories got a mandate with 37% of the electorate Jim, the SNP on the other hand only managed a measly 50% of Scottish votes, mandates eh?

          • Jambo25

            And Scots subsequently voted for 56 out of 59 Scottish MPs. They were then informed by the Tories that there was something illegitimate about having those MPs take part in governance of the English. Yet we now have a Tory government which achieved 1 Scottish MP by a few hundred votes with its lowest share of the Scottish vote since the 1860s claiming a ‘legitimate’ right to run large areas of Scottish life.

          • Jim2

            Very interesting, but it doesn’t change the statement above. I’ll put it again;

            Scots voted to keep the UK together;
            We just had a UK general election.
            The majority party is now the government of the UK.

            also;

            The only Scottish MP’s are SNP ones?

          • RolftheGanger

            Nearly there are two BritNat North Britons and a self proclaimed liar, so your guess as to how he identified himself is as good as anyone else’s

          • Jim2

            I think you mean MP’s whom represent Scotland, NOT Scottish MP’s……

          • Jambo25

            Pretty simple actually. Tories and their supporters cannot play the legitimacy card against the SNP and then complain about their lack of legitimacy in Scottish terms being flung back at them.

          • Mark Kilby

            “If SNP only got one seat in England would it be right for them to govern England”

            Sure it would, if they fielded enough candidates and won enough votes.

          • Sunset66

            I would suggest that since the unionist parties have suffered meltdown in Scotland that that is Gods way of telling them they are doing something wrong if they are supposed to,represent all of the UK

          • Mark Kilby

            56 MPs with close to zero influence in the UK parliament, a divine lesson in the folly of drinking from the cup of nationalism.

          • RolftheGanger

            They have already had influence.
            The PM’s plan for avoiding legislation and amending parliamentary rules to introduce EVEL has been accepted as a subject for investigation by the Speaker, on Salmond’s initiative.

            Tories only have a majority of 12.
            Very vulnerable. Wait till by-elections whittle the number down.

          • Mark Kilby

            What a victory. I feel safer already.

          • Sunset66

            If they have no influence it will just be as normal for Scots who vote one way and receive a different govt.

            If the Snp have no influence they can go back and say ” Hey it proves that if you vote in this parliament it’s a waste of time. It’s time we ran our own affairs ”

            By the way the UK reeks of nationalism spitfires and the Somme and commemorations of battles and wars. I mean nationalism is okay according to you but only of your kind

          • Mark Kilby

            The feeling that those voted for do not represent them? Yes I expect the 65% of the electorate in Scotland who did not vote SNP at the 2015 GE share those exact same feelings.

            “It’s time we ran our own affairs”

            One more spin of the wheel, hopeless gamblers rarely acknowledge to themselves they have a problem

            “By the way the UK reeks of nationalism spitfires and the Somme and commemorations of battles and wars”

            I must have been busy that day, or perhaps distracted by a ceremony to mark The Battle of Stirling Bridge that took place nearly 800 years ago.

          • Sunset66

            The Tories have one, let me repeat that one MP in Scotland. Hardly a ringing mandate on their manifesto. I think that even you would admit there is an issue when for a number of elections the Tories have only had one or two mps out of 59.
            It is hardly conducive to stability of the UK

            Unionists could choose to devolve meaningful powers to the home nations but it’s track record is to obstruct or devolve the minimum. They can hardly deny there is a desire for real devolution

            Re comemerstions good grief we have had Battle of Britain, DDay , Gallipoli
            WW1 etc etc, it truly is a sure sign of the decline of the UK when all it does is look back to military victories as a means of countering it’s failure to find a modern vision.

            Finally if you look back over the last fifty years you see the rise and rise of the SNP . Reform the UK or there is a real chance the UK will break up

            God knows the signs have been there for a at least a couple of decades

            Nothing so blind to the future as a Britnat who is busy looking back to 1957

          • Mark Kilby

            Tories. Sixty years ago Scotland was mostly Tory, decades later mostly Labour, this year it changed again, it will no doubt change again in future. This is SNP peak so enjoy it, the only way is down from here.

            Devolution. There’s a small matter of respecting the views of 63% of the population living in Scotland who are happy with the status quo. UK.gov was quite happy to cut the umbilical cord. The new further devolved powers were signed off by the SNP, they did so of their own free will, not under duress. It is a failing on their part if they signed up to something they did not agree with. I’d venture you have no idea what the new powers offer, but are happy to parrot the same party line.

            Yes the UK is able and willing to remember, it’s quite normal, visit any country and you will find the same. I suspect the women’s institute have a packed calendar of events too, and many interested in participating in said events, but that doesn’t define the UK nor the people living within it. Sorry if that doesn’t fit with your war monger characterisation.

            The UK is doing well. It has a good track record of adapting to change.

            Fifty years? Look back a little further to the founding of the SNP in 1934 and you will find a leader who viewed the possibility of his neighbours houses ablaze as a means to put food on his own plate. This man / his peers continued to play a role within the SNP into the nineties. The SNP has not fully confronted its past.

            I detest nationalism, including British nationalism. I look forward to a world without borders. You are peddling an ideal based around the notion of a nation state, a device to impose arbitrary borders with the single purpose of dividing man against himself.

            Looking back to 1957. Says a person who harks back to a land border that was dissolved in all but name over 300 years ago. Does that not strike you as a tad rich? If not, then it should.

          • jdmank

            Wow tortured logic that one since 59 Scottish MP’s +1 making 60 would leave us, now lets see…236 seats short of a majority. the natural majority of English seats makes it impossible for Scotland to get anything approaching parity without complete independence, time to move on guys we WILL be independent, its just a matter of time, make it easy on yourselves and quit whining about it.

          • Mark Kilby

            Well o great sage I will spell it out for you, they could field candidates OUTSIDE SCOTLAND. There, that wasn’t so tortuous was it.

          • hazelsmith

            Nicola Sturgeon told the Times that even although the Tories only had one seat in Scotland, that did not mean it was illegitimate for them to govern – it was all part of democracy.

            Mind you, that was before the election when she was trying to convince the rest of the UK that the SNP would have a mandate to govern in a Labour/SNP alliance.

          • Sunset66

            Do laugh at the twisted logic of unionists .
            The vast majority of scots want real devolved power to Holyrood

            Unionist fight at every turn to devolve as little as possible.
            If you think that is sustainable in the long term you are an idiot.

            Unionist could actually decide to sit down and negotiate a fair deal for all the home nations and resolve the issue whist at the same time limiting the impact of the SNP

            But never mind .land of hope and glory unionists can’t bring themselves to govern for all of the UK

            If you demonstrate to Scots that Westminster is s block they will draw the obvious conclusion .

            Do you honestly think hyping up,anti Snp rhetoric which slips into anti scottish rhetoric strengthens the Union ?

          • Iain Inkster

            On the contrary I reckon if you had devoref2 tomorrow you’d have 40+% wanting Holyrood scrapped.

          • RolftheGanger

            That’s the theory.
            The reality is the Union is in zombie territory.
            Still existing but dead of spirit and soul.

        • Jim Clegg

          Are you happy with the SNP’s record on education?
          Child literacy down, child numeracy down, exam results falling, over 100,000 college places cut, the lowest level of student grants in western Europe, the poorest students the most indebted, higher university drop-out rate than rUK . Then again I suppose none of that matters so long as middle class graduates do not have to pay back any fees.

          • G Maclaren

            Maybe with a bit more control of our own fiscal devices so bitterly hung onto by the Uk Government we could sort these as you say. But I could not see any of the other parties at the election in Scotland recently do any better if they got in. Oh sorry forgot they were wiped out, Maybe because they had no answer as well to your issues. Maybe instead of stating the SNP failings you could give us a run down on how the other two main parties in Scotland could have done better.

          • hazelsmith

            The SNP made their own choices about education. They decided to maintain free university tuition at the expense of college places, so having “a bit more control” wouldn’t have changed that.

          • RolftheGanger

            Not true. The money was not transferred form one to the other.

          • hazelsmith

            Possibly not directly, but if money is spent on one level of education, that money is not then available to be spent on any other level of education, therefore the choice was made, which was what I said originally.

          • RolftheGanger

            No “possibly” about it.

            The money was transferred within the same sector. From pointless under utilised and pointlessly duplicated “recreation and lifestyle’ type courses – to full time courses expanded to deliver skills in actual demand in the economy.

          • Sk11ng

            You don’t need more fiscal control just to change your spending priorities. You can’t change the size of the block grant but can decide how to spend it. Education spending too low? Increase it, then! And which of the two main parties is better? Actually even the Tories (puke) would be better if they were like the English Tories since they currently spend more on education at Westminster than Holyrood per head.

          • FF42

            Maybe instead of stating the SNP failings you could give us a run down on how the other two main parties in Scotland could have done better.

            I have no axe to grind one way or the other. As numeracy and literacy rates have fallen under this government, by definition Labour DID do better than the SNP.

          • The Forests Of Azure

            “Maybe with a bit more control of our own fiscal devices so bitterly hung onto by the Uk Government we could sort these as you say”

            So what the economic geniuses in the SNP going to do then? Plant some money trees?

            It would be funny if it wasn’t so serious.

          • RolftheGanger

            Still at your usual tricks of deflection,
            Of near 50 billion pa that goes south from Scotland, less than half comes back to the Scottish Government.
            Repatriate the money sucked out of the Scottish economy annually and the spending would boost demand and grow the economy – instead of that of the SE.

          • rollo_tommasi

            50 billion? lol

            Care to break that down.

          • RolftheGanger

            Oh look a squirrel!
            Anything to deflect from the self-confessed liar, Carmichael.

      • G Maclaren

        Sorry I don’t see the bit about being silenced if you are referring to A McGregors comment above if it is any where else I stand corrected.

      • RolftheGanger

        The pathetic Unionist efforts at smearing Salmond have failed dismally.
        So the idiots intensify their efforts!

    • Alistair Kennedy

      If what has been written is untrue then why doesn’t Nicola Sturgeon and Alex Salmond defend themselves in court as what has been written must surely be libellous.

      • Gary McKillop

        I would guess that is because given the electoral support they have in Scotland, they have no need to concern themselves with the bleating on the internet of odious blackguards such as yourself.

        • The_greyhound

          And of course the lying toads wouldn’t dare face a court..

        • robertsonjames

          A more aware person on the night before Sepp Blatter is re-elected president of FIFA in spite of the mountain of evidence of personal wrong-doing would not want to argue that so long as enough ignorant muppets keep voting for a charismatic charlatan his lying and dishonesty don’t really count.

          Nice.

          I can see why an independent Scotland run by people who think like you would be such a pleasant place to live and why a huge majority of Scots eagerly embraced it last September.

          • RolftheGanger

            Weird “logic” but then this is a Unionist lalaland blog.

    • Alexsau91

      Hmm, did you say ‘Allowed’? As in, You intended to censor Toby Young because you don’t like what he has to say?

      That’s the dishonest and fanatical SNP we all know and despise!

    • WendellGeeStrikesAgain

      Salmond DID lie. End of. Get over it.

      Perhaps you should be asking Nicola Sturgeon to resign as First Minister, considering she’s presided over the tawdry state of education in Scotland. It’s far worse than England, and we don’t even have to pay tuition fees in Scotland!

      In fact, get the SNP to resign from government thanks to their negligence on education. Social security my ar*e.

      In other news, David Miscavige – leader of Scientology – had distanced himself from allegations of support for the SNP. “God no, I’m not that weird”, he cried.

      • jdmank
      • Jambo25

        Actually, it isn’t far worse than England.

      • Andrew MacGregor

        Where is your evidence? Press reports of opponents claims, unsupported by any investigation anywhere. In other words, despite what you suggest he did, Carmichael has been caught, investigated and had his lies confirmed. Those are the facts.

        And then Toady Young writes an article above suggesting Salmond should resign. Well, unlike the lying s.hite Carmichael, Salmond STOOD FOR ELECTION WITH ALL THE ALLEGATIONS IN THE OPEN. IN OTHER WORDS UNLIKE CARMICHAEL, HE HAS TESTED HIMSELF IN THE FACE OF THE ELECTORATE. THEY VOTED HIM IN AS AN MP KNOWING THAT HE MIGHT HAVE LIED. CARMICHAEL HASN’T.

        And therein lies the problem. Alleged lies v actual lies, in the public domain v hidden. Tested in the eyes of the electorate v not. Carmichael’s case is NOTHING LIKE the same as Salmond. Carmichael has in all likelihood broken the law, breached an international treaty, and misled parliament, the electorate and lied about an opponent.

    • BillyShears67

      Please – you’re making a fool of yourself. Stop making a scene.

    • Russell Morrison

      Well said Andrew…..and ignore the apologists for liars like Toby Young and Carmichael.
      We now our cause is both honourable and just…..and its achievement is inevitable…..like those dozens upon dozens of democratic, successful nations who have done this already.
      Perhaps the trogladytes writing here could compile a list of all such nations that want to come back under the British imperial yoke……..at least it won’t take them long !!

      • Kaine

        You ARE the British Imperial Yoke you daft twit! Britain is the name of the union of Scotland, England and Wales!

        • RolftheGanger

          Scotland is ruled by Westminster – which has one representative of the governing party in all of Scotland.
          The situation is not sustainable.

          • rollo_tommasi

            It was sustained last September in a vote you had no say or influence in whatsoever.

          • Kaine

            Plenty of people in Scotland voted Conservative. Your argument is, at best, one against FPTP.

          • RolftheGanger

            Wrong. “Plenty” amounted to 14%

            One Tory MP and 14%of the population is not a democratic mandate to govern Scotland via an appointed Secretary of State (formerly called an Imperial Viceroy)

      • Charlieboy

        What people like you and Andrew never seems to get is that in a democracy battles are won or lost in the centre. I’m someone who was open to being convinced of the benefits of independence – initially not having strong feelings about it either way.

        Had the Yes campaign put forward a thorough, believable case with realistic aims, sound economic policies and contingencies, you may easily have had my vote – I can see the potential social benefits. However, the posts like yours I read, the more I was convinced to vote no, because you simply didn’t seem to take my questions and concerns seriously.

        You should understand, without the support of people like me the independence movement will NEVER get over the 50% mark. Perhaps you should consider this next time you describe people as “trogladytes” (sic) just because they disagree with you.

        You want to win – convince me. Insults drive away the very people you need to succeed.

    • The_greyhound

      I imagine that a free press does depress you, the more since your lousy yobs can’t run after Toby Young in the street to stop him saying anything your treacherous repressive party doesn’t like.

      Salmond is a practised proven liar, about issues of crucial importance. Carmichael merely provided collateral for a widely known truth, namely that Doris Dreghorn was gagging for a Tory win, but couldn’t acknowledge that to voters in Western Scotland.

    • hazelsmith

      “Allowed”? What does that mean? The last time I looked free speech was still “allowed” in this country.

      Is this a symptom of life under the SNP? Who decides what is “allowed” and what is not?

    • karen richard

      The Scottish Government spent £10million on the Ryder Cup golf tournament, staged at Gleneagles last September, and received more than 7,000 tickets as the host nation.

      The ex-First Minister said the briefs – worth up to £145 each, with hospitality packages worth up to £2,000 each – would go to junior golfers, veterans and other “inspirational Scots”.

      However, the Scottish Government has now admitted that a quarter of the tickets were given to influential supporters of independence and other guests from the worlds of business and politics.

      Was he frank about that before the election? Really?

  • Toby says: “Carmichael’s sin was denying all knowledge of the leak when asked about it at the time”

    Following the leak Alastair Carmichael lied. He was asked clearly and without room for misunderstanding whether he had leaked the memo. He clearly, and without room for misunderstanding responded that no, the first he’d heard was from a Telegraph journalist afterwards.

    The lie, which Carmichael has had the grace to admit to even if Toby’s not so sure, was intended to smear an opponent in the runup to a general election. That’s irrelevant to his position. The memo wasn’t correct, that’s also been admitted by Carmichael, if not by Toby, but that’s irrelevant too.

    The issue is that Carmichael lied, revealing an aspect of his character which, if his electorate had known it at the time, might well have changed the outcome of the election he was fighting in Orkney & Shetland. It’s an additional pointer to his character when you consider that he could have admitted his lie before the election, but waited to do so until afterwards, and in fact until he was certain to be revealed as the source, and as a liar.

    Alastair Carmichael should step down to fight a by-election, giving his electorate the chance to consider his actions and his apologies. If, after that process he is re-elected then many folk, even those who believe he was wrong to leak the memo, would accept that he’d done the right thing and deserved to represent the northern isles.

    But as things stand he is an MP who deceived the electorate in his constituency during the election campaign. His position is not tenable.

    • The Forests Of Azure

      Oh dear me!!!!!
      When are you going to call for the resignation of Salmond and Strurgeon for lying about EU membership, currency, oil income, the referendum being “once in a generation” etc etc ad infinitum ?

      In your “little blue blook” do lies only count as lies when La Sturgeon tells you?

      • Don’t fall for Toby’s nonsense. Salmond didn’t lie about EU membership and he was cleared by the Scottish Parliament standards committee when he referred himself to them.

        • The Forests Of Azure

          oh yes he did!

          http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/S4_EuropeanandExternalRelationsCommittee/Inquiries/Letter_from_Viviane_Reding_Vice_President_of_the_European_Commission_dated_20_March_2014__pdf.pdf

          Next time you get on your high horse about the EU don’t pick an argument with a lawyer like me who studied european law at university. The Treaties are Crystal clear, the claims by sturgeon and salmond were 100% incorrect and he said clear as abell that he had legal advice to back them up more than once.

          The SNP controlled Holyrood “standards” comittee is an absolute joke, it after all cleared that old tart Joan McAlpine of using parliamentary expenses to pay off her lovers wife when everyone and their dog knew she was guilty as sin.

          I would have more respect for nationalists if you didn’t assume that everyone else is as ignorant of the facts as yourselves.

          • Who’s getting on whose high horse about the EU? Salmond did not lie in the Andrew Neil interview, he got muddled and confused as Sir David Bell said in his report, but he did not lie.

            If you have evidence of him lying at some other point, feel free to let me know.

          • rollo_tommasi

            He lied on national television. How can a politician with Salmonds experience got muddled? you either have legal advice or you don’t simple.

            Nicola Sturgeon lied as well. In December 2007 Sturgeon told the Scottish Parliament that an independent Scotland would “automatically” become a member state of the European Union, that there would be no need for an independent Scotland to renegotiate EU membership and that this position
            was supported by both political and legal opinion. Utter fantasy.

            The sheer hypocrisy of the nationalists is breath taking.

          • Jambo25

            He didn’t. He was cleared by Sir David Bell.

          • rollo_tommasi

            He appointed his own judge and jury for his own trial.
            Even then, two of the jurors walked away from having to give a verdict.

            He also said Alex Salmond’s answers were muddled,
            incomplete and confused. It also said that the SG’s position on the legal advice scandal ‘stretched credulity’. He didn’t look at claims Wee Eck had been guilty of “an abuse of power” for using the code as the basis to prevent the release of details of legal advice on EU membership.

            In short it was a sham.

          • Jambo25

            He didn’t find him guilty of what you said he did.

          • rollo_tommasi

            Durrr…….not likely to found guilty when he picked his own judge and jury!

          • Jambo25

            Sez you. It must be awfully disappointing.

          • rollo_tommasi

            Jog on mate.

          • RolftheGanger

            Precisely because it would be inconvenient ot Unionists to confirm that Salmond followed the MinisterialCode of Conduct on non-disclosure of the existence or not of legal advice and of its source and content.

          • rollo_tommasi

            In a sham inquiry conducted by his mates……what did you expect the result to be?

          • HJ777

            The ministerial code only covers the content of legal advice, not the fact of its existence.

            Indeed, Salmond publicly claimed he had received legal advice. If revealing the fact is breaching the ministerial code (as you erroneously claim) then he would have been deliberately breaking the ministerial code.

          • Robert Peffers

            Are you daft? I’ve quoted you a link to the Neil/Salmond interview and Neil did not ask if Salmond had EU legal advice. He asked if he had SG Legal Officers’ Legal advice.
            You are just another Britnat that needs remedial English Language Courses. Salmond correctly replies that he had legal advice from his own Scottish Government Legal Officers.
            If I asked you, “What is the colour of the Sky”, I would not be expecting you to give me the answer that it was Green as you had not been asked the colour of the grass.
            Go watch the interview again and listen this time.

          • Bertie

            Salmond was asked if he had got legal advice – to which he responded yes. Does it matter, in the big scheme of things, from whom he got such advice??

            Because he clearly didnt ask anyone who had a scooby. And the EU actually contradicte his claims several times…

            Here’s a quote from the poorly dressed bank clerk himself!

            “Herman Van Rompuy said a newly independent state, breaking away from an
            existing EU member, would be classed as a “third country” and would have
            to apply using “the known accession procedures”.

            From A Scottish newspaper before you throw your toys out of the pram.

            Van Rompuy torpedoes SNP claims on EU membership

            http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/referendum-news/van-rompuy-torpedoes-snp-claims-on-eu-membership.22950437

            Spain and Belgium ‘would veto an independent Scotland’s EU membership’

            http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11054187/Spain-and-Belgium-would-veto-an-independent-Scotlands-EU-membership.html

            Who would hold more weight – Spain, Belgium or Scotland?

            Looks pretty clear. Salmond made it up, claimed it was a given, claimed he had legal advice,but the reality was Scotland would not get automatic membership.

            Res ipsa loquitur – even the big man himself, rumpy pumpy said NO.

          • Ronald Anderson

            Just as well we dont read Scottish newspapers or British, & if thats where you get your information from you,ll be sorley lacking in accurate information.

          • Paul

            Where does your information come from? SNP HQ? Or perhaps the Sunday Herald, The National, or Wings over Bath?

          • Bertie

            ” if thats where you get your information from you,ll be sorley lacking in accurate information.”

            So there’ll be no issues with an independent Scotland joining the EU then?

            Because there were plenty of other newspapers reporting exactly the same story – I merely quoted a Scottish newspaper becaus I didnt weant the accusation of media Bias to be used as a get out.

          • Ronald Anderson

            How can a politician like Cameron get muddled ? over whitch football club he supported, unless of coarse he was lying.

          • Paul

            What does that have to do with anything?

            Typical distraction technique.

          • UKSteve

            Anyone that believes Cameron follows any football is too deluded for rescue.

          • rollo_tommasi

            Hmmm…. Someones choice of football team or Scotland’s membership of the EU. Which is more important I wonder?

            Also its ironic to talk about football when SNP’s own sports minister John Nicolson on Question Time admitted the other night he had no clue his national team were playing this week.

          • The Forests Of Azure

            Yes he did. H also lied at other times about the EU as did sturgeon. I would have more respect for you if you tried to tell the truth, as it is you are clearly a devoted cybernat who is either too dumb to think for yourself or in on the concerted campaign to keep spreading the SNP’s lies.

          • Robert Peffers

            Then, Britnat, quote us your sources for your lying claims.
            Put up or shut up.

          • The Forests Of Azure

            you gonna find out where i live and come burn my house down because i have dared to speak against you hero?

          • Robert Peffers

            Don’t be an idiot. I’ll stick to commenting to show just what an idiot you are. Something about your style reminds me of Ian Smart. Same idiotic style and same claims of being a lawyer.

          • hazelsmith

            Somebody who has been in politics as long as Alex Salmond got “muddled and confused”?

          • lorraine kelly

            I find it ironic that they can pick on the SNP for lying yet forget all the lies that their won parties and government have made ..funny that isn’t it …Or is it because they know that the SNP and Nicola Sturgeon has and still is becoming very popular that they are afraid of her taking over as PM , that would be great , she is a thousand times a better person than David Cameron

          • Russell Morrison

            Oh dear…the last vestige of the moron….”I know more about this than you do”….without even a smidgin of PROOF.
            This cretin reminds me of the wee inadequate kid in the school playground, who shouts”ma dad is bigger than your dad”
            You’re a total embarrassment Sir……( or should that be ‘Sonny’…’???)

          • The Forests Of Azure

            eh no. i have these things called eyes and ears, you know the things that cybernats pretend do not exist when you try to reinvent the truth.

            if salmond truly was just “muddled” then why didn’t he say that rather than spending 20 grand of taxpayers money to hide the fact that the supposed legal opinion did not even exist in the first place?

            and of course all i will get in return is more drivel trying to reinvent history…… you lot really need to get it through your heads that not everyone is as dense or and easily led as your average cybernat.

          • Robert Peffers


            Well then, “Forest Of Azure”, (could that perhaps indicate a Follow! Follower?), can you explain how the BritCyberUnionists , failed to understand the question Andrew Neil posed to Salmond asked if he dad sought legal advice from his Scottish Government Legal Officers and accused him of claiming he had EU Legal advice?

            It’s all here : –

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q62gZHcS2es

            Unless, of course, your claimed, “things called eyes and ears”, have deceived you or, far more likely, you comprehension of the English Language is somewhat challenged.
            Mind you, you could perhaps, be able to quote us another source of Salmond ever having made such a claim.
            Well can you?

          • The Forests Of Azure

            your pathetic attempts at reinventing history are just that… pathetic.

          • UKSteve
          • lorraine kelly

            Funny how no one has picked up on the Claims that the PM made that were false , or is he above the law for all his lying

          • SNP “AJOCKALYPSE”

            Dense

          • blandings

            I am so looking forward to seeing the back of the Scots: a humourless whining nation of lemon-suckers.

          • Robert Peffers

            Err! Excuse me for interrupting, Russell, but the person’s signature is rather open to doubts upon his/her/it’s gender or sexual orientation. It may even be as yet indeterminate.

          • UKSteve

            You typed that, and you calls others an “embarrassment”?

            Who said irony was dead?

          • Michael Dillon

            Crikey a lawyer get you la De da. I hope you don’t bring your ill informed opinionated claptrap to work with you or you will be a particularly useless lawyer.

          • Jambo25

            Remind me never to get legal advice from you. I actually studied Politics and Government at university and know how the EU actually works. I also took the time to watch rather a lot of the meetings and hearings of the European and External Relations Committee of the SG. They are on You Tube so even you can probably find them. When you are a retired layabout like me you also have the time.
            I have absolutely no doubt having watched the copious expert testimony given to the committee that whatever other problems a newly independent Scotland would have had, getting membership of the EU would not have been one of them.

          • The Forests Of Azure

            Look up dumbo. You were saying…

            If you are retired you clearly studied the EU long before the Lisbon treaty ever existed, best to do some reading.

          • Robert Peffers

            Then, Mr Lawyer you will understand the meaning of the polite phrase, “rectally sphinctered male bovine waste matter”, the production of which you seem particularly prone to producing. Oh! BTW: I’m a Rocket Scientist.
            Aye!
            Richt!

          • The Forests Of Azure

            what’s this? you the new cybernat troll assigned to chase me round the internet?? you know you must be doing something right when an ignorant cretin like you starts spamming.

          • Robert Peffers

            Yeah! Right! I shoot your daft claims down with reasoned points backed up with evidence and you think I’m wrong, you are right and you are doing something right? I’ll leave it to others to judge who the idiot is.

          • UKSteve

            But you don’t….just semi-coherent gibberish.

          • HJ777

            I judge that it is you.

          • UKSteve

            For someone who can’t even speak English….phew!

          • uglyfatbloke

            Where is the bit that’s crystal clear? As a professional research historian I’ d be interested to have a look. I expect you may well be quite right, OTH I’d also be interested to know about the mechanism for excluding Scots from the EU in the event of independence.

          • The Forests Of Azure

            No one would be excluding scots from the EU, we would be excluding ourselves. I will try to explain.

            1. The UK as a state is the member of the European Union. You and I as individuals are not, our EU citizenship purely derives from the fact that we are citizens of an EU member state. Article 20 of the Lisbon treaty explains this.

            http://www.europarl.europa.eu/aboutparliament/en/displayFtu.html?ftuId=FTU_2.1.1.html

            2. In the event of a yes vote Scotland would be come a third country in terms of the treaties and we would no longer be EU citizens as we would no longer be UK citizens. We would be depriving ourselves of our EU citizenship, no one would be taking it away from us.

            3. At the moment Scotland in terms of international law is not a state with its own legal personality. As Scotland is not a signatory of any international treaties (including the EU treaties) it would have to negotiate and enter into these treaties from scratch.

            4. In order for Scotland to join the EU it would have to follow the accession procedure contained in Article 49 of the Lisbon Treaty which lays out rules including the requirement of unanimity of all existing member states. This is the only way a new state can join the EU, any claims to the contrary by the SNP are utter lies. Their two faced BS about the EU referendum shows what a bunch of liars they are, they were going to have Scots vote our own EU citizenship away so the SNP could claim power for themselves.

            Typed in haste on train off top of head without looking back to treaties but should be pretty much right.

          • Robert Peffers

            Absolute claptrap! Not only are your legal points flawed but your history is too. I’m not about to start teaching you history but here’s a few brief points.
            There was no Union of the crowns in 1603. Remember at that time the law of Christendom was divine right of Kings. Under which the English Kingdom had annexed the realm of the Prince of Wales, (Statute of Rhuddlan 1284), and Ireland, ( by the Crown of Ireland Act, 1542). Yet when James VI of Scotland inherited the crown of England in 1603 he could not invoke Divine right to just tag the English realm onto his Scottish realm as would be the case under Divine Right. Hence the split titles James I & VI.
            The problem was that the Pope, (head of Christendom), had accepted the 1320 Declaration of Arbroath. This not only declared Scotland independent but changed the law of Scotland from Divine Right of Kings to the people of Scotland being sovereign. So James could not invoke Divine right. Which was why he went to England where he was sovereign. That also explains why Scots monarchs are designated as, “King/Queen of Scots”.
            Thus, when the bipartite Treaty of Union was signed Scots law remained independent, (among other things), and it still is.
            Then in 1688, the English imported King Billy & Queen Mary as their joint monarchs it could not affect the Scottish monarchy as James II was still King of Scots. Which is why there was a Jacobite uprising until,1745, (well after the Treaty of Union). However the English also removed King Billy’s veto over the English Parliament which made England, Wales & Ireland a Constitutional Monarchy – but not Scotland as Scotland was still independent in 1688.
            The people of Scotland have never given away their sovereignty and that is why we still, as a nation, have the legal sovereign right to democratically declare ourselves independent. Going by the latest opinion polls, (the ones we take on the doorsteps), and the almost full representation by the SNP at Westminster and the likelihood of a further landslide in the coming Scottish parliament elections, could be happening soon.

          • The Forests Of Azure

            I’ve come across some cranks in my time but man, this is something else.

          • Jambo25

            Look up the various hearings of the European and External Relations Committee of the Holyrood Parliament. You know, the one where all those expert witnesses of pro-independence and Unionist sympathies gave evidence. All were more knowledgeable and eminent than you and all of them had had high level experience in the various organisations and bodies which make up the EU. Even you might learn something.

          • The Forests Of Azure

            I watched the committee sessions and read the relevant papers and you are wrong. Go read the Europa resources. If you can’t be bothered or want to ignore what they say then suit yourself. It’s pointless wasting any more time with you.

          • Jambo25

            I’ll trust the judgements of real experts with real experience of the EU rather than an hysteric like you.

          • The Forests Of Azure

            Yawn.

          • Jambo25

            If you’re yawning that much you probably need to adjust your medication.

          • The Forests Of Azure

            I’m yawning at how tiresome you are. you have not got a clue.

          • uglyfatbloke

            I think you are probably correct in principle, but I do see a fact that would change things radically in practice. Both separatists and unionists see independence as Scotland ‘leaving’ the UK. This would not in fact be the case. Separation would require the dissolution of the 1707 Treaty (the Irish treaty of 1801/2 is not relevant in any sense) and there would no longer be a United Kingdom at all; there would be the two Kingdoms of England and Scotland. Wales- like Scotland or England- has no international personality – it would continue to be a principality of England. Arguably (and it may be a good argument) N. Ireland would automatically continue in EU membership since she is specifically named, though equally the nation called ‘United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland ‘ would no longer exist so there is a real weakness to that proposition. In practice of course none of this really matters. The EU is expansionist by nature and would want to retain both countries, but I think we are kidding ourselves if we just assume that there will be no cost for that.

          • JPJ2

            2 lawyers-3 opinions 🙂

          • Jambo25

            Why did Sir David Bell say he didn’t then?

          • SNP “AJOCKALYPSE”
        • Mark Kilby

          “he was cleared by the Scottish Parliament standards committee”
          Run by his mates.

          • Cymrugel

            No its strictly cross party

          • BC

            Nope, 4 SNP, 2 Labour 1 Cons. So SNP majority, with Stewart Stevenson convener, with him running the show is bound to be a white wash.

          • Robert Peffers

            Tosh! I’ve posted the link to the video of the Neil/Salmon interview that they said Salmond claimed to have EU legal advice. However Neil’s question was, “Have you sought advice from your Scottish Legal Officers”,
            Salmond plainly told the truth when he said he had. Anyone claiming otherwise simple cannot comprehend the English language. How the hell can answering YES to being asked if he had sought advice from his SG legal offices be construed as claiming he had EU legal advice?

          • BC

            Robert and a few others making the same mistake. Scottish legal officers advise on Scottish, UK and EU laws and ensure that ministers adhere to the applicable laws. Trying to say that asking them for advice is not the same as having EU legal advice shows a very poor understanding of how things work. Nobody (not even AS) would see obtaining EU legal advice as going to the EU parliament and asking them, all it means is asking the government officers/lawyers for advice on points of EU law!

          • Mark Kilby

            Four out of six appear to be SNP members. Odds look decidedly stacked in his favour.

          • Robert Peffers

            Well actually, Mr Kilby, The Standards Committee is a cross-party committee. Last time I looked, (admittedly some time ago), it was actually composed of more non-SNP members than SNP members.
            Perhaps you might care to check?

          • Ronald Anderson

            Shall I remove the Idiot from the hickory dickery dock M Lud I,ll return him to the deep blue Azure sea.Would the Mariana Trench suit M Lud,he can swim wie the other fishes.

          • Mark Kilby

            And why would I doubt your word Robert? Wait a minute… four out of six members are SNP. Good thing I checked. How many do you think would realistically vote against their boss?

          • uglyfatbloke

            He was cleared by Colin Bell, a man of exceptional integrity who has no fear of the political class.

          • Mark Kilby

            I guess you know the man better than most

        • Folk defending Carmichael’s lie by pointing out Salmond’s non-lie are missing an important point: Salmond’s non-lie was public knowledge during the general election – and he won with a large majority.

          The voters spoke, taking into account the non-lie story put about by SNPouters. O&S voters weren’t appraised of Carmichael’s brazen to-camera flat-out lie until after he’d got himself back into Westminster. Big difference, in more ways than one.

        • Guest 1

          Whether he lied, or not, about non-existent Scottish legal advice, the basic fact appears to be that, yes, an independent Scotland would have to apply for EU membership. Which, of course, would entail acceptance of the Euro. So, 1) the indyref ‘yes’ campaign was wrong about E membership and an independent Scotland, and 2) the € not the £ would be Scotland’s currency in the future, which was not what the ‘yes’ campaign argued was the case.

        • Mark Kilby

          “cleared by the Scottish Parliament standards committee when he referred himself to them”
          Is that the one run by his mates? It appears four of the six members are SNP. How likely are they to convict ‘the big boss’?

      • Robert Peffers

        Thing is, the Wee Blue Book quotes sources and you quote nothing except your own perceptions or what the Red/Yellow/Blue Tory propaganda tell you to say. Go look at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q62gZHcS2es
        You will find there that Salmond did not, as you claim, say he had EU advice, he said he had SG Legal Officer’s advice.
        And that is the difference. The YES campaign quotes sources for their claims and Britnats just lie and parrot whatever the Establishment propaganda happens to be. Trouble for the Britnats is the Scottish public no longer believes the lies and demands the proofs – proofs that you lot just have not got.

      • Ronald Anderson

        Your apptley named your having trouble seeing the tree,s for the forest.

      • Airey Belvoir

        Sturgeon was certainly lying when she denied the content of her chat with the French about wanting a Tory victory. the leak enquiry found no reason to dispute the accuracy of the transcript by an FO official.

        • Jambo25

          But the French ambassador who was actually there and one of the principals in the conversation flatly denied it as did the French Consul General who was also present.

          • Airey Belvoir

            They had to dissemble. The definition of a diplomat: “An honest man sent abroad to lie for his country.”

          • Jambo25

            They didn’t dissemble. They outright denied the veracity of the story in categorical terms.

          • Airey Belvoir

            And the FO defended the reliability and integrity of its note-taker in similar terms. so who to believe? As the SNP needs, and thrives on, opposition, I know who I believe.

          • Jambo25

            There was no FO note taker at the meeting. There was a note made of a reported conversation about the meeting which the civil servant who made it put a caveat in about as he thought that what he was writing was unlikely and he might have misheard. Despite that Carmichael and the Telegraph reported the smear as true without checking with any of the principals in the meeting.

    • BillyShears67

      Wow – you actually believe Orkney and Shetland kept Carmichael in on account of this issue alone? Unbelievable. And to say Salmond ‘didn’t lie’ (because of a kangaroo type/Mickey Mouse committee) is just desperate. Whatever you say, he misled the Scottish public on an issue that has far wider and serious implications than a pithy memo leak would ever have. Clearly with you any independent or rational thought by yourself is out of the question. If the SNP said jump you’d shout ‘how high?’

      And for an SNP supporter like you to talk about ‘deceit’ and being ‘misled’ is stark to say the least. The rhetoric on all things political which you no doubt regurgitate with glee is very different from the facts and figures which you conveniently gloss over. While you decide to stoke the flames of hysteria it’s all fair game for the SNP as they continue to allow areas including education and health standards to slide to shocking standards here in Scotland.

      Power without responsibility – you perfect the art of blame avoidance. That is your contribution to Scottish politics.

      • uglyfatbloke

        The voters of Orkney and Shetland are pretty widely united in wanting a by-election.

        • Simon de Lancey

          Yes, I believe 50 of them turned out to protest in Shetland alone – a pretty clear indication 🙂

          • uglyfatbloke

            50 does n’t sound like much, but in a place like Sheltand it’s really quite significant; a comparable figure for Edinburgh would be more than 1000.

          • Oldfatblokeish

            So out of a population of 22000, 50 is a significant amount???

          • RolftheGanger

            The population is scattered over multiple islands, around half would find it relatively easy to attend the demo.

          • Simon de Lancey

            Precisely. It’s ludicrous. Lerwick has a population of 7,500 by itself and previous protests (non political) have seen turnouts of 300+

          • Simon de Lancey

            No, Shetland has seen far greater numbers turn out on previous occasions – this is an indication that people aren’t all that concerned about this issue.

          • Caractacus

            And of that 50, were all of them paid up members of the SNP?

          • uglyfatbloke

            It would seem not. I don’t recognise most of the faces, but I do live well away from Lerwick, so that’s not surprising, however I know that 2 of them certainly are SNP, but I think the nats were having their own event yesterday. Carmichael says he has lots of supporters here, but it’s a major topic of conversation and so far I’ve not met one person – including a couple who are keen lib-dem activists – who does n’t think he should quit. Of course, the people that I happen to bump into is hardly a scientific cross-section of Shetland society.
            OTH I hear that the Mail and the Record were looking for the SNP person who started the petition, but I happen to know he’s an Englishman and not SNP at all., so that’s kind of amusing.

        • Michael Johnston – Shetland

          Maybe if the voters got their heads around this article which spells out the misleading [lies] dirty tricks campaign by SNP they may want another vote for the 56 SNP seats.

          • RolftheGanger

            To Unionists so accustomed to lying that according to Sir M Bruce the HofC is full of them – everyone looks like a liar.

            Meantime, the Scottish electorate do not agree. SNP Government popularity extends well beyond those who vote for it.

          • Michael Johnston – Shetland

            The SNP are the biggest liars by a mile. The Scottish public will see the light before it is too late.

          • SNP “AJOCKALYPSE”

            “Michael Johnston – London Mate”

            Worry about politics in your own country.

          • Booboo72

            The seats you refer to are part of the UK Parliament. So to that end it is politics in his “owb” country.

          • Michael Johnston – Shetland

            I am worrying about politics in my own country, what planet are you from?

          • Tim Morrison

            The thing is this kind of petition has to be raised in each site – no reason why they cannot.

          • lorraine kelly

            How about the lies that Cameron told before the referendum and the election , He lied about the oil running out , he lied about Scotland not being able to use the pound , and he put the fear into the people England about the Scots coming down to take over and rule England , before you start slagging off our Fm and MSP’S sort your own PM and Westminster out first , they are not so Lilly white

          • Michael Johnston – Shetland

            Cameron did not tell any lies. It was Salmond who told the lies. You obviously have no knowledge of what was said about oil by Salmond and Cameron, so I suggest you research the facts. A summary is that Cameron’s estimate was on the high side due to drop in oil prices and Salmond’s was overstated by a factor of 10 or more. There is no obligation by rUK to allow Scotland to keep the pound. Your next point is even more stupid so not even worth a reply.

          • lorraine kelly

            Excuse me , but he did , he told us all that the oil was running out , when he knew that there had been a new oil field found two weeks before the referendum , funny how it was exposed in the papers just before the vote , and then two days after the vote it was in the papers how there had been a new oil field found with at least 70 years of oil , so do not tell me that he didn’t lie , also regarding keeping the pound the Head of the bank of England also announced just before the vote that Scotland could use the pound , which i may enlighten you to some history …The pound Scots once had much the same value as the pound sterling, but it suffered far higher devaluation until in the 17th century it was pegged to sterling at a value of 12 pounds Scots = 1 pound sterling.

            In 1707, the Kingdom of England and the Kingdom of Scotland merged to form the Kingdom of Great Britain. In accordance with the Treaty of Union, the currency of Great Britain was sterling, with the pound Scots soon being replaced by sterling at the pegged value.

            so you see it is ours as well

          • Michael Johnston – Shetland

            SNP overstated oil revenues by 1300%. This is now an excepted fact, not even being argued any more by SNP. The latest reports confirm this to be the case.

      • Jambo25

        Carmichael was re-elected with a majority of less than a thousand votes so it is perfectly possible that he would have got the bullet had his little misdemeanour been known about.

        • Simon de Lancey

          He’d have been done for, and I say that as someone who voted for Big Al 🙁

      • Robert Peffers

        The claim that Salmond said he had EU legal advice is hilarious, (if you can understand English). Ask anyone claiming when Salmond made such a claim and they will tell you it was on an Andrew Neil TV Interview. Trouble with that is the official BBC Transcription of that interview shows the question Neil asked Salmond was, “Have you sought Legal advice F

        • rollo_tommasi

          Lets have the full transcript.

          ANDREW NEIL: “Can we clarify whether an independent Scotland would have to
          reapply for membership of the EU?”

          ALEX SALMOND: “Well, no we wouldn’t. We’d be a successor state, one of two successor states. Both of these successor states would have to negotiate, but they would do it within the context of the wider European Union.”

          AN: “We’ve established that it is unprecedented, although you’re trying to give a guarantee. Have you sought advice from your own Scottish law officers in this matter?”

          AS: “We have, yes, in terms of the [inaudible], and obviously…”
          [interruption]

          Pretty clear to me!

          • Robert Peffers

            Well no it was not inaudible, and a transcript is a written record not an audible recording. If memory serves,(I’ve little time to check it just now), Salmond continued, “In terms of the debate”. Then he told Neil the information was already published.

          • rollo_tommasi

            http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p02sf07v

            Of course he said in terms of the debate yet according to him yesterday he said ‘In terms of the document’ right after saying the art of politics is not to lie. Lol

          • If, as British nationalist fanatics like to claim, Alex Salmond said what they like to imagine he said, why didn’t Alex Neill pick him up on it at the time? Why was it not until much later that this claim emerged when some “researcher” at Project Fear realised that some selective quoting of the transcript could be spun into a smear?

            The reason Neill didn’t pick up on what would have been a major admission by Salmond is obvious when you watch the actual interview and so have access to more of the cues that inform a verbal exchange. Both men realised they had momentarily been talking at cross purposes. Neill was talking about unpublished advice while Salmond was referring to advice that was already in the public domain.

            In order to feed their mindless prejudice, these British nationalist nutters have to believe (a) that an astute political operator such as Salmond would blunder in the most appallingly amateurish fashion; and (b) that an experienced political interviewer such as Andrew Neill wouldn’t notice that blunder.

          • rollo_tommasi

            Ludicrous by your own low standards. Andrew Neil pressed him further for a response and later admitted it “never crossed my mind that
            whether or not he had legal advice was a matter of contention”.

            The claim was only spun into smear when later in the year Nicola Sturgeon said “The Scottish Government has previous cited [legal] opinions … but has not sought specific legal advice [on EU membership].” A complete contradiction to what Alex Salmond had said in the interview.

            You are correct only in that Andrew Neil is an experienced political interviewer which is why Salmond went out his way to avoid him for the rest of the campaign instead sending his deputy to take the flack.

            As for calling anyone who disagrees with you a nationalist nutter you should take a good hard look in the mirror.

          • Greenslime

            ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

          • HJ777

            You’re accusing other people of being mindless?

            Given the vacuity of your frequent long-winded denunciatory pompous diatribes, it is clear that you lack self-awareness.

          • UKSteve

            They were told years ago – by the head of the EU’s legal affairs – that Scotland would be a separate country, and therefore have to apply for EU membership.

            All accession countries have to agree to adopt the euro as single currency over some timescale, along with many other integrationist measures.

            The SNP – as politically as they are economically, incompetent.

          • lorraine kelly

            I am sure that on my “SCOTTISH ” passport that it says that we are a member of the EU so that can’t be taken away from it just because England comes out

          • rollo_tommasi

            You have a Scottish passport?

            hmmm….don’t think thats correct is it?

          • lorraine kelly

            Yes as i am Scottish and it says it on it that i am so also part of the EU as Scotland is not England , i also have a scottish cover for it

          • rollo_tommasi

            You have a British passport. You can shove whatever cover you like on it.

            The UK diplomatic service has 270 offices in 170 countries with 14,000 staff. The UK Passport is one of the most prized in the world with 173 countries allowing visa free access. Aren’t you a lucky one eh?

            Latest polls show more Scots want to leave the EU than many parts of England.

          • Guest 1

            You are, of course, required to remove the cover at passport controls.

          • Sheumais

            Oh dear…

          • John Robertson

            Jesus. The SNP seems to have converted on the brightest into Nationalism.

          • SNP “AJOCKALYPSE”

            Like you she has a European Union passport.

          • Guest 1

            Look inside your passport, and you will find that it is issued by the United Kingdom.

          • edward howie

            you sound as deluded as eddie reader there is no such thing as a Scottish passport ya clown its wait for it*******BRITISH get over it jacobite and remember 45 is not your lucky number

          • lorraine kelly

            I know that , after all i have used it many times , but i just like winding you all up , , getting my own back for all the slagging off the SNP get , but i do have a cover for my passport that say Scottish on it , so not really lying

          • Mark Kilby

            Deary me Lorraine – you have EU citizenship by virtue of being a UK citizen. Do you think if you moved to live in another country (say, the US for example), then you would take that status with you?

          • lorraine kelly

            Actually i just love winding those who don’t like the SNP up ,

          • Mark Kilby

            Good for you Lorraine.

          • lorraine kelly

            I get so sick fed up of folk bad mouthing us for thinking for ourselves , we have had conservative and Labour governments that have caused so much harm to this country , Labour by getting us into debt , and conservatives by getting us out, but causing so much poverty to the lesser paid workers , The SNP are at least trying to help , they pay the bedroom tax £35 million that should be going to other things, but that tax could break a lot of families budget and cause more poverty ..they are not the demons that the media make them out to be, but people think we have no mind of our own ,and are brainwashed .. I am 61 years old have traveled to several countries on my UK Passport , but as a citizen of Scotland i think i should have the right to say whither i want to stay in the EU or not , as should the citizens of Ireland and Wales ..

          • Paul

            “Actually i just love winding those who don’t like the SNP up ,”

            Well, perhaps you do. It’s just a shame you’re not very good at it.

          • lorraine kelly

            , OFF COURSE IT IS A UK PASSPORT, but it just shows how much people believe what folk say , like Those who believed Cameron when he said the SNP were coining down to London to takeover and rule , that was how he won , fear , fear that the Scots were coming down to conquer

          • Mark Kilby

            The Scots are not the SNP, just the 30 odd percent who voted for them. The crux of the Tory pitch was a weak Labour administration reliant on SNP support would give their ‘borrow and spend beyond our means’ policies more traction. Prudence prudence prudence is what the electorate voted for. SNP MPs are in the mean time fitting in nicely. After a bumpy start they are better behaved now, which is good news for all concerned. It’s a place where the lives of millions of people can be improved, not the vile institution some peddled it to be to their electorate (on the back of which many won a seat there).

      • Paul

        These people see everyone else’s lies and express them lavishly, to anyone who will listen. SNP lies are not lies to them though. Stunning lack of self-awareness shared by the party itself.

      • lorraine kelly

        Oh but wait , did Sir Malcolm Bruce not just say that it is common for politicians to lie , well he certainly is right on two accounts , the first being what this topic is about and the second one from your PM who told the nation that the oil was running out before the referendum when he knew dam well that a new oil field had been found , funny how it was in the papers two days after the no result , pot calling kettle black comes to mind , but can i suggest that you get your own houses of Parliament sorted before slagging off our FM

      • David McDowell

        Orkney and Shetland didn’t keep him in on account of this issue alone. No one in Orkney and Shetland knew about this issue before the election because:
        (1) Carmichael deliberately hid it from them, and;
        (2) A Cabinet Office enquiry conveniently delayed its findings until after the election.
        That’s the obvious point you appear to be too thick to grasp.

      • SNP “AJOCKALYPSE”

        56/59…..Soon to be 57/59………..read and weep.

      • scotcanadien

        Hand over mouth, Yaaaaaawn

    • Aporia

      Poor attempt at deflecting from the main strain of Toby’s argument: that even if Carmichael was being duplicitous, the SNP are worse – both in the scale and seriousness of their duplicitousness. Nothing you have said addresses this.

    • Paul

      Except that the investigation into the issue found that it was ‘an accurate reflection of the conversation that took place’ even if it was critical of him for leaking it.

      • No. The investigation found it had no reason to believe that the memo was not an accurate reflection of the conversation between the civil servant author and the consul. That doesn’t make it an accurate reflection of the conversation between Nicola Sturgeon and the ambassador. It’s a case of Chinese whispers, and in the memo the author him/herself voices doubt over whether the conclusions are correct.

        • Paul

          I’m sorry Gavin, but I gave up any notion I could reason with the utterly unreasonable or that I could attempt to reason people out of positions they hadn’t first reasoned themselves into some time ago. I find there are much more productive uses of my time than arguing with the human equivalents of a brick wall.

          People who think they are entitled to their own facts as well as their own opinion have no place for objective truth and I have no time or place for people for whom facts are the enemy.

          Once you’ve wasted your time debating with one cybernat, you realise you would be as misguided as they are to encourage them. Sorry Gavin, but there’s nothing unique or special about your comments. They’re just the standard cybernat type response, so it will be met with my standard response to cybernats – dismissal of such utter subjectivity and then ignoring any further rants or utterances. I care about what’s true too much to entertain the thought of conversing with you further

          Sorry if this causes disappointment and disruption to your plans to argue with anyone who dares to have a different view to you, based on evidence rather than fantasy. I do hope you enjoy the rest of your day anyway.

          • My name’s not Gavin, and you’re the one who decided to debate me.

    • flippit

      If Salmonds is tenable then so is Carmichael. Scotland has already accepted a lower level of honesty from its politicians, can’t moan now.

    • HJ777

      “The lie, which Carmichael has had the grace to admit to even if Toby’s not so sure, was intended to smear an opponent in the runup to a general election.”

      You are confusing two things. He may, indeed, have lied about whether he leaked the memo. His behaviour may have been reprehensible.

      However, it would only constitute a smear were it to be demonstrated that the contents of the memo he leaked were untrue (and that he knew or suspected it to be so). If he simply leaked a memo that was a true account, or which he believed was a true account, then it cannot reasonably be described as a ‘smear’.

      • Jambo25

        The contents were. All those actually present at the meeting said so.

        • HJ777

          The French official on whose account of the meeting the memo was based has said nothing of the sort and the cabinet inquiry said that there is no reason to believe that the memo is an inaccurate reflection of what the civil servant involved believes he was told.

          It is standard practice for participants to deny the content of a leaked report of what was meant to be a confidential meeting. And if Carmichael had no reason to doubt the authenticity of the contents of the memo, there was no ‘smear’ on his part. All he did was leak the memo (or rather he allowed it to be leaked) – there is no suggestion that he in any way influenced or altered the content of the memo.

          • Jambo25

            All those present at the meeting denied the accuracy of the memo/Telegraph report. The civil servant who drew the memo up put in a rider that he doubted the accuracy of what he was reporting. Carmichael has admitted that he released a lie. Neither he nor the Telegraph approached the participants in the meeting, themselves, to check on the accuracy of the report.
            Don’t just take my word for it. Listen to the BBC’s ‘Week in Westminster’ broadcast on 30/05/15 and the discussion between Robert Hutton and Damien MacBride.

          • HJ777

            The French official that gave the account has not denied its accuracy.

            The memo was released in its entirety, including the civil servant’s doubts. Had there been an attempt to deliberately construct a false record, then it would hardly have contained these qualifying comments.

            Rather obviously, there was no attempt to ‘smear’.

          • Jambo25

            Only in your rather twisted mind. Carmichael himself has admitted wrongdoing.

          • HJ777

            So he man with the paedophile obsession thinks my mind is twisted. I would be worried if you thought otherwise.

            I see you have conceded the argument since I did not say or suggest that what Carmichael did was not wrong (indeed, I said it was wrong). I merely pointed out that he simply allowed a memo that he had no reason to believe was inaccurate to be leaked. That was not an attempt to smear.

          • Jambo25

            Carmichael, himself, has admitted to the leak. He has acknowledged that the information in the memo was wrong and has apologised for his actions. It was a deliberate attempt at a smear , along with that purveyor of journalistic integrity, the Telegraph, to damage the SNP’s electoral chances in Scotland. It was a minister of the crown smearing an opponent for political gain. Neither Carmichael nor the Telegraph approached the First Minister or the French Embassy to check on the authenticity of the content.
            Incidentally, I see another dead Tory MP was outed as a child rapist about 10 days ago . What is it with Tories?

          • HJ777

            It is not in dispute that Carmichael has admitted to allowing the leak.

            Neither he nor you can know whether the information in the memo was accurate. The memo itself qualifies what it reported. He certainly had no influence on the content and nor would he have had any reason to question it at the time. Indeed, the civil servant who penned it has been cleared of any intention to misreport. If you really think that Sturgeon or Salmond would confirm any embarrassing content even if totally true, you are even more of a fool than I already know you to be. After all, Salmond is a proven liar.

            Produce your evidence that Tories are any more likely to be paedophiles than anyone else like, say, retired Scottish SNP-supporting teachers. You certainly have an unhealthy obsession, you disgusting old pervert. Does your wife know about this side of your character?

          • Jambo25

            Actually I do know that the memo was inaccurate as all the participants in the actual meeting said it was inaccurate. So, unless you think that the Scottish First Minister, another Scottish minister, the French Ambassador and another French diplomat are all lying, in much the same way, for some undisclosed reason from the point of view of the French diplomats, you have to accept that the memo was inaccurate. Carmichael and the Telegraph could easily have ascertained this by merely phoning up Bute House in Edinburgh and the French Embassy in London. They didn’t do that. I wonder why.
            Incidentally, the Scottish Labour Party who went OTT on the story when it was first aired dropped it like a hot brick as soon as the French denials came out and it probably politically harmed them for running with the story before checking its accuracy. So, not only a smear but a stupid, counter productive one.

      • That’s a valid point. If I were being picky I’d say that leaking without making an effort to check the truth of what you’re leaking and ignoring the fact that the author of the memo expressed his/her doubts on the conclusions in it undermines the point a little. Nevertheless if Carmichael had good reason to believe its contents then ‘smear’ may well be too strong a term.

        But if you read my original comment again you’ll see that I said the leak was irrelevant in this context, as was whether the content was factual or not.

        In the end it’s the fact he lied which matters. He lied before an election, came clean after the election and so was elected under false pretences. If he’d owned up before the election and his electorate voted him in he’d have my full support, because he’d have allowed his constituents to vote whilst being in possession of the facts.

        • HJ777

          I don’t think that he had any reason to doubt the contents, except to the extent that the memo itself expressed the possibility of some uncertainty. He didn’t try to edit the memo to remove this part.

          I agree that he lied. However, if you are saying that any candidate who has lied was elected under false pretences, then you would have to say the same of an awful lot of MPs. Salmond, in particular, undoubtedly lied in his interview with Andrew Neil about legal advice on EU membership. And what if a candidate made a statement or promise that subsequently turned out not to be true or couldn’t be fulfilled (even if originally said in good faith) – were they not elected without their constituents being in full possession of the facts?

          We were told by Nicola Sturgeon that the people who disrupted a Labour party rally had nothing to do with the SNP. It turned out that not only were they SNP members, they were known to both Salmond and Sturgeon. Does that make the election of every SNP MP illegitimate? Of course, it does not.

          And what about some of the claims in the SNP’s manifesto, such as the one where they claim they would raise more money to spend by a tax on bankers’ bonuses? The implication is that they aren’t already taxed (they are, in exactly the same way as any other income). It was simply mendacious. I could go on:”Oil is a bonus, not a basis” (where the SNP’s own figures show that it is very far from being a “bonus”), etc.. Yet SNP MPs were, arguably, elected on the basis of repeating these falsehoods.

          What I am saying is that if you are going to be consistent, then singling out Carmichael, whilst ignoring other mendacious claims just because they are from the party you support, is hardly reasonable.

          • Salmond didn’t lie in his interview with Andrew Neil. He said he had advice which had been published, which was true. Neil asked about more specific advice, and Eck couldn’t answer that due to cabinet rules. It was a very muddled answer, but not a lie.

            There’s a very big difference between the kind of spin which all parties use to promote their policies, and a blatant, outright and (now) admitted lie.

          • HJ777

            I’ve seen the interview and he was a model of clarity when delivering his lie.

            Sturgeon similarly lied when she denied that the SNP had anything to do with disrupting a Labour rally – we know she knew the SNP members who did it.

    • njt55

      An MP who deceived his electorate….WOW!, I’ve never heard of that before

    • Mynydd

      The point here is not about Alastair Carmichael it’s about the Orkney and Shetland islands. They have made it quite clear that in the event of Scotland gaining independence they will stay with Westminster.

      • SNP “AJOCKALYPSE”

        Aye…..and the North of England and Devon will join with Scotland !

        Orkney and Shetland aren’t some remnant of your vile Empire that died.

        The people of Orkney & Shetland are proud to be the people of Scotland, as that’s where they are………Scotland !

        • Aporia

          But surely if Scotland forces a group of people to live under its rule against its will then the imperialism is all Scotland’s?

          Orkney and Shetland seem to have a sufficiently distinct history from that of Scotland’s to justify self-determination (similarly to Jersey/Isle of Mann etc.). In any case, who are you to decide?

          I think the imperialist is worried about his precious oil.

    • SNP “AJOCKALYPSE”

      Tomorrow’s SPECCIE EXCULSIVE :

      “SNP REFUSE TO COMMENT ON REPORTS THAT THEY WOULD PROBABLY BOIL UP YOUR CHILDREN AND EAT THEM IN AN INDEPENDENT SCOTLAND”

      The SNP leadership are in crisis over reports that they would eat children, and family pets, if they ever managed to gain Independence for Scotland.

      In an exclusive follow up to our SNP BAD……SNP BAD……..SNP BAD……SNP BAD….

    • Sheumais

      If you object to liars, you should object to Salmond. You don’t, so let’s not pretend you have a moral argument to offer.

  • In search of a witty moniker

    If I may add a few soothing words… I’d like the Nationalists to remember that, at the end of the day, after all is said and done, we still rule Scotland. You, the Scotch people, are ruled by us, the English. Good, innit? 🙂

    • “the Scotch”? LOL

      • In search of a witty moniker

        Did I overdo it so you’re not actually annoyed? Oh dear. Well, we English are still the dominant partner, which is fitting when we’re 85% of the country, wouldn’t you say.

        • RolftheGanger

          Evoked feelings of pity for the deluded, actually.

    • RolftheGanger

      You poor sucker. Westminster elite rule you. They play the English public like a violin and get their rule endorsed. You suckers suffer.

      • rollo_tommasi

        Has no voice no vote and yet posts 23000+ comments all about a country on the other side of the world from where he lives.

        Still it is your time to waste.

  • dodewalker

    The Memo was based on a 3rd hand telephone call.
    1.4 Million Sterling in 6 weeks to find out what Alistair Carmichael MP could have been honest about in the first place.
    A Solicitor, Ex Procurator Fiscal Depute, the Right Honourable Gentleman is a well trained and qualified liar.

    • RolftheGanger

      Add to that a Kirk elder.

  • smilingvulture

    Carmichael himself said it was a resigning matter
    just saying

  • In 3 out of 15 years, claims financial illiterate Kevin Hague. Of course, he does so by refusing to account for the fiscal transfers which are forced on Scotland by the UK accounting regime.

    In the current budget this is some £12bn per annum, and while around £4bn of that is (probably justifiable for common services) the rest is made up with a bloated military budget which doesn’t even protect Scotland, paying for English debt never needed by Scotland and most importantly around £3bn per annum for English Infrastructure billed to Scotland every year.

    But as it fits the Westminster bubble narrative, I’m sure the media are happy to have found it and will no doubt rely on this blog’s ravings for the foreseeable future.

    • The_greyhound

      Impose Fiscal Autonomy now on Scotland immediately, and we’ll soon have the truth.

      They’re not called Slobbering Nationalist Parasites (SNP) for nothing, you know.

      • Sk11ng

        Ah, but that would be “economic suicide” without Barnett or similar according to the SNP so they now reject real FFA. Unlike independence which would not be “economic suicide” apparently. Strange that their manifesto said FFA would take “a number of years” whereas they said independence would take 18 months after a Yes vote. Trying to pull a fast one on the electorate while risking “economic suicide”.

      • Stuart

        Amusingly SNP MP and Economics Lecturer George Kerevan has written an article in the ‘National’ the Nationalists in house comic about Fiscal Autonomy;

        http://www.thenational.scot/news/george-kerevan-federalism-or-bust-snp-mandate-now-goes-far-beyond-smith-powers.2787

        “For Scotland to accept fiscal autonomy without inbuilt UK-wide fiscal balancing would be tantamount to economic suicide. However, all federal systems have mechanisms for cross subsidising regions in economic need by regions in surplus”
        Translation Scotland with FA would still need UK taxpayers money to prop it up!
        More interestingly is he implying an indy Scotland is ‘too poor and too wee’ to survive?
        Which may explain why the SNP are squirming whenever the subject is raised.

      • Sunset66

        Well actually only you call them the slobbering nationalist party and that’s because you appear to be not as others

      • melat0nin

        So, if you’re correct about FFA, you’d rather the whole of Scotland went down the tubes, just to prove a point.

        Better together, eh?

    • Kaine

      Citation needed.

      And the military budget is obligated by the NATO treaty. You know, the one the Nats have pledged to sign.

      • Andy Ellis

        Scotland could spend £1.5 – £2 billion per annum less on defence than it currently contributes to the bloated UK defence budget, and still be spending similar amounts to countries like Denmark and Finland of similar size. The Danes are more secure and have a better balanced security stance than Scotland does as part of the UK, which can’t even keep the Russian Navy out of the Moray Firth, afford maritime patrol aircraft, or aircraft for the one carrier it can afford to finish of the 2 it is building.

        Defence and security is not a strong point for the britnats, even without discussion of the ridiculous Trident programme.

      • uglyfatbloke

        It’s a recommendation, not a requirement and only a couple of countries even come close to observing it.

    • Sk11ng

      “Fiscal transfers forced on Scotland” — the SNP govt’s GERS figures are wrong then? Military budget: 2% of GDP for the UK, as NATO requires. An iScotland would have to pay the same for defence as it does now thanks to the SNP agreeing to join NATO. Yessers say they hate military spending but won’t challenge the SNP on NATO. Btw, it means scrapping Trident won’t save a single pound of Scottish taxpayers’ money, independent or not. Because you can’t reduce military spending below its current level. 2% of GDP forever. (Irish Republic spends 0.5% because it’s outside NATO.)

      • Andy Ellis

        Nonsense. There is no compulsion. 2% is a target which few members achieve, nor would Scotland need to. It would still be better defended for less money as the example of other small nations amply demonstrates.

        • Sk11ng

          Hmm, OK I was wrong about 2%. Scotsman played around with ‘NATO sources’. However, lowest NATO spender is 0.6%, second lowest 0.8%. Higher than Ireland’s 0.5% so that’s wasted money. SNP said they somehow needed to be in NATO to get air defence for the North Sea. Even if iScotland was outside the alliance I would be surprised if the Russians went in and stole the oil without NATO stopping them. If that really is a danger, and explains why Norway is in NATO, then look at them spending 1.4% of GDP i.e. nearly 3 times the Irish level.

          • Andy Ellis

            Exactly, which is why there is an immediate saving of £1.5 to £2 billion PER YEAR when compared with 10% of the £30 odd billion we contribute to the UK defence budget, which doesn’t adequately provide for our security as it is.

          • Sk11ng

            No, as Kevin Hague shows using the Scot Govt’s figures there’s a deficit £9 billion larger than the rUK every yr for the last 15. Oil reduces the gap but only closes it 3 out of those 15. Lose billions most yrs to save 1.5-2 bn on defence? Why?

            Inadequate security? UK has conventional forces 10x better than iScotland would have. That’s 10x better defence of Scotland against Russia, not worse at all! (Doesn’t matter when they’re based outside Scotland. They’d be used if Scotland was attacked.) You want to be protected by NATO’s nukes despite rejecting the UK’s nukes.

            (Yessers usually accuse the Union of risking Scottish lives in nuclear war out of a desire to keep its oil. To keep the oil the SNP now wants Scotland to remain in a nuclear alliance, which means staying a nuclear target for Russia.)

          • Andy Ellis

            I’m not sure many non-unionists would accept Mr Hague’s analysis; the problem with anything he comes out with is it has to be viewed through the lens of his obvious anti-independence prejudice. We can trade statistics all day, but in the end it’s futile for anti-independence campaigners to claim that Scotland would somehow be an economic basket case. Defence is only one area of policy; there are many others where huge opportunity saving can be made.

            I’m sure you’ve heard in the past that size isn’t everything. We are NOT well defended at present, despite the bloated UK defence budget. Yes, I want to be part of NATO, but I want to be non-nuclear, as are all other NATO states except the USA and France, Our lives are more at risk due to the UK’s ill advised interventions abroad than direct nuclear attack, but removing nuclear weapons from the Clyde is at least a start. We can have smaller, cheaper, better equipped independent armed forces which have a more rational security stance compared to the current one; one which has maritime patrol aircraft for example, and can adequately defend our territorial waters rather than wait for a frigate to be sent from Portsmouth, and of course one which doesn’t involve Scottish service personnel being killed in ill advised and illegal foreign wars.

          • Sk11ng

            Strange that you don’t want to discuss SG’s own statistics which were after all used to make the case for the indy White Paper (and which now lead SNP’s George Kerevan MP to call FFA “economic suicide” without Barnett!).

            Of course Scotland is well defended, you avoid my point that the UK’s conventional forces are 10x better than iScotland could afford and that’s before getting onto the nuclear issue.

            All your suggestions (fewer stupid wars like Iraq and Afghanistan, but remember that the latter was a NATO war from the start), maritime patrol can be done inside the UK rather than having to resort to indy.

            Strange also that you don’t understand the significance of the nukes. Non-nuclear NATO members will still be blown up by Russia if war happens. If you think nuclear war won’t happen, there is no need to remove Trident. If you think it might happen, then you must remain outside NATO to avoid every city in Scotland being vaporised by Russian hydrogen bombs. It is not a matter of whether you host nuclear weapons of another country.

            The latest published evidence is the Seven Days to the Rhine war plan which Poland has declassified. The Warsaw Pact was going to nuke Western Europe *apart* from France and Britain! That may no longer be true, but independence as a NATO member does not reduce your chances of being nuked at all, and may actually increase it.

          • Sk11ng

            Well a non-unionist is George Kerevan, SNP MP who says FFA without Barnett or similar would be “economic suicide”, as you say a basket case. (And FFA has the advantage over indy of keeping both sterling and lender of last resort.) Accusing Hague of prejudice doesn’t answer his points. Why would FFA take “years” but indy only 18 months? Why did Sturgeon say in the debates that SNP MPs would vote for FFA if it was offered, but won’t pursue it now? If the GERS figures are wrong, and FFA wouldn’t leave Scotland £8bn worse off per year, what is the true figure? And what spending cuts / tax rises would you make if they’re easy to identify?

            Better defended with conventional forces a tenth of the size? The distance to Portsmouth is trivial compared to that. What will happen in the time it takes to arrive from Portsmouth? Russia will attack part of the UK? Another EU country will take all the fish? If for coastguard reasons that’s a reason to change UK policy not to throw in the towel and leave altogether.

            Why do you want to be non-nuclear? Is it because it’s wrong to use nuclear weapons? Or wrong to be made a target for them? You’ll be both of those things if you remain in NATO. Scotland isn’t under a nuclear umbrella because it’s in the UK but because it’s in NATO. Scotland isn’t a target for Russian nukes because Trident is there but because it’s in a NATO country. Germany is non-nuclear by treaty, it can neither build nukes nor host anyone else’s. Russia would still destroy it, because it’s in NATO. The latest public evidence (Seven Days to the Rhine) shows the Warsaw Pact planned to nuke Western Europe *except* Britain and France!

            Afghanistan too was an ill-advised war, and it was a NATO war. The Taliban were interested in extradition (with evidence) and the West was not. We even had a model for how to do the trial, Lockerbie. Afghans pleaded in a loya jirga in a rare show of national unity not to be attacked but NATO still bombed them to bits. Kosovo was a NATO war — and illegal.

    • Sk11ng

      Oh, and “English debt”… I’m against austerity myself, so I want to expand the deficit to stimulate the economy. (SNP only wanted a 0.5% stimulus hardly worthy of the name and which thus keeps most Coalition cuts intact.) Being against austerity means increasing the national debt in the medium term to get the economy growing properly. That’s perfectly safe because the economy will outgrow the debt as it has many times before. Independent or not, it means you want to pay more UK debt, or Scottish debt. Your reasoning sounds strangely Tory!

      • Without England, Scotland would have the same Sovereign Wealth as Norway. With England, Scotland is BEGGED and FORCED to pay money to English debt.

        • Mark Alexander MTC

          Allan you’re clearly passionate about this and good for you but you’re dreaming. Or believing what the politicians tell you, which is never a very good idea. Norway has an $800bn fund, which owns more than 1% of global equities and is the largest owner of European equities. Scotland and the UK has debt. These starting points make a tremendous difference to how one would expect them to deliver in the future. Norway’s Fund comes from a surplus of revenue created by oil. And continued investment. Scotland would on its own have a huge deficit. So would be unlikely to build up a surplus or fund.

          Now I guess you’ll say that the debt isn’t The SNPs problem and that Scotland could save billions with Trident etc. Those claims- though handy sound bites don’t stand up as things that could be executed. Trident would be a one off e saving that would screw Scotland out of jobs, Which would politically v difficult, and leave, under NATO’s nuclear sharing and don’t ask don’t tell doctrines, with U.S. or French Nuclear subs doing exactly what Trident does, basing at Faslane, and hanging round Scottish inshore waters. Assuming that you want like most Scots want to be part of NATO, the whole thing looks very tricky deliver without concessions. And then it would be sort of pointless.

          Scotland share of UK debt is impossible to get without shafting Scots. If the SNP had won Indyref they’d now be locked in a cycle of negotiations which would leave us with crippling debt and/or an inability to raise capital to implement QE or government spending. Which is what they call an end to austerity. What I mean is that Scotland walking from its debts would mean that oil fields wouldn’t be transferred and the debt markets would say “sod you” Which makes the “end to austerity” tricky

        • Sk11ng

          Oil wealth in the ground is not the same as a sovereign wealth fund. An oil fund like Norway means the govt running a budget surplus (taxes being higher than spending). Yet, Yessers are usually against austerity because they want to stimulate the economy. This means more borrowing, not less. It’s good to stimulate the economy out of the Great Recession so I agree with anti-austerity. But that means you’re BEGGING and FORCING yourself to pay govt debt to yourself! (It’s safe. UK govt debt is mostly owned by Brits, so the taxes which pay the debt mostly are paid to Brits anyway. No burden on future generations at all.)

          What chance for an oil fund? 80s oil boom is over. Scotland isn’t Norway. The tax got from oil is on profits, not the oil price itself. In the 80s oil was cheap to extract therefore profitable. These days that’s not true and the problem will get worse as more North Sea oil is used up. Even when the price is high.

    • The Forests Of Azure

      “claims financial illiterate Kevin Hague.”

      says the numeric illiterate who thinks that 37% is really 45%.

      • It’s the Tories that think their 37% Illegitimate government is somehow more valid than Scotland’s 45% freedom vote. Somehow the Tories feel that 45% is a “huge defeat” while 37% is a mandate to impose anything they want. Such is the broken voting system in Britain.

        • John Lea

          Spot on pal. The Tories have forced poor people like me to depend on food banks and stuff. I used to shop in Tesco and stuff, but now I’m down the foodbank every half an hour, topping up on crisps and chips and stuff. I’m also disabled and live in a 2-bedroom flat, and I was told by the Tories last week that I’ll need to move into a gerbil’s cage in Tollcross. That’s the reality of the bedroom tax and stuff eh.

        • edward howie

          you people do not do irony do you ! 55% voted no and we had an election for the whole U.K. and the SNP got their government of choice, just as they did when they voted to let Thatcher in,UKIP got far more votes than the nuts and got one seat any comment hypocrite? SNPout

      • uglyfatbloke

        Do you mean ‘innumerate’?

    • Stuart

      “financial illiterate Kevin Hague”,
      As he is running a business group he built up himself, I assume that he is not ‘Financially illiterate’.
      As if he was ‘then surely ‘Wings over Scotland’ (aka the Goebbels of Bath), would have pointed out the inaccuracies in what Kevin Hague says.
      Curiously wee Stewie Campbell has not done so, and he is not normally so shy and retiring.
      I mean perish the thought that the ‘Wee Blue Book’ is factually inaccurate!
      Because that would mean that the economic case for independence was built on a lie (allegedly).
      Still if you think Kevin Hague is so ‘illiterate’ why don’t you point out to him where he has got it wrong?
      I’m sure he will be interested.

      • Cymrugel

        Sorry, but can someone explain to me how a debate over a lying toerag of a Liberal MP has morphed into an analysis of all aspects of SNP policy?

        Just asking.

        Seems like one of those “don’t look at this, look over there” jobs

        • Robert Peffers

          Oh! That’s just the Establishments only actual policy, it goes, “SNP BAD”.

        • edward howie

          Because the whole SNP manifesto was a lie, only in the deluded world of N.S&A.S.could 59 M.P.s have an influence to change things, Labour with enough English MPs could have but the ravings of Salmond had the desired effect on the English electorate who would not have tolerated an agenda driven minority running the country so now its boo sucks Westminster from the nuts just as we predicted, hope that clears it up for you. #S.N.P.out

          • Cymrugel

            Well then why bother voting in Scotland at all? Or should we just vote labour or Try and pretend that our views actually count?

  • Andy Ellis

    The issue is above party. Any MP of ANY party who had behaved in this manner should resign. If an SNP MP behaved this way, I’d work hard to make them step down too. It is quite obvious that Carmichael, who was in the forefront of those promoting the right of recall against MPs, is a monstrous hypocrite.

    All reasonable people accept that the 3rd hand contents of the memo do not represent what was said in the meeting. The 3 people present in the meeting have all said so, and yet Toby Young continues with his “truthy” certainty that he knows better. Not only must the 3 people involved be lying as far as he’s concerned, but he apparently has a window into Nicola’s soul, and knows that (even if she didn’t say it) that’s what she really, really wanted.

    Worst of all naturally is the fact that Carmichael cynically delayed his “mea culpa” until after the election, where his majority fell from 10,000 to 800. It is highly likely he’d have lost had he done the decent thing and resigned as he should have at the time. He is therefore in office under false pretences. The outrage which has stoked the campaign to make him stand down, and to crowd-fund a legal challenge to his election, is not an example of the SNP or pro-independence supporters hounding a penitent sinner; they are an example of right thinking people across Scotland and especially in the Northern Isles, expressing their disgust at his behaviour.

    Anyone defending this self confessed liar and hypocrite lacks a moral compass.

    • The_greyhound

      “Anyone defending this self confessed liar and hypocrite lacks a moral compass.”

      Indeed. They should strip salmond of his five pensions and deport the sniveling traitor.

      • Andy Ellis

        Even of it were true, or had anything to do with this story (which it patently doesn’t) I notice you singularly fail to address the actual point. Why would that be I wonder? We all know if an SNP MP had done anything half as bad the britnat media would have crucified him by now and wouldn’t stop until he’d been driven from office.

        The difference between the atavistic britnat cringe and civic nationalists is that we can see wrong from right. You’re welcome 😉

        • The Forests Of Azure

          Civic Nationalists ?

          It is Blood and soil that motivates you my chippy wee victim….. Blood and soil.

          http://www.siol-nan-gaidheal.org/foreword.htm

          The worst of it is you are too much of a coward to admit it.

          • Andy Ellis

            Somewhat ironic being accused by an anonymous troll of being a coward, huh? There’s nothing “blood and soil” about my politics or that of the SNP or wider pro-independence movement. I’m hardly likely to admit to your grotesque caricaturing of “civic nationalism” as equivalent to Siol nan gaidheal.
            Get back to us when you’re brave enough to post as yourself and we’ll talk.

          • The Forests Of Azure

            You see I can’t use my real name on sites like this becasue a shivelling wee coward like you would sneak up to my house in the middle of the night (with your tears of victimhood running down your torn wee pus) and try to burn my house down. You Blood and Soil nationalists truly are Scotland shame.

          • Andy Ellis

            Paranoid much? Strange then that the vast majority of violence and assaults during the indyref cam from the unionist side, and that the near riot in George Square was caused by britnat extremists?

            We know who the dangerous fanatics are in this debate, it’s your mates on the far right, the Orange Order and sundry Rangers supporting loyalist nut jobs.

            The only thing you’re scared of is honest debate. Stun us with another!

          • The Forests Of Azure

            Once again we are witness to a foaming at the mouth bigot who wants to stir up sectarianism and turn Scotland into Northern Ireland.

          • Andy Ellis

            I think we can safely leave it to others to judge who is the bigot here; after all I’m the snivelling anonymous coward posting bile from the safety of a pseudonym am I? 😉

  • WarriorPrincess111111

    As I have said many times, the Scottish people are very insular. The majority of Scots are born, educated and work in Scotland. Much of their world understanding stems from their own communities.

    Nicola Sturgeon, who strongly resembles Merkel, would benefit from Alistair Carmichael being forced to stand down. However, it would be grossly unfair for Scotland to have one single party. Sturgeon, is unreliable and constantly changes her mind over issues, her words in 2010 – that someone should remind her of, are as follows:

    “……have made me wonder whether a more general willingness to allow each other space to reflect on honest mistakes, admit where we’ve got things wrong and learn lessons would be much better for our politics than the instant rush to judgment that all of us, me included, so often rush to”.
    So is Sturgeon acting in haste or ‘so often rush to’ or is she using the issue for self serving purposes.
    I would suggest the latter, since Carmichael has not been charged with any offence to date – innocent until proven guilty – and has not yet, had to face any Government inquiry.

    • Andrew Morton

      The majority of English people are born, educated and work in England. By your definition, they are very insular. What’s your point?

  • Steve Larson

    In the last 2 days, the SNP have raised more issues about Scotland than Labour and the Tories did in 5 years.

    Yet they wonder why they do not exist north of the Border.

    • Jim2

      What issues have they raised?

      • RolftheGanger

        If you are not up to speed, do your own work and consider not commenting until you do.

        • rollo_tommasi

          “work”…..lol

          Is this your lifes work Rolfy? endlessly commenting on national newspapers in a country which you live thousands of miles away from.

          Perhaps you were deported? would go some way to explaining the venom in your posts.

      • rollo_tommasi

        They’ve raised issues about clapping in Parliament.

  • The_greyhound

    The SNP has a very idiosyncratic view of the truth. Like the Moonies, whom they closely resemble in many ways, the SNP feels entirely relaxed about lying in their own cause. Thus last year they put before the Scottish people an entire tissue of lies, without compunction. salmond lied about EU membership, the currency, the extent of Scotland’s oil and gas reserves, their value, and the extent of the public spending deficit.

    Connoisseurs of salmond’s delusional nonsense will recall that in his notorious Celtic Lion speech (2008) he raved that an independent Scotland would join the Ark of Prosperity (Iceland, Eire). Almost immedately those two economies went belly up, and salmond was the butt of more jokes. So salmond’s corrupt minsters tried to expunge the gaffe from the public record – you can read an account of the blundering shifty clowns’ cover up here http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/david-allen-green/2011/06/global-economy-world-scotland

    • The Forests Of Azure

      The fact that SNP campaigners are compulsive liars comes as little surprise when you consider that the entire SNP itself is based on a lie….. that lie is of course that us scots are victims of our imperial english masters and that only independence can improve our lives in any way. It is one of the great lies of modern times.

      The SNP answer to any problem is “independence”…. it isn’t vote in a new party or support new policies, it is go through the extremely painful process of tearing a country in two and handing absolute power to the cabal at the top of the SNP. Whether there will be less money or the economy tanks is of no consequence, all that matters is independence. The people at the top of the SNP are not interested in improving one persons life, all they care about is power for power’s sake and they know that splitting Scotland off from the rest of the UK is something that will make it more likely that they will achieve absolute power.

      To digress slightly, I’d like to say that these threads are very informative. When the cybernats start to get a doing and lose the argument the war horn obviously goes out on nationalist websites like whinge over scotland and they flock to defend their losing colleagues. The best of it is, rather than helping their cause they make it worse because they suffer from classic extremist groupthink meaning that there isn’t a single independent thought in the entire SNP. If one of them makes a fool of themselves or tries to peddle a lie, it doesn’t matter if hoards of their colleagues appear as they are equally ignorant of the truth and as ill informed as their distressed colleague. It’s quite pathetic.

      • The_greyhound

        I share your perception of nationalist troll behaviour. They don’t really matter – the only people taking their guff seriously are themselves. There was never so much innocent fun to be had as when we fed them stories about missing ballot boxes in the referendum count. It was not was not until those missing ballot boxes started turning up on the moon (next to the WW2 bomber) that the poor witless creatures began to suspect that they were having their chain yanked.

        But there is a serious point – too many of these crazies believe that Toby Young shouldn’t be allowed to express his criticism of the SNP. Once again we see extremist nationalism as deeply inimical to our civil liberties, and to the ordinary canons of civilised behaviour.

    • RolftheGanger

      Factualy the arc of prosperity included Norway which you conveniently omit, and could also have included Sweden and Denmark on the same basis. All are doing relatively better than the UK – apart from housing debt boom masquerading as “growth” rate.

      • rollo_tommasi

        Wrong. The Arc of Prosperity was Iceland and Ireland but he tweaked it when both tanked.

        We know nationalists the world over have a tendency to rewrite history to suit them.

        • RolftheGanger

          Wrong. Two points connect as a line, not an arc.
          The original quote was all three, but Unionists find Norway an uncomfortable subject to address vis a vis Scotland and their squandering of out irreplaceable natural resources.

          • rollo_tommasi

            That along with the banks, Kosovo, The Euro, The Arc of Prosperity, second oil boom etc

            Whats the opposite of the midas touch?

          • RolftheGanger

            Err, Murphy’s political ‘judgment’
            Remember him and the erstwhile Branch Office party?

          • rollo_tommasi

            Poor attempt at deflection even by your standards.

  • LG

    The question of whether Carmichael should resign has nothing to do with the SNP. Do we want politicians given free rein to be caught lying to the electorate? Should they face no consequences?

  • Ajourney

    What a bitter little man Toady Young is. Chippy isn’t the word.

  • She only made one statement on the affair. Here’s the video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=awlZqJRY1uY

    In it, she says “He has apologised to me and I accept his apology”. She then goes onto say “I think he should apologise to his constituents and reflect further on his position”.

  • uglyfatbloke

    Good old Toby, an English nationalist through and through. In the fines traditions of journalism, never let the facts get in the way of a good story.

  • jdmank

    Awa an bile yer heed!

  • Arron Blue

    It’s fun to read such uninformed articles. London-centric politicians and commentators haven’t a clue about Scotland. The chasm between Scotland and England continues to grow. More please.

    • The_greyhound

      Though not as fast as the chasm within Scotland grows. The nationalist minority are screeching themselves hoarse to no effect.

      The SNP may deliver partition, but it will never deliver independence.

      • RolftheGanger

        Never say never.

        Heard all this before – about Suez, Malta, Cyprus, Kenya, Malaya and Singapore, Hongkong, and other Westminster ruled territories that are now sensibly out form under that archaic monstrosity and self governing.

  • Andrew McLean

    Oh that excuse again brought out whenever you want to be an apologist for wrongdoing, however in the real world, “But mummy I know I have been a bad boy, but all the other boys were doing it too so in must be ok” might work aged 5 best not to try it as an adult.

  • Kevin D

    ” it’s hypocritical of the SNP leader to complain about duplicity, given her party’s conduct in the run-up to the referendum.”
    The tendancy to smear seems a singular penchant carried by those opposed to the SNP (instinctive or otherwise) and Toby Young proves he is no exception.
    Let’s be clear about the people who were involved in this cack-handed effort to smear Scotland’s First Minister:
    There was of course Alistair Carmichael, a Tory/LibDem Government Minister, who by virtue of his Party’s sheer collapse throughout the UK,new he faced a daunting task to retain his Islands seat against the SNP.
    His special adviser, Euan Roddin, is the man credited with orchestrating the secret meeting between Alistair Darling, (the late) David McLetchie, Jim Murphy, Douglas Alexander and Cameron’s spin doctor Andrew Cooper.
    A meeting that led to the so-called “Abbotsford Accord” with the sole function of discrediting the SNP by any means possible.
    Toby Young persists, despite all the evidence, to assert that the contents of the leaked memo were an accurate account. That this is undermined by Carmichael himself who admits the contents were “incorrect”, that they were flatly denied not just by Nicola Sturgeon but by France’s Ambassador to the UK and the French Consular General appears not to prompt any self-doubt in Toby’s almost psychic self-belief, as he preaches the opposite of the truth to Spectator readers.
    The reason why Carmichael must place himself again before the judgement of electors, is not to satisfy political egos, but plain and simply because his admitted dishonesty, his blatant attempt to smear Scotland’s First Minister and his apparent belief that foreign diplomatic conventions would protect him from discovery.
    This is a “British” way of doing politics that has been responsible for turning off generations from engagement in the democratic process.
    It is a way of doing politics that was rejected absolutely by the people of Scotland and it says a significant amount about Toby Young that he seeks to defend and excuse it.

    • The_greyhound

      Stating an inconvenient truth isn’t a smear.

      A liar like Sturgeon is likely to come in for a great deal of scrutiny, and the SNP won’t succeed in shouting any of ts opponents down. The press is free in the United Kingdom (we all know just how uncomfortable that makes your sort feel) and will remain so.

  • Jeannie Mackenzie

    Your account is factually wrong in so many places!
    1. Nicola Sturgeon did not call for Carmichael’s resignation – she said he should consider his position.
    2. You say the memo is ‘almost certainly an accurate account of what she said’. How do you know? Were you there? The only two people who were present deny it completely. The memo is a third party account and the person who presented it admitted it might not be accurate.
    3. There are different perspectives on the financial contribution that Scotland makes to the treasury. I know which one I believe, but having a different perspective is not a lie.
    4. ‘The most dishonest party in Britain’? Really? So you would exclude the lies that the Tory party and UKIP daily promulgate re the net benefits of immigration?

    and I could go on….

  • Julia

    Unfortunately an article following the usual spin of London centric media.

    Carmichael had full knowledge that the article content was false. The application of common sense would have guided him that it was unlikely that such an experienced politician would have made such a remark/gaff with civil servants present.
    Why did he sit on the “report” for several weeks?
    Why did he deny authorising it’s release to the Telegraph?
    Why did he cost the nation a fortune for an enquiry unless he either hoped for a whitewash or at the least have it kicked into the long grass until post GE.

    Whe the attempt to present the issue as foe against foe and all fair under Westminster rules of politics. His action and that of the media was disgaceful. Ms Sturgeon and the French Ambassador were victims of nasty politics.

    I’ve had enough of deceitful politicians being successful by the defence of “everybody does it!”.

    The Spectator is driven by it’s opposition to Scottish Nationalism to such a degree that it cannot see the real story staring them in the face.

    • The_greyhound

      Another repetitive troll whingeing on about nothing.

      Where was your anger when salmond lied about about EU membership, the currency, the extent of
      Scotland’s oil and gas reserves, their value, and the extent of the
      public spending deficit during the referendum campaign?

      Sturgeon is a liar, and everyone already knew that she was gagging for a tory win; this nonsense is an attempt to divert attention from the anger Labour voters feel at this act of SNP betrayal.

  • Cymrugel

    Oh come off it.

    The man was found guilty of lying about a political opponent in the middle of a national election . He kept denying it until over £1 million in public money was spent on the enquiry that exposed him. That in itself should surely be enough to demand his resignation.

    Yours is the second article to argue that tis liar should be left in peace ; why? His constituents are up in arms and quite rightly want a by election to remove him.

    Why should they have their area represented by a proven liar for the next five years?

    His actions are not acceptable just because you don’t like Nicola Sturgeon.

    • Mc

      My reading is that Toby Young is pointing out that the SNP is being hypocritical and that the SNP has a very long history of obfuscation, particularly about matters that would have dire economic consequences for SNP supporters. Though one gets the impression that the SNP knows that if an independent Scotland went belly up, their supporters would blame it on the UK rather than on the SNP.

      • Andy Ellis

        No, he’s trying to defend the indefensible and justifying it with a dressed up version of the “SNP=BAD” schtick that worked so well for Labour’s Scottish branch office at the GE. It isn’t all about economics, but needless to say few of us actually take the “sky will fall” predictions at all seriously. It’s all a bit “too wee, too poor, too stupid” isn’t it? Not even Cameron and the britnat establishment seriously believe Scotland would be an economic basket case post independence, and yet people like you dutifully trot out the same old agitprop that it would rapidly descend to be Europe’s Zimbabwe. Do please change the record!

        • Mc

          Andy, I get the impression that the English population couldn’t care less or would be downright delighted to be rid of Scotland. But if I were Scottish, I wouldn’t believe a word the SNP said. Which seemed to be the view of most Scots at the referendum – how do pro-independence voters manage to get along with those who voted No?

          • Andy Ellis

            You may be right, tho’ I’m not sure how much real “evidence” there is on English attitudes? Subjective feelings, media reports and self selected opinions based on comments here or elsewhere probably aren’t the best guide. My take on it is that the majority would be sad to see the union dissolved, but you’re probably right “most” aren’t really that bothered. Whether they feel strongly enough to actively vote or organise to “get rid of us” as you charmingly put it remains to be seen; I suspect the only way it will actually happen is if Scots vote for it, not by the English voting to have their own independence.

            You may not trust the SNP, but Scots seem to disagree with you. Pro and anti independence folk get on in the same way as political opponents all over the world; there are hot heads on both sides of course. In the end, democrats have little option but to accept the wishes of the majority, just as we did last September. Next time though, huh….? 😉

          • Mc

            “Next time though, huh….? ;)”

            Are you telling me that one can’t hold the SNP to its claim that another referendum wouldn’t be held in this generation? 😉

          • Andy Ellis

            It isn’t up to the SNP, still less Westminster to decide how often or when future referendums are held; the Scottish people decide not Salmond, Sturgeon and certainly not Cameron or whichever Blairite our NuLab friends elect leader.

          • Mc

            How would one separate out the SNP’s call for a referendum from citizens? After all, if a new referendum was arranged, it would be the SNP that would be the formal political counterparty in such an arrangement, not anonymous citizens. Your statement just doesn’t sound very credible and sounds more like an SNP fudge.

          • Andy Ellis

            Well, if the SNP call for a referendum and the people of Scotland vote them in, then they have a clear mandate. Similarly if they or other parties in future set out their stall for approving a referendum, and the majority of Scots vote in favour, then I don’t see the problem. The statement relates more to the oft quoted trial balloon floated by more extreme britnats that Westminster can or should seek to veto or limit the right to self determination. In practice the only really feasible way for Scots to do so is via political parties, which in our case effectively means the SNP, given the fact other pro-indy parties are fairly minor. It’s much the same in Quebec with the PQ, but different in Catalonia which has a number of pro-indy parties from across the political spectrum. It’s not a fudge, just fact.

      • Cymrugel

        So basically he can lie bit its OK because the SNP have done worse?
        Evidence please?

        • Mc

          Straw man

          • Cymrugel

            No. Very much to the point I’d say

          • Mc

            For brevity, I didn’t include a treatise about all politicians being equally duplicitous. So you then jumped to the straw man argument that I supposedly thought Carmichael’s behaviour was excusable “because the SNP have done worse”.

          • Cymrugel

            Well you are, aren’t you?

          • Mc

            Yes, these are the sorts of replies I always get when I point out people’s logical fallacies.

  • Mc

    “For Scotland to wash its own face would mean massive public spending cuts.”

    That’s assuming a Scottish government would have the sense and integrity to cut its spending to the appropriate levels. One suspects they would instead spend themselves into the ground and then try wangle it for the UK government to pick up the tab. Nevermind that in the scenario of an impoverished Scotland, a flood of Scottish jobseekers to the UK would be a de facto case of the UK paying for Scottish debt.

    • RolftheGanger

      Cringe, cringe and Better Together cringeworthy.

  • ohforheavensake

    Carmichael admits that the memo isn’t true.

    Stop it, Toby. This is very pathetic.

  • Very sad to see bare-faced lying being defended on partisan grounds.

    And this predictable attempt to muddy the waters by bringing up the EU advice thing, when Salmond was cleared of wrongdoing and went on to win a big majority from the voters, is desperate and feeble.

    For Carmichael to cling on in the face of popular support for a by-election is insulting to his constituents who went to the polls deprived of the knowledge that he had lied to their faces to keep his seat. Come on Alastair, show some class.

    • The_greyhound

      Greatly amused to see the repetitive trolling of the SNP’s cybernats, slopped up merely for partisan reasons.

      Perhaps you were equally scandalized by the bare faced lies of salmond during the referendum campaign, and in particular his wholly untrue claim that he had positive legal advice on Scotland’s position vis a vis the EU. Perhaps you were scandalized, but, somehow, I doubt it.

      • Andy Ellis

        Perhaps we, or any disinterested observers, would have been scandalised if it were true, but (as others have pointed out) it simply isn’t true, as the inquiry into the matter found. Irrespective of britnat frothing and the false analogy however, it still doesn’t explain why we should give nay credence to the partisan defence of Carmichael mounted by the unionist commentariat, media and political establishment?
        The true difference between the two sides of course is that if an SNP MP had done the same, we’d still be calling for him to step down, whereas the knee-jerk britnat response is to defend the indefensible. By their friends shall ye know them indeed!

        • The_greyhound

          When all else fails, you lie.

          Please cite the advice salmond claimed to have received, and who gave it. We will all wait a bloody long time.

          salmond lied. period.

          • Andy Ellis

            No, he really didn’t, as the enquiry into the matter found. Stop trying to divert attention from your defence of the indefensible by constant and erroneous reference to something which is neither analogous nor true; it simply makes you look disingenuous.

          • The_greyhound

            Quote the advice. Say who gave it.

            You can’t.

            salmond is a proven liar.

            Liar. Liar. Liar.

          • Andy Ellis

            Do try to calm down, and wipe the spittle from your eyes – you might be able to see more clearly. Salmond din’t lie, and the official enquiry demonstrated. Such advice is routinely confidential; it is custom and practice for legal advice given to both UK and Scottish governments to remain confidential to protect the lawyers giving it from being pressurised or becoming involved in political disputes. Few lawyers in such circumstances would be happy to give advice knowing it was going to be published.

            Repeating your absurd claims over and over again doesn’t make them any more convincing…it just makes you look desperate and slightly hysterical. Nor indeed do you show how they are in any way connected to the issue at hand; even if you had a case (which you patently don’t as the evidence about the EU advice issue shows) that still wouldn’t be as serious a matter as Carmichael misleading his electors, gaining a seat under false pretences, and telling bare faced lies on camera and denying any offence until after he was caught.

            You’re diversionary “LOOK>>>SNP = BAD” schtick is hilarious, but contributes nothing to the case at hand. Carmichael isn’t any less guilty because other politicians misbehave.

      • No I wasn’t, and neither was the body tasked with investigating the incident in question. Because I’m not a rabid Salmond hater who’s absolutely desperate for reasons to deflect attention from Carmichael.

  • The_greyhound

    An invitation to the cybernats and trolls that keep rolling up to insult Mr Carmichael – are you going to be equally condemnatory of the lies and thefts committed by other MPs exposed in the expenses scandal? Specifically, Stewart Hosie, Angus MacNeil, Angus Robertson, and Alex Salmond, all exposed for cheating the tax payer?

    Because if you don’t, people will suspect, quite correctly, that you are merely another nationalist twitter mob with a highly adjustable sense of morality, feigning moral indignation in a crude attempt to get rid of a serious political rival.

    • ohforheavensake

      Carmichael admitted that he lied. There is that.

      • Kevin D

        And he lied to save his gold plated Westminster pension and MP salary – and if he hadn’t been caught out (by virtue of the French Ambassador breaking protocol and denouncing his lies) he would have bagged £17000 pay off as a former Tory Coalition Minister.
        Carmichael is in the mire and should do the decent thing… Toby’s diversion tactics are so blatant as to be ridiculous.

    • Andy Ellis

      If you can prove such lies and theft, then step up and we’ll condemn them. In the meantime, feel free to condemn Carmichael for his self-confessed lies, and justify why he shouldn’t resign. Or of course, hide behind your anonymous ID and throw rocks from the sidelines like most britnats with an unthinking hatred of all things SNP?

  • hoddles

    “Scotland would be facing an annual deficit gap of £8.5 billion in its first year of independence ” The Uk deficit gap last year was £87 billion – pretty much pro rata

  • dodewalker

    Toby Young is by some biggest margin the most opinionated ball bag that is an associate editor for the Spectator, and Alistair Carmichael MP is the biggest liar of all the Liberal Democrat MP’s in Scotland.
    Almost as Greedy as some Ex LD Scottish MP’s,. Sir David Steel, Sir Malcolm Bruce,
    then the Lords Nichol Stephen & Jim Wallace.

    • Kevin D

      And the most hilarious mitigation for Carmichael was Sir Malcolm Bruce’s defence that all Westminster MPs are corrupt liars.
      Well he should know.

    • The_greyhound

      Greedy?

      greedy as in proven expenses thieves like Stewart Hosie, Angus MacNeil, Angus Robertson or Alex salmond? that sort of greedy, or some other sort?

      The SNP – making hypocrisy a way of life.

      • dodewalker

        If Proven dishonesty has happened then you just put forward the evidence and SNP Members like me will see that there is a Investigation to where any false claims have been made and will be sure that any expenses not due are fully refunded and legal action take.
        Alex Salmond MSP & MP does need to stand down from his seat in Holyrood and let there be a By Election.
        He did get far too much of a taste for Scottish Golf Resort Hotels as he travelled around Scotland and elsewhere.

        • Oldfatblokeish
          • dodewalker

            Greedy thieving barstewards, lets get shot of them,
            like all the other MP’s & MSP’s from Scotland that were at it.
            Doh, we have though, Jim Devine no more, Eric Joyce no more, Jim Murphy no more, Danny Alexander no more, Douglas Alexander no more, Alistair Darling no more, Gordon Brown keep giving him more and more.
            Lets get on and sort out the SNP Snouts in Troughs then,
            & lets get a Snout of Alistair Carmichael off the Gravy Train as well.

          • The_greyhound

            So we’re just left with thieves like Alex salmond, Angus macNeil, Angus Robertson, Stewart Hosie., but that’s alright, because they’re nationalists?

            Yeah, right.

  • contrarian

    The biggest lie of all was the Cameron/Osborne/Clegg and others’ lie, repeated add nauseum, that “it was Labpur’s (financial) mess”, during the election campaign, when the truth was that it was the Conservatives who laid the very foundations of that mess from the start of the 80’s and continued throughout the subsequent long years of a Labour government to complain loudly that it’s light touch on the City was “not light enough”! Labour’s inability or reluctance to face and counter that lie head-on was simply because Labour either had fallen for the Conservative’s simple minded (but frequently self-serving) trust in the market or feared killing the golden goose – for the usual short term, blinkered political purpose, or because of a combination of them, and would have had to admit naivety or complicity.
    I just add that I did not believe much of the SNP’s presentation of the case for Scottish independence either, but Toby Young’s approach to it is comparative overkill.

    • Sk11ng

      There are other reasons for Labour’s attitude. Economists around the world were praising low volatility in the business cycle for 20 years as proof that free markets were nice and stable. That is why Brown said ‘no return to boom and bust’. Both sides of the Atlantic were telling him that serious recessions or high inflation during booms have both been solved. Second reason is, our lopsided economy with an overbearing Shitty of London and powerful Thatcherite media defending it meant they didn’t want to step out of line. The right could kill their election chances. Look what happened to “Red Ed” when he turned the party to the left again. What of the SNP? They copied his progressive tax policies verbatim at the last minute. On banking? An investment bank, like Labour, but Labour also wanted 2 new High Street banks for more competition. SNP manifesto didn’t copy that bit! And they want to keep a single British financial services sector post-independence. And they said if Scotland had been independent in 2007, they’d have bailed out the banks in collaboration with the rUK. Red Tories or Yellow Tories?

  • ahhhem
    http://www.firmmagazine.com/first-minister-in-missing-records-riddle-over-hollie-greig-abuse-allegations/
    First Minister in missing records riddle over Hollie Greig abuse allegations

    Share on facebookShare on twitterShare on emailShare on pinterest_shareMore Sharing Services64

    The Scottish Government is refusing to disclose whether it has lost or destroyed communications records relating to the Hollie Greig case which may indicate when the First Minister Alex Salmond became aware of allegations of sexual abuse, which Ms Greig claims was carried out against her over many years whilst resident in the Aberdeen area.

    Last month the Scottish Ministers were compelled by the Information Commissioner to address a series of questions put to the First Minister in correspondence in relation to the case in January this year, the first of which was: “When did you first become aware of the allegations made by Hollie Greig about her being abused by members of a high-ranking paedophile ring in Scotland?”

    The commissioner required the Scottish Ministers to respond by today’s date or risk being held in contempt of court.

    It was reported in April 2009 that Greig received a payout of £13,500 from the criminal injuries compensation authority, and was described by Detective Inspector Iain Allen of Grampian Police as “a truthful witness to the best of her ability and an entirely innocent victim.”

    Two Grampian Police Officers interviewed Greig in September 2009. No charges have been brought against anyone in connection with sexual abuse.

    The Scottish Ministers’ response to the question, issued by the First Minister’s Private Secretary Terry Kowal stated: “Following a search of our paper and electronic records, I have established we do not have a record of when the First Minister became aware of these allegations. Therefore, the information you require is not held by the Scottish Government.”

    However, The Firm has seen correspondence from the Crown Office dated 23 July 2009 addressed to the Greig family’s lay representative Robert Green, which suggests that correspondence addressed to the First Minister outlining the allegations was received over two years ago.

    “Thank you for your email of 20 June 2009 to the First Minister in which you raise concerns about the handling of the case involving allegations of abuse perpetrated against Hollie Greig,” the letter says.

    The letter then says that Green’s inquiry was passed to the Crown Office for response, given the nature of the subject matter.

    When pressed by The Firm to explain the apparent contradiction between the two positions, the First Minister’s office told The Firm today only that “we do not have a record of when the First Minister first became aware of these allegations”.

    The First Minister’s office have acknowledged receipt of The Firm’s subsequent query asking whether the records had been destroyed, but have offered no direct response, despite repeated requests.

    Russell Fallis of the Scottish Government communications team issued a statement to The Firm that said the First Minister’s office “receives a large volume of correspondence on a wide range of subjects, which is answered by that office or by relevant officials” , and added that the Government does not have “any indication that this information was recorded.”

    Pressed to confirm whether the correspondence was destroyed or lost, the First Minister’s office has provided no response.

    The correspondence questioning the First Minister was sent on 28 January and had received no response, despite a series of reminder letters. The Information Commissioner later ruled that the Scottish Ministers had failed to comply with their obligations under Sections 10(1) and 21(1) of the Freedom of Information Act.

    This afternoon the Information Commissioner confirmed he is now considering whether “further action is required” against the Scottish Government in respect of their handling of the original correspondence containing the six queries.

    In May, Andrew George MP wrote to Lord Advocate Frank Mulholland asking him to outline the options available to “those many people who remain concerned” about the “unsafe” investigations into the Hollie Greig case.

    “There appears to be a lot of evidence and allegations which point in one direction and indicates that this whole case deserves a through review,” George wrote in constituency correspondence.

    He adds that “many of the professionals with whom she came into contact…have allegedly failed in their duties or even covered up important facts.”

    George was the second Westminster MP to raise concerns about the case, following David Ruffely MP’s intervention earlier this year.

  • Disgraced former Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill finally admits that the ‘Sein Fein’ SNP Government are human rights abusers on prisoner voting rights, Scotland is on the road to fascism, there isn’t any room for justice under unpopular Nicola Sturgeon

    Dear All

    Kenny MacAskill was the worst Justice Secretary in the history of the Scottish Parliament.

    He got the job because he was basically Alex Salmond’s pal; this was the criteria it seems to hold Ministerial Office in the SNP Government. Through-out his rein he was dogged by controversy, one of the cases which showed him up as a lemming was the Cadder Case.

    What is interesting about the Cadder Case was the UK Supreme Court had to act to ensure that Scots got access to a fair trial. MacAskill fought tooth and nail against this case, at the time, I opined that human rights couldn’t be replaced by effectively was ‘gifts’ by the Crown Office. Although Cadder the individual wasn’t exactly a pillar of the community, he did more for justice in Scotland as ‘deadbeat’ than Kenny MacAskill did while holding ministerial office.

    On the Cadder Case, George Laird was right again by the way, it was they say an open and shut case.

    During the Scottish referendum, the SNP deliberately continued to disenfranchise a section of the population resident in Scotland from exercising their right to vote. These people were prisoners who were locked in prison. The issue of prisoner voting is an issue that most politicians won’t touch with a barge pole because everyone is signed up to ‘tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime’.

    This slogan was Tony Blair’s mantra while in public office.

    Anyone not signing up to this was attacked by the other parties and described as being weak and pro criminal.

    Giving people their human rights isn’t and shouldn’t be a matter of whether we like them, or what they stand for, or even what they have done previously.

    So, a political consensus emerged which was ‘fuck criminals, we don’t want their votes if they are in prison’.

    My position when the issue cropped up at the referendum was that the prisoners should be allowed to vote. This view is in line with the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) who ruled the blanket ban on prisoners voting is a breach of human rights.

    According to MacAskill view now, the Scottish Government must review its “shameful” position, during the ‘shame’ episode, Kenny MacAskill had no problem in doing two things, one, collecting his Ministerial salary and secondly keeping his mouth shut.

    Keeping your mouth shut doesn’t make you a team player, just in case you motherfuckers didn’t know that!

    You are either the Justice Secretary of Scotland or you are not, is my opinion, plainly MacAskill was Alex Salmond’s placeman.

    MacAskill’s sudden conversion to ‘faith’ is that he thinks the SNP must back prison votes to fight Tory human rights plan.

    I get the sense, this isn’t about restoring democracy and human rights but rather this is a political manoeuvre. The Conservatives want to repeal the Human Rights Act 1998, and replace it with what is termed the British Bill of Rights.

    The problem with the Human Rights Act 1998 isn’t that the Bill is wrong, but the wrongful judgments which arise from it, like allowing terrorists to have a revolving door to attempt to defeat the ends of justice. Another misuse is allowing foreign criminals the right to remain in the UK on the basis they can cite another part of human rights as a justification as a breach.

    One of the gags used is right to family life to avoid deportation.

    David Cameron wants to replace the human rights act with a British Bill of Rights but it rather looks like people will get less rights; and as we head towards a possible exit from the EU, this may look to some as long term housekeeping.

    We don’t have a bad human rights act, we have bad judges.

    Writing in The National newspaper, MacAskill admitted that he was “complicit” in the “wrong” decision to oppose granting convicted prisoners the vote.

    He added:

    “That’s an issue that has come before the European Courts on many occasions and in which they have been quite clear. A blanket ban is unacceptable and in conflict with human rights, notwithstanding that the UK Government has simply refused to comply and indeed Prime Minister David Cameron has said that the very thought of it makes him sick. Shamefully, the Scottish Government has so far refused to adhere to the spirit and the judgements of the European Courts. Initially it hid behind the franchise being reserved to Westminster but did indicate that it did not support its extension to prisoners. That was compounded by replicating the Westminster line in the franchise for the referendum. Votes were granted for 16 and 17-year-olds but not prisoners.

    Kenny MacAskill also said:

    “In that act I am as complicit as any as the former justice secretary. It was the wrong thing done, albeit for the right reasons. It was to avoid any needless distractions in the run-up to the referendum, to deny the right-wing press lurid headlines that could tarnish the bigger picture. But the referendum is behind us and the Tory press have failed to stop us. To have credibility on the issue the Scottish Government must now review their position on votes for prisoners or the defence of the Human Rights Act will ring hollow.”

    This is basically rubbish, but lets us home in on this part:

    “It was the wrong thing done, albeit for the right reasons. It was to avoid any needless distractions in the run-up to the referendum, to deny the right-wing press lurid headlines that could tarnish the bigger picture”.

    So, I read this and I think, this is a person who doesn’t give a shit about human rights, doesn’t give a shit about justice and thinks that Government exists as an election and referendum tool.

    The job of the Justice Secretary is to oversee a justice system that is fair to both sides in a legal, during his tenure as Justice Secretary, Kenny MacAskill was so far up the arse of the Crown Office; you would have thought he was their employee instead of being their boss.

    As to Sein Fein SNP adopting MacAskill’s position, I don’t see unpopular Nicola Sturgeon taking an interest in giving people their human rights; she hasn’t really expressed an interest in that as a politician.

    Scotland is on the road to fascism, there isn’t any room for justice.

    Yours sincerely

    George Laird

    The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University

  • Ronald Anderson

    Is that piece written by Toby Mug, certainly not a Journalist of any note.The People of Orkney & Shetland will have their day with Carmichael in Court,now thats called Democrecy.

  • THOMAS CAIN

    Now HERE’S a problem with an easy solution! Given the not disputed facts of this case, does Carmichael enjoy the confidence of the people of Orkney and Shetland or not? To find out the answer, let him resign. trigger a by election, and stand as a candidate.

    Well, why not?

    • The_greyhound

      He does enjoy the confidence of the Northern Isles electorate. They just voted for him. Same as Scotland voted against the salmond’s lies about independence. apparently nationalists can’t cope with the idea that people don’t subscribe to their dim bigoted nonsense.

      But it’s none of your business – the Northern isles aren’t part of Scotland.

      • RolftheGanger

        They voted on a false basis that he obscured that he is a self-confessed liar.

        • rollo_tommasi

          Don’t slur Alex like that.

      • THOMAS CAIN

        Well, actually, what I was looking for was a way for him to assert his authority by demonstrating a firm base of support. As things stand now there is a shadow over that. He has now become THE LibDem(Scotland) at Westminster; he needs to avoid being a five year running joke. I dont see that another course is open to him. Everyone knows he behaved in a dishonourable way during the election; he has said so himself and apologised for it. And in a democracy where your legitimacy rests on that support you need sometimes to ” go to the country”. Dont you? I mean, you dont think he’d lose, do you?

        I cant agree with you about the status of Orkney and Shetland. Even in the 1300s the Jarls were mainland Scots (sinclairs etc)with holdings across the islands and Caithness. And linguistically Scots was already winning out against Norn by the time of the official transfer of the islands to the Scottish crown in 1470. I certainly treasure the diversity of Scotland’s culture represented by the linguistics of five languages a thousand years ago( Brythonic. Irish, Pictish and Scots and Norse) I rather see them as strands in a tartan: unpick them and all you have are woollen balls of different colours. Wont keep you warm…. OR cover your arse.

        • The_greyhound

          More droning nonsense.

          Carmichael exposed sturgeon’s act of betrayal. The only politician that needs to renew her mandate is that duplicitous harridan.

          No one cares about your idiot tartan, or any of the other souvenir shop trash the nationalists mistake for “culture”. The Northern isles are not part of Scotland, and no internationally recognized treaty or statute says otherwise.

          And since you are, like so many of your kind, ignorant of Scotland’s history, I must embarass you by pointing out that there was no “Scots” (language) a thousand years ago. Only English. “Scots” is merely an English dialect, a debased form of the language popular with the ignorant, which seems to have appeared only in the fourteenth century..

          And Brythonic is pure invention.

          • THOMAS CAIN

            Dear me. Such a farrago of misinformation I can only give you a D for your work and send you off to do a little reading and then rewrite this short essay entirely and hand it in by the week-end.
            To start you off try to think more clearly about the early post Roman period when groups of settlers arrived in eastern Britain from various parts of the low countries speaking a variety of low german dialects. You seem not to realise that one of these regions of origin is anciently known as ANGELN and gave its name to the people there. So german dialect named after a place on the north german coast is the language we are talking about..the language of Angeln. And it spread in Britain widely. It is one of the ancestors of Scots and also Geordie. To somehow dismiss Scots as “not appearing before 1400” could only come from someone who has never tried to read or learn the speech of, say, Sussex before 1400. One could say that English as we know it did not emerge until the 12th or 13th c. To suggest that somehow English was England’s language and Scots were just speaking it badly is ill informed.

            Just a few more things before you go. Tartans are not tourist tat…not always. They are actually mentioned quite clearly along with “braccae” or breeks by Tacitus in “The Agricola” which you were supposed to have read last term. So they’ve been around since the first century anyway.

            Oh and your howler about brythonic! How we laughed in the staffroom at that one, especially Mr Evan-Evans and of course me; we have both been speaking a brythonic language since soon after childbirth.

          • Clive

            Well, no. Pictish – presumably the language you claim as distinct – seems only to be a variation of brythonic language as spoken in the rest of Britain

            So there was and is no distinct Scottish language as The_greyhound said – despite all the other smoke and mirrors you deployed. Bit like the SNP after a lie.

          • THOMAS CAIN

            Duw, Duw..how far have we strayed from my simple suggestion that Mr Carmichael might strengthen his hand and credibility by creating a bye election. As he is the single LibDem MP in Scotland I think this would be the right move for him. Everyone has attested to how popular he is and what a good guy generally so a bye election should be a walk in the park and in fact strengthen his position. Dont you think?

            On language matters I think what you and wolfie are trying to say is that Scotland isnt a real country at all and the language that most, lowlanders certainly, speak is just bad english that got worse and worse after 1400. Is that about it? A similar line was often taken about Wales…that it was really just part of England etc etc. But I never heard a Welshman say that; they were the bitter or not so bitter views of Englishmen outraged at the idea of people not accepting English dominance. Is that you, Clive? And Wolfhound? Angry Englishmen? Pissed off that Scots arent just, well, “grateful”?

            Bede(who surely would know and from first hand experience) lists the “nations” AND languages of Britain…in 700 or thereabouts. English,,Scots, British and Pictish. By Scots of course he means Irish. But he does not see Pictish and “British” or even similar. What is one to make of that?Pictish may well have been a further P Celtic language otherwise unknown. Or not Celtic at all. Most of the tiny handful of short inscriptions have not been read ie no clear Brythonic or Goidelic core is revealed and it could have been a mix of an indigenous pre celtic and an early celtic. Now that they are even reading the insriptions of Tartesssos in Spain as “Gaelic” before 1000 BC almost anything seems possible.

            Scots is as much a language as Norwegian. All the Scandinavian languages evolved out of old Norse, each in their way, after about 1000 ad just as English and Scots evolved out of the german language of old Saxony and Angeln.,Yet no Dane would ever dream of telling Norwegians they werent speaking a “proper” language. Would they? Too well informed and too well mannered for that.

  • RolftheGanger

    The degree to which Carmichael is in the proverbial, is indicated by the extraordinary lengths to which fellow Unionists are going to argue ludicrous justifications for colluding with a self confessed Cabinet level liar.

    In any other circumstances the same people would be howling for his head.
    But the SNP threat has them defending the indefensible.

    The sad levels to which a corrupt Union has been reduced to perpetuate its sorry existence.

    Time to put it out of its misery.

    • The_greyhound

      Time to put the corrupt SNP out of its misery.

      To hear practised liars like the nationalists whining about sturgeon’s blatant act of betrayal being exposed is pure comedy gold.

      The sour-faced hypocrite was gagging for a Tory victory. Carmichael merely provided the evidence.

  • Oldfatblokeish

    So , let me see if I have this correct, Salmond on an Interview with Andrew Neil stated in terms of the EU debate, that SNP had sought and been given legal advice by Scottish Government law officers on the position of Scotland’ membership of the EU following a “successful” vote.

    Asked what that advice said, Salmond responded: “Well, you know I can’t give you the legal advice or reveal the legal advice of law officers, but what you can say is that everything we publish is consistent with the legal advice we have received.”

    The SNP then spent £19,452.92 appealing a FOI Commissioner that they had to disclose whether they had sought advice from their law officers on the issue. Nicola Sturgeon, the Deputy First Minister at the time, suddenly announced the case was being dropped last year because “no specific legal advice” existed.

    The “lying” part is that at that time the SNP had not been given any such advice and then Sturgeon revealed that the Scottish government had only sought legal advice from its law officers in the week, following the interview..

    But Salmond is no stranger to controversy for spending the public purse for his own regal benefit, charged the taxpayer more than £250 for a pair of tartan trousers before trying to keep secret that he had not refundedthe public purse. This repayment only occurred after yet another FOI request and a further 7 months trying to keep secret the date of repayment.

    One thing I can say for Alistair Carmichael, he never once had to be pulled up on any expenses scandal, unlike the SNP at that time, https://michaelgrieve.wordpress.com/2015/03/28/the-snp-and-the-expences-scandal-the-truth/

    • LG

      What has Salmond’s alleged transgression got to do with Carmichael?

      • Oldfatblokeish

        Counterpoint to all the indignation ( and it most certainly is not alleged transgression, it is factual) by the SNP about Carmichael. Stones and glass houses etc. As someone put it on their strap line, SNP.. making hypocrisy a way of life.

        • LG

          So the net result of your ‘whataboutery’ is that no MP will ever have to stand down or be censured for anything in the future. Because when the next one is caught red-handed, they can always point to Carmichael, and say “what about him? He didn’t have to stand down.”
          This is NOT about the SNP. It’s about the electorate v. the politicians. I despair.

          • Oldfatblokeish

            Well, in your despair, consider this, as a member of the constituency of Orkney, the only people I see agitating now are on behalf of SNP. As said member of the constituency, I have seen no benefit from having SNP as the scottish government, in fact the reverse. It is cheaper to go for a weeks holiday abroad than travel to and from these Isles. Oh wait, what about the RET, no that was introduced only for the Western Isles as a trial (and then extended, ONLY for the Western Isles), funny that isnt it, that the Western Isles returned a SNP MSP. ( in your despair, that was sarcasm)

          • LG

            I’m sorry the SG haven’t organised things better for you. I’m sure they’ll try harder in the future.

            But what has any of that got to do with the ethical issue over Carmichael lying to get elected? Or indeed, why would the ethical issue change depending who is calling for him to resign? I can understand why the SNP in the constituency are upset. Clearly, they might have won if the facts had been known before the election. So they will feel the most shafted by Carmichael’s lying. They also have the most to gain by removing him. None of which makes any difference to the fact that he SHOULD resign. He has no shame.

          • Oldfatblokeish

            And lo, the wheel turns and the circle is once more complete,
            Ok lets spell it out LG as you are clearly a Scottish Nazi Party affiliate.

            All I hear is “the people of Orkney and Shetland”
            represented by the “Yes” campaign which is merely the SNP in another guise, just more false misrepresentation by a party whose own duplicitous nature and scurrilous conduct is well known and clearly documented.

            AC allowed the release of a memo he believed to be factual
            at the time. The Cabinet Office’s own investigation of the author revealed, “Senior officials who have worked with
            him say that he is reliable and has no history of inaccurate reporting,impropriety or security lapses. The Cabinet Secretary has concluded that there is no reason to doubt that he recorded accurately what he thought he
            had heard. There is no evidence of any political motivation or “dirty tricks” Based on the source and something he probably believed to be true at the time, he was wrong to stoop and indulge in the machinations of the rest of the political brigade. Admittedly he was wrong to deny knowledge of this, however the revelation was not against
            someone who was even standing in the general election, therefore had no real bearing in the local election.

            As for the £1.4 million spent on the investigation beggars belief, when it was known from the out start, the Scottish office was the source of the leak. How that was allowed to run to such a level unchecked is more worthy of investigation.

            I mentioned the Ret as just one example of the duplicitous
            nature of the current SG, you don’t vote for us, we don’t give you anything, your trite response was “I’m sorry the SG haven’t organised things better for you. I’m sure they’ll try harder in the future.” Clearly you do not reside here and
            I am sure that the people of Orkney and Shetland will mention you when dealing next with the SG. The RET affects family being able to visit more often than once a
            year, families being able to travel to visit members in hospital in Aberdeen and Inverness, students/schools/clubs being able to afford to travel to competitions, museum’s etc. Tourism is one of the Islands largest sources of external income and by lowering the cost of travel in favour Western Isles, (who, may I labour the point, returned SNP MSP) directly impacted the Northern Isles. Cost of delivery of items from the mainland are artificially inflated thereby raising the cost of living here.

            So I and the people of the Northern isles thank you for your
            concern on our behalf, you sanctimonious little prick, if you let me know your collar size, we can order your shirt, black or brown?

          • Oldfatblokeish

            So I guess for me the context is, I would rather have someone beholden to us and determined to put right a wrong, who will work harder on our behalf, than someone who just wants to add to the “happy clappy club” and wants to “nut and stick it to the English”

          • LG

            “….you are clearly a Scottish Nazi Party affiliate.” Sorry, no, I voted LibDem last election.

            “….you sanctimonious little prick, if you let me know your collar size, we can order your shirt, black or brown?

            You know you’ve lost the argument when you descend to this sort of thing. I thought it was only the SNP who were bullying and abusive? You clearly have some sort of axe to grind which is blinding you to any sort of balance. All you’ve got left is rant.

          • Oldfatblokeish

            Actually LG, your right on that, it was uncalled for, uncouth and extremely oafish and I both withdraw and apologize unreservedly for the remark.

          • LG

            I accept your apology, but I suggest you may wish to apologise to the people of Orkney and Shetland and perhaps consider your position……..?

          • Oldfatblokeish

            Nope, I have nothing to apologize to them for and my position remains unchanged.

          • Oldfatblokeish

            Oh and just to back up the impartiality (not) of the YES campaign, http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/scottish-politics/snp-spent-825k-bailing-out-yes-scotland-after-indyref.127556332

            As I said, risible moral procrastination.

          • AtMyDeskToday

            I reckon that vulgar post says more about you than anyone else.

          • Oldfatblokeish

            Annnd the next Troll please.

          • Oldfatblokeish

            http://www.scotsman.com/news/uk/snp-postpones-ffa-push-in-battle-for-smith-plus-1-3788372

            During the election Sturgeon spoke long and hard about FFA for Scotland ,
            ridiculed anyone who questioned the feasibility of it – would not
            listen when she was told the deep black financial hole it would create. Everybody was wrong but her and her advisors.
            She insisted FFA would go ahead immediately if there was a large number of SNP , MP’S returned to Westminster.

            Now this plan has been ditched, did she lie to the electorate, I am sure many people voted SNP for this reason, more devolved powers to Holyrood is what they were promised.
            Should Sturgeon be asked to resign.

          • LG

            Are you still banging on? Give it a break.

          • The_greyhound

            You can’t answer the point though, can you?

            Sturgeon lied about FFA (and plenty else) – where’s your indignation at that?

          • Oldfatblokeish

            Annnd there we go…..

        • LG

          BTW, Carmichael’s transgression was not the leaking of the memo per se, it was lying about it until just after he had scraped in at the election. He was happy to see a very expensive inquiry proceed, at public expense, because he knew he would be safely over the election before the election took place. I consider that’s worse than a few pairs of tartan trousers claimed on expenses tbh.

          It’s outrageous that there’s no penalty for this. I’m not an SNP voter, but I despair at the knee jerk reaction from anti-SNP zealots commenting here.

          • Simon de Lancey

            We don’t know how expensive the inquiry was – the £1.4 million figure is pure fiction and originated with the SNP.

          • LG

            Even if it was only £50, so what? How does that change things? It’s the misleading of the electorate that is the issue.

            If he had admitted all this prior to the election, there would be little to get excited about. It’s the fact that he cynically waited to ‘fess up until after the election.

    • abystander

      “in terms of the debate”

      Salmond said advice had been given “in terms of the debate”

      But just ignore what he said in the same sentence because it doesn’t suit your purpose.

  • LG

    The people defending Carmichael because they have an anti-SNP angle are doing us no favours. This is not about the SNP, it’s about the electorate’s right to be respected and not treated as gullible fools by the politicians. Go after Salmond AND Carmichael FFS.

  • David McDowell

    Wonderful to see how rattled the Unionist press is about Carmichael’s court case.
    Pages and pages of verbal diarrhoea about Sturgeon and Salmond!
    You just don’t get it do you, Toby? The more “SNP bad” bull you excrete, the worse things get for corrupt unionist politicians in Scotland. Please keep writing!

    • The_greyhound

      Is “corrupt” like the corruption we saw with MPs’ expenses?

      Would you like me to post the links to the thieving of Stewart Hosie, Alex salmond, Angus MacNeil, and Angus Robertson, all SNP MPs mired in the expenses scandal?

      It’s just that the corrupt lying SNP is very happy to sling the mud, but when it’s returned you wee nats sit whingeing and whining that anyone should expose them for what they are. Which is, of course, corrupt liars, and thieves.

  • Michael Johnston – Shetland

    This article is absolutely on the button. About time someone spelt out the truth of SNP behaviour.

  • peter_dtm

    and

    didn’t Sturgeon DENY (lie) about ever having said anything to the French Ambassador ?

    pot – kettle –

    • LG

      No

      • peter_dtm

        Actually a rhetorical question.
        Following the initial breaking of the story the SNP/Sturgeon robustly denied ever saying anything of the sort to the French Ambasador.
        The denials continued until the Civil Service confirmed the meeting notes were an accurate transcription of what was said.
        So, Sturgeon (unsurprisingly) gets all het up about something she does as well ? Then tries to distract everyone from not only the origins of the story, but also the fact that she initially lied in her response.

        • LG

          Yes, rhetorical, as in completely made up. The inquiry didn’t confirm the notes were an accurate transcription of what was said. Read the report.

        • AtMyDeskToday

          “the Civil Service confirmed the meeting notes were an accurate transcription of what was said.”

          As I recall the report said that the civil servant who had written the memo was well respected by his managers and colleagues so therefor it must be true. Somewhat of a large assumption. Or simply a Tory lie?

        • abystander

          How can someone who was not at a meeting confirm what was said at that meeting?

  • david o’brien

    Are you going to school in the summer Toby

  • The_greyhound

    If I have understood the SNP trolls here (it’s a little difficult to be sure, it’s their third team, and it shows) apparently it’s OK for salmond to lie, because he is, after all, merely a bloated delusional liar. But we should expect higher standards from Liberal Democrats. Since no one would expect lower standards than the SNP, they have a very slight point.

    But it’s not clear that Carmchael has committed any offence, and he did a public service by exposing the duplicity, hypocrisy and treachery of sturgeon. So this is merely another tale of the ranting intolerance of the nationalists, and their deep hatred of freedom of speech.

    • ChuckieStane

      Neil,
      If Carmichael did not commit an offence why did he voluntarily forgo his £75,000 minsterial serverance pay?

  • global city

    The biggest deception that SNP have undertaken is to mask their selling out to the EU, a sovereignty sapping project, but one based on bribing local elites mouths with gold.

  • misomiso

    Ah Tobes, against Passion Reason is always defeated.

  • Roger Hudson

    Nonsense! We Tories are by far and away more dishonest than the SNP or anyone else for that matter.

  • AtMyDeskToday

    Another in the long tradition of click-count articles from this scurrilous “magazine” (I’m being very generous there). Expressly designed to bring out the malignant Mr Angry Of England and the equally malignant Mr It’s Not Fair That We Lost of Scotland.
    Yawn!

  • paul

    Cameron & Sturgeon having done a number on the Labour Party have both successfully split the Union beyond repair they both sacrificed the UK for their own political gain – DESPICABLE PAIR !!!

    • john

      Wonderful pair!

  • Barba Rossa

    Another Day.. Another Attempted Smear on the SNP….so whats new?

  • SNP “AJOCKALYPSE”

    ha…..ha……. This has got to be the biggest pile of pish that I’ve ever seen from someone purporting to be be a journalist……. From start to finish, complete and utter pish.

    The pathetic britnat unionist press is often laughable, but this is in a different league.

    Keep up the anti-SNP / anti-Scottish “articles” Speccie……… You’re just encouraging more and more of the people of Scotland to vote SNP…… Every little helps !

    SNP BAD…….. SNP BAD……….SNP BAD……….SNP BAD…….etc

    • njt55

      I take it you disagree with this article then?

  • Bonkim

    All is fair in love and politics!

  • abystander

    Carmichael is a proven liar and he and his unionist friends lied through their teeth to the Scottish people in the referendum campaign.

  • SNP “AJOCKALYPSE”

    Tomorrow’s SPECCIE EXCLUSIVE :

    “SNP REFUSE TO COMMENT ON REPORTS THAT THEY WOULD BOIL UP AND EAT YOUR CHILDREN GIVEN HALF A CHANCE”

    The SNP leadership today refused to deny that they would gladly eat children, and family pets, in an independent Scotland………

    • Booboo72

      Well that would clearly not be good. After all that is what Nats accuse Tories of. There won’t be anough youngsters or pets to go around… Back to hunting the foxes I say.

  • SNP “AJOCKALYPSE”

    The Speccie is the most dishonest MSM in Britain.

  • Abie Vee

    Because it was almost certainly an accurate account of what she said to the French ambassador.

    In “actual fact” it most certainly is not. The unnamed civil servant who wrote the memo was cleared by an internal civil service investigation which said, in typical mandarin-speak, that the memo was an accurate recording of the conversation. That is to say, as the civil servant thought it was! The actual parties to the conversation, Sturgeon and the French Chargé d’affaires both say it is incorrect.

    There is indeed legal advice out there concerning Scotland an the EU which suggests that entry could be effected by Article 59 allowing Scotland a relatively smooth and quick transition.

    Um, what “share” of oil production do you mean? Are you aware that there are two definitions? a geographical share and a share by population. I’ll leave you to figure out which share the English prefer to use.

    By the way, it isn’t just Salmond’s opinion that oil is “just a bonus”: during the referendum campaign the international credit-ratings agency Standard & Poors looked at the Scottish economy and liked what they saw. They saw, their own words, an educated workforce and a vibrant on-shore economy which would guarantee it S&P’s top credit rating. I’ll make that clear for you Tobe… that is to say, without North Sea oil! They also said that they had no concerns about Scotland being over-dependent on the sector.

    Of course Salmond’s figures were wrong; neither he nor anyone else foresaw Saudi Arabia collapsing the price by near 50%… it was simply undreamed of, unheard of; if anything on-going wars in the Middle East would be, by normal standards, expected to raise the price. UK Treasury forecasts were predicated on US$100 per barrel (even when the price was way above that).

    But hey, why argue about numbers? Don’t you understand that Independence is llareggub to do with the price of oil.

  • scotcanadien

    Toby Young. Another Metropollyannaland hack who hasn’t got a clue about ANYTHING let alone Scotland.

  • scotcanadien

    The MAIN reason Metropollyannaland hacks are hopping about like frogs on heat over this matter is because THEY are supposed to tell what should be done about liars like Carmichael. You dear reader and other common folk should remember your place. They don’t like it when the proles take matters into their own hands.

  • davidofkent

    Nicola Sturgeon is doing a splendid job of reminding us why we should keep voting Conservative and why we should give Scotland another referendum as soon as possible so that they can make the right decision this time. I think the characteristics that she shows all too plainly are smugness and self-importance, two characteristics that traditionally we English love least.

    • AtMyDeskToday

      “smugness and self-importance, two characteristics that traditionally we English love least.”

      Curious then that you regularly display them in abundance.

  • Terence Hale

    Hi,
    Would a normal person buy a life insurance from Mrs. Sturgeon or a second hand car from Mr. Salmond?

    • AtMyDeskToday

      Err, no, because they are not in that business. Would I respect any opinion of yours? Probably not, based on your present inane contribution.

  • Precambrian

    Be fair, dishonesty is not only rampant in the SNP.

  • Ian Lovell

    I wasn’t going to reply to this as just seems the usual hate filled anti snp tripe we have become used to seeing. However a few points seemed to not add up whilst reading this.

    The “lies” the snp said about the eu application was well publicised well before the referendum so people who went and put an X next to their yes or no box already knew this was the case. Can the people who voted for Carmichael say the same?

    Salmond spend £20k of tax payers money to cover this up. Do you actually know their was £1.4m spent from tax payers money to discover it was actually Carmichael who leaked the falsified meno?

    Now you say the snp are the most dishonest party.

    Didn’t the better together parties tell the people of Scotland that oil was running out?

    Did they also not tell the people of Scotland that if faslane closed their would be thousands of jobs lost when mod actually confirmed it would be more like 250 jobs?

    Also did they not actually phone vulnerable people of Scotland to tell them they would lose their pensions if Scotland got independence even though that is 100% a lie?

    Now the things that unionists seem to not understand is that for every negative you can say about snp and it’s members we could give list ten things.

    Even on the day of the general election Davidson tweeted about burly blokes intimidating voters outside a polling station. Did she retract that statement when both the police and the council posted up that was lies?

    The lies about currency? You mean that we would use the pound? Please explain how that’s a lie? Salmond explained we would use it with or without a union agreement and even Darling himself admitted that was possible.
    What about the lies though from better together saying their would be no currency union? The bank of England actually came out and said they would consider an agreement for a currency union.

    The price of oil was lied about? Even though these figures came from unbiased sources in fact one who then changed his opinion when he joined the better together campaign and as a reward was given the fracking rights.

    Or what about the supermarket who one week said shopping prices would remain the same but then next week tried to tell us it would be more expensive in an independent Scotland. Later revealed that this same supermarket would be used for the benefits card.

    And now for the one I really don’t like using as it’s just sick. What about the Westminster system who protect the guilty rather than the innocent? Thousands of cases being reported to police of child sexual abuse and an article I read yesterday from the police even cases of child murder being covered up.

    So after just this small selection you still think snp are the most dishonest party?

  • Alistair Carmichael, like the rest of the Purple and Blue Tories is a liar, how can one trust any word which comes from the mouth of a lying politician? Have we not had enough with Blair, Clegg, or many of the other so called representatives, whose deceitful patter has not just brought Parliament into complete disrepute but has also caused lives to be lost, our children to suffer appalling abuse and even betrayed our young in terms of educational opportunity. If the media are prepared to stand by all that and are not prepared to protest, then really what is the point of the media?

    Nicola Sturgeon is absolutely right to protest and we all should be protesting about the standards which Parliament sets. Standards which have fallen to the level of the sewer in recent times Of course we could all expect the press to rush into the defence of the lying and deceitful and protect their interests, but when it comes to the poor, or the unemployed, they are described as scum. What a two faced, wretched, society of double standards we have turned into.

    The truth is scorned when it comes to Mp’s, Parliament or those with high incomes, Whilst the poor face a barage of condemnation and abuse. The hypocrisy and double standards of our media is stomach churning. Indeed, in recent years the media has become nothing more than the parasites who feed off the blood of the sewer rat. –

  • Tim Morrison

    Toby has of course missed the point.
    Sturgeon can call on AC to resign but cannot make him go. The only power that
    can do that is the electoral court, hardly a kangaroo one, that will decide if his conduct, not in the General Election, but here, in Orkney and Shetland was appropriate – that is now a question for judges and we look forward to hearing the result.

    I am in a position to comment, though not on the merits of the case, because I an
    one of the four people whose name is on the paper work. We brought it because we accept Alistair Carmichael’s apology and think that the appropriate place to
    express that is in the ballot box right now.

    Over 3000 people have raised the funds to help us begin the case. Their generosity enables us to exercise our democratic rights. I would have thought that kind of grass roots activity would be the kind of thing that Toby would support.. This is not a campaign support byeither the local or national SNP. It is a few people and our mates who want tosee political change. I am sure most people here would disagree with our politics, but isn’t this the kind of citizen action that brings back faith inwhat people can achieve.

    You can find out more about us at the ‘People Versus Carmichael’ the campaign site.. We are very close to reaching our target and I am confident that the commitment to justice of Spectator readers will mean that
    many will want to contribute.

  • dodewalker

    The story is not going away and it is only right that the matter is being investigated by the proper person to investigate Alistair Carmichael MP and his behaviour in the weeks leading up to the 2015 General Election.
    Someone like Alistair Carmichael who was a Procurator Fiscal Depute clearly understands that honesty is the best policy and that he was dishonest from the off.
    I doubt he will have any need of the assistance of Sir Malcolm Bruce as a character
    witness. Obviously the least said by that gentleman on honesty or the lack of the better.

  • Steve Larson

    Let Carmichael stay, his refusal to go is destroying the Lib Dems in Scotland.

  • caledon

    Don’t expect much from this clown but he actually has the audacity to say the content of the memo was probably true when even the people who were involved admitted they’d made it up. No smoke without fire is presumably his reasoning. It was a bare-faced attempt to manipulate the result of the GE by smearing the First Minister. Carmichael is now trying to hold on in the hope that the news will be forgotten, turning a sneaky trick into a much more important incident.

  • brilliant

Close