View Full Version : Did Alex Salmond tell lies?
Nicola Sturgeon has just admitted that the Scottish government did not seek legal advise on Scotland's EU membership after independence. Yet Alex Salmond said in an interview with Andrew Neil that they had. Then Alex Salmond went to court to prevent them finding out that he lied.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1pt-zOnU9c
John Little
23-Oct-12, 16:44
Does the SNP making it up as they go along surprise you?
It is possible that he did not 'lie'.
He simply thought that it should be so, and so it was.
Par for the course.
weezer 316
23-Oct-12, 17:32
It appears to. To be honest I dont expect the first minister to know everything but when its concerning one of the main planks of the constitutional cahnge he is driving them he really must be aware of the facts surrounding it and the validity of their position......
Of course its possible he knew all along and was telling a pack of lies.....which would make the court action look almost dishonest.
Of course its possible he knew all along and was telling a pack of lies.....which would make the court action look almost dishonest.
If he did lie and used tapayers money to cover his tracks then he should pay the money back at the very least.
weezer 316
23-Oct-12, 18:05
Listen I wont jump on him until I see the full story, but if he lied and then used taxpayers money to cover it up, or try to, then he should resign. If someone should go for calling someone a pleb then he should go for that. He was just having a go the other day about Londons snotty mob too (less desirable than Edinburgh's snooty mob apparently). I would rather have a snooty mob than someone who has potentially could have lied about something that could sell the entire country he professes to love right up the swanny!
I bet he is on his way to Holyrood to expain himself right now.
Of course he lied
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QH5FRvEV3SQ
John Little
23-Oct-12, 19:40
Does anyone know if you can buy red herrings in Lybster?
Hi,
I just hope that the opposition can get together and make the most of this situation which IMHO again exposes Ecks conviction to push thro independence at any cost.
C
morvenview
23-Oct-12, 20:44
He is a politition so of course he lied!
Just wondering how the SNP thought and assured us that membership of the EU was automatic if they hadn't even sought legal advice?? :eek:
He is a politition so of course he couldn't possibly ever lie, we are merely all uneducated plebs without any ability to possibly understand complex matters such as accession to the EU! Fixed it! :Razz
John Little
23-Oct-12, 22:02
Fixed it! :RazzNo you ain't! ;)
The promulgation of terminological inexactitudes in order to obfuscate a situation or factual purview is liable to cause recto-dental incursions of an unreconstructibly fierce nature in the area of the posterior.
(If you tell lies they come back to bite you in the bum).
If the thistle fits, thistle do....
Well we know how these things work now don't we kiddies? I give Alex about 6 weeks before he resigns as leader of the SNP and First Minister. Who knows what will happen then? I suspect we have just seen the wheels come off.
What he actually said was "we have, yes, in terms of the debate"
As for Nicola Sturgeon well this is how the Scotsman reported it ..... "Unveiling the Scottish Government’s referendum consultation, Ms Sturgeon told MSPs: “The Scottish Government has previously cited opinions from a number of eminent legal authorities, past and present, in support of its view that an independent Scotland will continue in its membership of the European Union, but has not sought specific legal advice.”She then said that since the Edinburgh Agreement on the referendum had now been signed, the Scottish Government would seek specific legal advice on EU membership."
It appears that general advice has been sought on the possibility of Scotland staying in the EU and now we have a signed agreement then specific advice about the mechanics of Scotland remaining in the EU can be discussed. i am not sure why this has led to Alex Salmond being branded a liar.
The cries of liar liar your pants are on fire are a bit hysterical in the true sense of the word. The fact that the SNP has refused to reveal their legal advice has always struck me as a bit daft but then I read this http://www.thecourier.co.uk/News/Politics/article/19176/uk-government-accused-of-hypocrisy-for-refusing-to-release-legal-advice-on-independence-and-the-eu.html#.UIe-SGW8za0.facebook and ...well it does seems like they are all doing the same.
weezer 316
24-Oct-12, 16:13
Squidge please, your not a fool...."In terms of the debate." What exaclty can that mean? I, along with everyone else it seems, took it in the context in which the question was asken, namely will Scotland be an EU member upon Independence. What else can it possibly refer to?
He lied. If he deliberately mislead people on what is an extremely serious constitutional matter then he should do. If he was simply going on what he was told the Nicole Sturgeon should go.
Now if that is the case, which it appears to be, do you not agree?
I agree weezer, it does look more than ever that he mislead us all. I think his resignation may now be the only option open for him if he is to save the Yes campaign. The question of whether Scotland stays in the EU is a specific issue which requires a specific answer. You can't give general advice to that when you need to be clear to the Scottish people.
What he actually said was...................
Yes, the begining of the end! :lol:
I think his resignation may now be the only option open for him if he is to save the Yes campaign.
I don't think so, I think that, without his political ability, the YES campaign would be hit a harder blow.
Between this and his 2 MSP's quitting the party over NATO, it's been a bad week for the SNP.
rob murray
24-Oct-12, 17:12
What he actually said was "we have, yes, in terms of the debate"
As for Nicola Sturgeon well this is how the Scotsman reported it ..... "Unveiling the Scottish Government’s referendum consultation, Ms Sturgeon told MSPs: “The Scottish Government has previously cited opinions from a number of eminent legal authorities, past and present, in support of its view that an independent Scotland will continue in its membership of the European Union, but has not sought specific legal advice.”She then said that since the Edinburgh Agreement on the referendum had now been signed, the Scottish Government would seek specific legal advice on EU membership."
It appears that general advice has been sought on the possibility of Scotland staying in the EU and now we have a signed agreement then specific advice about the mechanics of Scotland remaining in the EU can be discussed. i am not sure why this has led to Alex Salmond being branded a liar.
The cries of liar liar your pants are on fire are a bit hysterical in the true sense of the word. The fact that the SNP has refused to reveal their legal advice has always struck me as a bit daft but then I read this http://www.thecourier.co.uk/News/Politics/article/19176/uk-government-accused-of-hypocrisy-for-refusing-to-release-legal-advice-on-independence-and-the-eu.html#.UIe-SGW8za0.facebook and ...well it does seems like they are all doing the same.
Smoke and mirrors, we can all see that, just as renewables is...smoke and mirrors : not an outright liar more a person who gilds the lily !
Squidge please, your not a fool...."In terms of the debate." What exaclty can that mean? I, along with everyone else it seems, took it in the context in which the question was asken, namely will Scotland be an EU member upon Independence. What else can it possibly refer to?
He lied. If he deliberately mislead people on what is an extremely serious constitutional matter then he should do. If he was simply going on what he was told the Nicole Sturgeon should go.
Now if that is the case, which it appears to be, do you not agree?
"In terms of the debate" means in context. Now funnily enough, in context is something which is ignored by all those on here who cherry pick only the bits of posts they can quote to twist in order to produce ad hominem responses...so I guess they wouldn't understand the concept.
In this case, ie the Andrew Neil interview which prompted the OP.....and which incidentally dates from last March, not last week....is certainly a great example of a Unionist interrupting somebody he opposes in order to stop him finishing his remarks. Bias...most definitely yes....but not a great deal different to any BBC handling of anything to do with Scottish Independence.
Did none of you ever wonder why the Nulabour war cry has never been a demand to release the legal advice received regarding the EU membership...but a demand to reveal whether the Scottish Government holds legal advice about an independent Scotland’s membership of the EU. The Nulabour Party certainly understood what "in terms of the debate" meant.....so how thick does that make all those who don't?
He may resign - he may not. I would doubt it actually.... if there were politicians of any calibre calling for his resignation then it might be different but there arent. What we have is Jackie Baillie shouting from the rooftops about bare faced lies when we have learned to take whatever she says as gospel NOT.... ( Blankets and Modern Apprenticeships to name a couple) We have seen so much jumping up and down that its a bit rumpelstiltskin (That might be though becauseI have no time for Scottish Labour at the moment - having felt badly let down by them for a long time - there is however a conference for Labour voters for independence shortly and it will be interesting to see how that develops over the next few months. ) It all smacks of the tea party carry on and I lost the will to live over THAT debacle.
I think Rob is right - smoke and mirrors but I watched the Andrew Neil Interview and I thought that at the time. Im not really in agreement that the interview shows bias - I have seen some examples of that but i dont really think interruption is part of that. We shall see what happens in first ministers questions tomorrow and Ill be interested in that.
weezer 316
24-Oct-12, 18:48
"In terms of the debate" means in context. Now funnily enough, in context is something which is ignored by all those on here who cherry pick only the bits of posts they can quote to twist in order to produce ad hominem responses...so I guess they wouldn't understand the concept.
In this case, ie the Andrew Neil interview which prompted the OP.....and which incidentally dates from last March, not last week....is certainly a great example of a Unionist interrupting somebody he opposes in order to stop him finishing his remarks. Bias...most definitely yes....but not a great deal different to any BBC handling of anything to do with Scottish Independence.
Did none of you ever wonder why the Nulabour war cry has never been a demand to release the legal advice received regarding the EU membership...but a demand to reveal whether the Scottish Government holds legal advice about an independent Scotland’s membership of the EU. The Nulabour Party certainly understood what "in terms of the debate" meant.....so how thick does that make all those who don't?
Yet again i am speechless.
Can I ask a hypothetical question please? If david cameron killed someone, then Alex salmond killed someone afterwards, would you argue it is ok for Alex salmond to kill that person on the grounds that David Cameron did it?
weezer 316
24-Oct-12, 18:51
He may resign - he may not. I would doubt it actually.... if there were politicians of any calibre calling for his resignation then it might be different but there arent. What we have is Jackie Baillie shouting from the rooftops about bare faced lies when we have learned to take whatever she says as gospel NOT.... ( Blankets and Modern Apprenticeships to name a couple) We have seen so much jumping up and down that its a bit rumpelstiltskin (That might be though becauseI have no time for Scottish Labour at the moment - having felt badly let down by them for a long time - there is however a conference for Labour voters for independence shortly and it will be interesting to see how that develops over the next few months. ) It all smacks of the tea party carry on and I lost the will to live over THAT debacle.
I think Rob is right - smoke and mirrors but I watched the Andrew Neil Interview and I thought that at the time. Im not really in agreement that the interview shows bias - I have seen some examples of that but i dont really think interruption is part of that. We shall see what happens in first ministers questions tomorrow and Ill be interested in that.
MMMmm, I really dont think interruption was the cause if the issue. He did after all say legal advice has been saught.....and the debate refrenced was clearly Scotlands EU membership. And again I wouldnt judge his points on who is now having a go at them. he stands or falls on his own actions, not what Labour or havent done surely?
It really doesn't matter what clever or stupid people think. The media will keep bringing it up, it will grow arms and legs, don a pair of Nikes and off it will go.
tonkatojo
24-Oct-12, 20:46
It really doesn't matter what clever or stupid people think. The media will keep bringing it up, it will grow arms and legs, don a pair of Nikes and off it will go.
A bit like the Con party troubles eh LOL.:Razz
Yet again i am speechless.
Can I ask a hypothetical question please? If david cameron killed someone, then Alex salmond killed someone afterwards, would you argue it is ok for Alex salmond to kill that person on the grounds that David Cameron did it?
I wish speechless and you were compatible..but I fear they will never be that as long as you can open your mouth and let your belly rumble.
That hypothetical question is as stupid as all your other hypothetical questions. And I don't for one iota of a second think you will accept my response, any more than you have accepted, or even discussed, my responses to your other flights of fancy. But NO, I'd expect both to face a long prison sentence.
But out of interest....where have I said that what you claim Alex Salmond did was fine because some Unonist (and not specifically Cameron) did it first.
Get a grip, weezer and read posts IN CONTEXT, before you make a complete arse of yourself!
Either He lied or she lied...
Angel...
A bit like the Con party troubles eh LOL.:Razz
Precisely. And the BBCs and Ranger's and South Yorkshire Police and..............
And why were they not listening to the what was being said by Bruxelles and Strasbourg on the matter?
Alec Salmond has backed into a corner of his own making, whether it is serious enough for him to be pushed into resigning remains to be seen but there will be quite a few ready to give him a push methinks.
Ultimately, any legal advice is only a matter of opinion until battled out in court, especially as this could potentially be a test case (if it were ever to get that far). Basically it's a load of rowlocks whether he or she lied about it anyway!
Just another pointless diversion from the matters at hand.
neilsermk1
25-Oct-12, 12:19
Listen I wont jump on him until I see the full story, but if he lied and then used taxpayers money to cover it up, or try to, then he should resign. If someone should go for calling someone a pleb then he should go for that. He was just having a go the other day about Londons snotty mob too (less desirable than Edinburgh's snooty mob apparently). I would rather have a snooty mob than someone who has potentially could have lied about something that could sell the entire country he professes to love right up the swanny!
Salmond is treating the entire country as plebs, his arrogance knows no bounds
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.