Deputy Leader of UK calls Scots Extremists

reply to post by bigyin


I think that anyone would have to be really blinkered if they fail to admit that the first Thatcher term was exactly what the whole of the UK needed - the proverbial kick up the arse, so no argument from me on that.

I believe one of the benefits of independence is that, strangely, we would then have a more 'inclusive' politics as people could then vote for the party of their convictions without worrying about Westminster, London-centric domination. In an independent Scotland, the Conservative vote would certainly increase and would have some effect at Holyrood.

reply to post by YeshuaPiso


Too many of our political representatives (in both Scotland and Westminster) are qualified solicitors. (that fact alone skews the role of government in the UK on the whole). The political forum suits solicitors, the format and tactics employed being much the same used by any courtroom. These lawyer politicians’ first allegiance is to their profession not their constituents and it matters not which political party they choose to align themselves to.

The legal system in Scotland has retained its autonomy throughout the entire term of the Union...and it is a messy embarrassment.

With the SNP in charge we got the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission set up in 2007 to deal with complaints against solicitors. (The Law Society's bias toward solicitors being problematically overt) Despite receiving literally thousands of complaints each year only ONE solicitor in that time has faced criminal prosecution...and I recollect only one solicitor has appeared before the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (which has the power to remove the solicitors practicing certificate).

All of this under the watchful eye of MacAskill – (SNP) Justice Secretary – himself a solicitor. The current state of play is that we have a lawyer, governing the lawyers, disciplining the lawyers. ...who are criminally shafting their clients....and getting away with it....Scot free!

‘Scotland has one of the best justice systems in the world.’ – We know that because it keeps telling us so.

The SNP have time before their referendum to demonstrate to me (not persuade me) that things really will be better in Scotland.

They could start by sweeping away the little political dynasties extant in our local councils. It could punish nepotism rather than tolerate. It could change the holders of some key positions all over country who have held those positions for DECADES only because they do their masters' bidding. They could end the self governance of solicitors. They could end the master insurance policy that puts ALL Scottish solicitors in the pocket of the Insurers etc., etc., etc.

All this could easily be achieved prior to 2014. With the old boys (and girls) out of the way - maybe we'd stand a chance of having a decent country.

reply to post by christina-66


Christina

I actually share your distrust of solicitors - I served in the Metropolitan Police for a number of years - and particularly of legalese. I think your view of the 'club' is like any of the professions - they are often self-investigating and protective of each other.

Not sure what this is worth (or how it compares to the other parties) but of the 69 current SNP MSPs - seven studied for law degrees; so one in ten. The 'offenders' are Roderick Campbell, Roseanna Cunningham, Annabelle Ewing, Fergus Ewing, Christine Grahame, Kenny MacAskill and Nicola Sturgeon.

Interestingly there are more SNP MSPs with degrees in economics/accounting/mathematics disciplines than lawyers - perhaps that's why they understand the massaged figures pertaining to Scottish contributions to the Union better than the Unionist parties would like.

As for 'sweeping away' these insidious insiders in Scottish councils... that is a long-term project and will be done through more SNP councillors being elected starting in May. The prospect seems to be that even dyed-in-the-wool Labour Councils are going to fall to the Nationalists - my sources in Midlothian tell me they're a certainty to fall. The big prize, of course, is Glasgow City and even there worried conversations are taking place amongst Labour councillors. You may yet have your wish.

reply to post by YeshuaPiso


Our lawyers are different from other self governing professions. Their effluence, sorry influence, seeps well beyond the realm of the courtroom. (Every committee has legal advice) I was recently contacted by a MSM media documentary maker re corruption within Scotland’s legal establishment. He researched for at least a year and found he was spoiled for choice in regard to horror stories he could tell...but lo’...he was unable to get any broadcaster to tackle the subject (because of course they had to seek legal advice before they could give the go ahead – which was in the negative)....and around and around we go.

One particularly tacky example;

We really do try our best to overlook the personal indiscretions of Scotland's lawyers and judges and concentrate instead on their legal misconduct. However, the Neilson Scandal highlights grave judicial unaccountability that amounts to nothing short of corruption. The Scottish Taxpayer is getting sick and tired of gravy-train riders such as Neilson milking the system when caught behaving badly.

Neilson's world collapsed as the police raided the Glasgow brothel in which he was about to pay for kinky sex. Dressed only in a towel, the myopic sheriff bleated to cops about how he "only came in for a shave". A man of integrity would have resigned immediately, but Neilson chose instead to remain in his position - albeit suspended - collecting full pay and benefits, courtesy of the taxpayer, for a further 4 months.

Lords Gill and Cullen led the costly, protracted judicial investigation into Neilson's "fitness to practice". As this lengthy investigation drew to a close, Neilson suddenly resigned. The findings were conveniently binned and the Law Lords also conveniently failed to comment on Neilson milking the cash cow for a whole FOUR MONTHS; an astonishing omission given the expense of this avoidable judicial investigation (paid for by the taxpayer).

Hugh Neilson has never been asked to repay this money.

Source - Scotland Against Crooked Lawyers - Rogues Gallery

A lass even wrote a song about this nonsense. (She left this country in disgust and declares she will never return.)



Now when these matters are entering the realms of popular culture it really is becoming a problem we can no longer afford to ignore.

I hope my wish does come true and we do lose the dead wood and I pray that someone somewhere has the courage and the nouse to tackle our renegade little legal establishment. In the current SNP majority government there is nothing preventing that happening now. So I suppose what I’m really looking for is an omnipotent fairy genius.

reply to post by christina-66


Lord Cullen - my particular 'favourite'... I know some people involved on the inside of the Cullen Inquiry into Dunblane. Some of the stuff covered up there was scary and, again, to back up your points, largely concerned legal insiders.

Just saw on twitter that BBC Scotland is downsizing a bitlink

I would like to see the BBC disbanded in Scotland. The operation if it wants to continue could be privately financed but certainly the whole licence fee idiocy can be assigned to the dustbin.

Just more of Scotlands money going to London

reply to post by YeshuaPiso


Ach we do have a couple of good judges up there but they are seriously outnumbered by the bad ones. More dynastical tendencies....the Emslie's are a case in point. Lord Nigel Emslie...brother of Lord Kingarth ( Derek Emslie) who are both sitting in the Court of Session and who are both the sons of the former Lord President (and Baron) George Emslie (who, I understand, was an extremely good judge. Methinks his kiddie winkies are living well from his reputation.). What family on this Earth - let alone in a small country like ours, is so talented they can produce supreme court judges with every generation?

don't know the details of the Dunblane Inquiry but I know the Lockerbie case leaves much to be desired.

Previously any solicitor's involvement with this case would have been proudly touted to boost reputation. Now? They couldn't delete it from their cv's fast enough.

Megrahi had lodged his Grounds of Appeal. He had circa 6 weeks to lodge his Note of Argument (when it would become a public document) which would contain all the painful detail of what was wrong with his trial (particularly large sums of money being paid to the key shop-keeper witness - (to help jog his memory I presume.))

Anyhow - about three weeks after lodging his Grounds of Appeal he was awaaaay - long before his Note of Argument needed to be lodged.

I have just read the last 6 or so posts and have enjoyed reading them.
Some thoughtful posts and interesting reading.
The legal matters i have or had no knowledge off until now,something i will now be keeping an eye on.

Aye ye can add Willie McRae to the list of coverups.

Ah here we go with the 'false flag fear mongering' by the desparate London mafia

Terror ist Attacks

Originally posted by bigyin
Ah here we go with the 'false flag fear mongering' by the desparate London mafia

Terror ist Attacks

So you are saying it can't or wont happen? Maybe you should read this:-

en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by alldaylong


Did you even read the article ?

My money is on it won't happen.

Originally posted by bigyin
reply to post by alldaylong

 

Did you even read the article ?

My money is on it won't happen.

Yes. And who know's ?

reply to post by alldaylong


So your happy that the pro union side can spout utter nonsence and make up stories based on lies to further their cause.

As my link points out the guy who made these threats is well known and makes them all the time about anything he feels like.

If the pro union side can't come up with valid arguments and have to turn to this kind of thing to win it's pathetic.

Originally posted by bigyin
reply to post by alldaylong

 

So your happy that the pro union side can spout utter nonsence and make up stories based on lies to further their cause.

As my link points out the guy who made these threats is well known and makes them all the time about anything he feels like.

If the pro union side can't come up with valid arguments and have to turn to this kind of thing to win it's pathetic.

Are you one eyed? This idiot sent letter bombs. Made hoax bomb treats (Which is looked upon as being a serious crime) Or is this "Made Up" ?

www.guardian.co.uk...

reply to post by alldaylong


Ok I take it you think it's a fair tactic.

How sad.

Originally posted by bigyin
reply to post by alldaylong

 

Ok I take it you think it's a fair tactic.

How sad.

What you on about now?

reply to post by bigyin


With all due respect it's bit of an exaggeration and alarmist calling it a 'false flag by the London mafia' isn't it.

Yes, the Scottish Sunday Express definately appears to be guilty of exactly the same thing and has more of a responsibility for accuracy, unfortunately we've come to expect such irresponsible and innacurate reporting from publications like that but I've come to expect far better from you bigyin.

It does appear that this is the doings of a lone nutjob and his family who have a long history of making fantasy like threats to everyone connected with Scottish independance regardless of viewpoint.
To portray it as a potential terrorist threat somewhat akin to the P.I.R.A. etc is just ridiculous and fear mongering of the highest order.

ETA.

I'd be interested to know if or how this was reported in the English press.

I started my thread with the claim by Nick Clegg that Scot Nats were extremists and now the MSM are trying to chime in with the same claim based on one nutter who the authorities know about.

I suppose we can expect a lot more of this drivel. And yes it is a false flag, because its intended to sow the seed in the sheeple that being a Scot Nat supporter makes you associated to bombers.

We all know that is not true.

And the London mafia are behind it. They always have been. Whenever they want support north of the border they buy it with money or gongs.

It's impossible t have a staright forwrd straight discussion about the issues because the London controlled msm will spin it their way.

Originally posted by bigyin
I started my thread with the claim by Nick Clegg that Scot Nats were extremists and now the MSM are trying to chime in with the same claim based on one nutter who the authorities know about.

I suppose we can expect a lot more of this drivel. And yes it is a false flag, because its intended to sow the seed in the sheeple that being a Scot Nat supporter makes you associated to bombers.

We all know that is not true.

And the London mafia are behind it. They always have been. Whenever they want support north of the border they buy it with money or gongs.

It's impossible t have a staright forwrd straight discussion about the issues because the London controlled msm will spin it their way.

One nutter? Can you read? There are 4 people named in that article.