Alex Salmond is still a hero

Tony Blair, Gordon Brown, Alistair Campbell and almost every member of the UK Parliament of 2003 are deeply complicit, forever marked, by the deaths of hundreds of thousands of women and children. They ‘did’ that, above. RAF pilots on their orders, did that.

David Cameron and Theresa May are likewise guilty of responsibility for mass deaths in Libya and Syria.

Alex Salmond, more than any other political leader in the UK, stood against those conflicts. He marched and spoke, in the heart of the Empire. He then attempted to have Tony Blair tried as the war criminal he surely is.

Before that, he was they key figure in taking the Scottish independence movement from nowhere to nearly there in 2014. Now, I know many others played a big part and I’m not generally happy with the idea of ‘great men making history’ but, objectively, I’m not sure we’d be anywhere near where we are today, without him.

Now:

He did wrong. Like so many other men who gain power, he took advantage of his situation. Maybe he should have apologised earlier and more fulsomely though, when some of your accusers were clearly encouraged by civil servants to turn trivia into substance, weakening the more genuine cases of two (?), his sense of injustice is understandable.

But, are we really comparing his sins with those above and suggesting that he, unlike say, Gordon Brown who funded the mass deaths, is not fit, though proven innocent of any crime, to be forgiven, rehabilitated, and to continue as a politician?

In 2015, speaking to the United States Council on Foreign Relations in Washington, DC, she, not on my behalf, said:

We would consider ourselves to be a key ally of the United States.’

Of the 2003 Iraq war, the invasion and what followed, she said astonishingly that it was (only):

‘the wrong direction.’ Feel free to swear. I just did.

https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2015/06/23/stur-j23.html

She has since had a grinning selfie with the war criminal Alistair Campbell and championed the utterly appalling war criminal and fake feminist, Hilary Clinton.

I’ve written at length about these issues before, if you need more convincing:

https://thoughtcontrolscotland.com/2019/01/23/do-we-need-to-talk-about-the-snp-leadership-now/

39 thoughts on “Alex Salmond is still a hero

    1. Alex
      Their is no doubt AS did wrong but only so in the social attitudes of today
      AS is old school and whilst imbued with
      Johnnie Walker Wisdom he behaved in a manner that not for once he considered harmful
      Never ever would he have considered his actions wrong, far less criminal and to which a good fair Jury found him not guilty
      Any who think otherwise have been sneakily snared by the Propaganda machine
      Of the MSM
      AS in a moment of clarity should realise such, take a big chunk of Humble pie then express his apologies to any who took offence as to his behaviour in a simplistic but honest and sincere manner
      And without any Qualification whatsoever
      End Off

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Premier O.
        “Johnnie Walker Wisdom he behaved in a manner that not for once he considered harmful
        Never ever would he have considered his actions wrong”

        So why did he apologise to one of the complainers?

        Liked by 1 person

        1. Clydebuilt
          Maybe he partook and overindulged with the
          Johnnie Walker on that occassion and realised that in that instance had broken his own pre set boundaries and therefore apologised to the individual concerned
          Lord only knows as it is purely a matter
          Between himself and the other person

          Like

      2. In an ideal world that would indeed be a good route to take.

        Sadly, we don’t live in an ideal world. Rather we live in one where any admission of any small degree of guilt or weaknesses would be pounced upon by -in AS’s case – the media, his enemies and many of his former allies. It would be inflated, twisted and used as ‘proof’ that he did everything of which he stood accused and more. There are already Indy supporters who cling to that point of view.
        Want proof of how a word like that can be held against him forever? I remind you of the phrase “Once in a generation.”

        Liked by 1 person

        1. Targaid
          It could all be done properly but privately by both AS and the person for which and to whom it happened
          With the only caveat that both issue a public statement saying a private apology given , received and accepted
          And both parties now consider the matter as settled and firmly closed
          No further correspondence whatsoever shall ever
          Be entered into upon this matter.

          Like

  1. Totally agree with all you have said John,all these people you mention should look themselves in the mirror and I mean them all and ask questions what have I done.I will still vote SNP for independence then everything is up for grabs.
    As for A Salmond he did wrong but no deaths on his conscience as you say.
    PS Maybe you should have mentioned the pressure the USA put on to convict al megrahi with a lot of evidence withheld by them.

    Liked by 2 people

  2. Sometimes people including senior political and other public figures read and believe the wrong reports they are misled , it happens to the best of us, that unfortunately is modern day media reporting , you cant always trust what you read see or hear, the internet has made it worse but has also made it better , if you take the time to look and search and evaluate but not everyone does.
    The quick soundbite works.
    The front page works.
    If only we had a truly reliable and neutral source of news that provided
    both sides ( or more sides if necessary ) of the story .

    I believe that Nicola Sturgeon is a caring person, a good person i dont think she is a warmonger.
    I believe Alex Salmond is a good person , a caring person , i dont think he is a rapist.

    Liked by 4 people

  3. NS is a woke virtue signaller. I wasn’t surprised by the excerpt where she states her loyalty to the US. She’s well and truly part of the global agenda. This makes me wonder about her real commitment to independence unlike Alex. This is why ‘they’ have tried to get rid of Alex amongst other reasons.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. I do believe that would like to leave the FM job to go to a big international appointment. Let’s hope she has not muddied her doorstep too much.

      Liked by 1 person

  4. I’m not here to moralise or cast judgement on the abuse allegations against AS, as I don’t have all the evidence based facts. I’m also not here to act as an apologist for AS, though I would point out that he was handsomely compensated for an internal inquiry into his conduct, that was deemed to be unlawful and “tainted by apparent bias”. He also walk free from a criminal trial, and was largely vindicated by the Fabiani inquiry.

    However, there certainly appears to be gross incompetence or malicious intent from those surrounding the FM, or perhaps a bit of both. Which ultimately reflects badly on the FM. If the SNP wishes to continue conducting its business along these lines, then it’s with heavy hart that I can no longer offer them my support, or vote for them. I could say more, but some things are best discussed in a more private setting.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. The alternative does not bare thinking about. If a BritNat party takes over the Scottish parliament, they will punish Scotland, privatise everything, from the the SNHS, to your water, and forget about renationalising Scotland’s rail service.
      Social care, education, health, environment, (say hi to fracking!) Business, economy, social security, energy, the English government will take a massive wrecking ball to it all and more.
      English Tory rule for the foreseeable, or a Scottish party that is not perfect, but might not frack your country to UKOK kingdom come, take your pick.
      The FM will not be there forever, but without the SNP, Scotland is another region of England, no sweeteners required for votes. Prisoner in your own country, fantastic.

      Liked by 2 people

  5. She has since had a grinning selfie with the war criminal Alistair Campbell

    AS pal David Davies?

    David Davis voted that the Government should use all means necessary to ensure the disarmament of Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction leading to the UK joining the US invasion of Iraq two days later.
    Show vote
    On 26 Feb 2003: David Davis voted against saying the case for military action against Iraq is as yet unproven
    Show vote
    On 26 Feb 2003: David Davis voted to endorse UN Security Council resolution 1441 giving Iraq a final opportunity to comply with its disarmament obligations.
    Show vote
    On 25 Nov 2002: David Davis voted against requiring the support of the UN Security Council and the support of a vote of MPs in the House of Commons before the commitment of UK forces to military action in Iraq.

    We’re not doing the Iraq war now.

    Surely you can’t compare AS failure to get TB with the positive achievements of NS.

    You are trying just like Boris to whip up admiration for past doubtful “glories?”

    Like

  6. She also said:
    ‘Do not think that the SNP and the Scottish government takes a markedly different position from the UK government on the vast majority of international issues. We don’t. … You will not find any great difference between our position and the position of the United Kingdom government.’

    Like

        1. Terence
          I can assure you that the £ will devalue rapidly in world currency markets
          When Scotland departs
          So a wise person would have a alternative to run from the £ to either your own currency and the most favourable would be the €
          But not before Scottish exporters took full advantage of the increased competitiveness it gains from a devalued £ to create a greater market share and expand in emerging markets,all strengthening their respective niches
          For which Scottish producers are extremely well equipped to do so

          Like

        2. He said a formal currency union with the rest of the UK was the best option, saying: “It’s Scotland’s pound and we are keeping it.”

          Like

  7. Good things about independence.

    1.-Self-government.
    2.-As a consequence of self-government, Scotland will never attack any other country.
    3.-
    4.-

    Like

  8. No one is perfect but being stitched up by British M15 agents takes the biscuit. Wolfe and Evans were paid £Million to do their UK biding. Wasting £Billions of public monies. Westminster unionists illegally killing millions of people. Getting away with it. To line their greedy pockets. An absolute disgrace beyond comprehension and redemption. Their crimes are multiple. The UK the most unequal country in the world.

    Iraq, Dunblane and Lockerbie kept secret for 100 years. The culprits will not be held to account.

    Nicola and Alex are the best leaders the SNP/Scotland have ever had. They were both proved innocent of any crime. Only a unionist pile on. They have saved lives in Scotland. Not destroyed them. Tried to help people have a better life. The band back together will help that continue. The best outcome.

    Leaders come and leaders go but Independence is most important. To make Scotland and the world a better place. That is most important. On balance more important than personalities. The better outcome.

    Sticks and stones will break bones. Names are less important.

    Vote SNP Alba if possible. Secret ballot.

    Liked by 1 person

  9. “I didn’t see the current First Minister in the crowd in Glasgow in 2003 protesting the imminent assault on Iraq but there were 100 000 so maybe she was there?”

    Is that an example of a journalistic device worthy of ….. The Herald?

    On 15 March 2003, SNP leader John Swinney was one of the platform speakers at the Iraq antiwar protest in Glasgow. From the official report of the Scottish Parliament from 13,March 2003 Nicola Sturgeon, from the opposition benches, said this two days before the protest (some extracts from a longer speech):

    “All round this country right now there is a sense of anxiety that does not recognise the division between devolved and reserved matters. It is based on a deep-seated unease about the motivation and justification for, and the legality of, a war against Iraq. In its first stage, that war will see 3,000 bombs and missiles rain down on an innocent Iraqi population.”

    “People are questioning the real motivation for waging war on Iraq, which is a broken country with a leader who is evil but contained, while North Korea flaunts its developing nuclear capability for all to see, and the tally of UN resolutions that have been breached by Israel without sanction exceeds 60. People doubt that there is justification for a war that is based on no clear or compelling evidence.

    ‘There is also the question of legality. Article 2 of the United Nations charter is unequivocal. It prohibits the use of force except in self-defence—which neither the US nor the UK can argue with any credibility—or with the specific authorisation of the United Nations Security Council. As we have already heard in today’s debate, even the ambassador of the United States to the United Nations admits that resolution 1441 is not a mandate for war. Even if the second resolution that is currently tabled at the Security Council was passed, it would not be a mandate for war.

    ‘War without a United Nations mandate will be illegal. It is incumbent on the First Minister, as Scotland’s leader, to say unequivocally that he would not back illegal action against Iraq. That is important because each of us as individual citizens must ask what it will mean for international law if the United Kingdom and the United State choose to ignore the United Nations just because they can.

    “We are probably only days from an illegal war and I say to the First Minister that there is nothing hypothetical about that. We are days from war and it might be too late to stop it, but each of us has an obligation to try. That obligation rests most heavily on those of us who are elected to speak for Scotland. So let us do that today; let all of us speak on behalf of the majority of people in Scotland who want peace not war, and who want international law and not the diktat of the United States. Let the Parliament unite and speak with one voice and let that voice say to Tony Blair, “Not in our name’.’

    But of course “I didn’t see the current First Minister in the crowd in Glasgow in 2003 protesting the imminent assault on Iraq but there were 100 000 so maybe she was there?”

    Liked by 3 people

    1. I was amongst that 100 000 (where I saw a number of people who were dyed-in-the wool Tories and diehard Labour supporters) who were angry and shocked at the UK Government decision. At the time, the leader of the SNP was John Swinney, who made a powerful speech on the day. I do not know if Nicola Sturgeon was there, but, I would be surprised if she had not been given Alex Salmond’s speech at Westminster, which had the Tories, ‘new’ Labour and the Westminster commentariat apoplectic.

      So, I agree with stewartb that this was an unworthy statement.

      Liked by 2 people

    2. ‘Glasgow anti-war march draws over 5,000’ : Source: Socialist Worker 25 March 2008

      ‘Over 5,000 people marched through Glasgow on Saturday (15 March 2008) to mark the fifth anniversary of the invasion of Iraq. Strong trade union and student contingents were joined by asylum seekers, peace campaigners and school students. There was also a good turn out from Scotland’s Muslim community.

      ‘Nicola Sturgeon, Scotland’s deputy first minister, spoke at the demonstration, telling marchers, “The war in Iraq was wrong, is wrong and always will be wrong.”

      ‘Adding that she was representing Scotland’s government, she issued a “clarion call” to end the war in Iraq and to bring the troops home, but also to ensure “those responsible for the war are brought to account”.’

      https://www.sacc.org.uk/news/2008/glasgow-anti-war-march-draws-over-5000

      Like

  10. How many years has the SNP had so far in government, and what have they achieved, what have they done in the few short years to start to repair the horrendous English governments’ damage to Scotland. That is my measurement of their worth and I want them to be able to carry on repairing the English government damage of their 300 year rule, and for an actual Scottish party to take Scotland forward to independence. A huge task, but, the alternative is… well, it hardly bares thinking about.

    Liked by 2 people

  11. Billions around the world protested the Iraqi war. An absolute abomination. A miscarriage of justice. Many in the US & UK were against it. The majority.

    Foreign policy and Defence is reserved. If Scotland had been Independent that could have stopped it. Voted against it. A massive reason for Independence. Control over Defence and Foreign policy. So people can live in peace. Without Westminster illegal interference.

    Scotland has important connections to the US. 10% of the US are of Scottish/Irish descent because of Westminster appalling policies. Enough to swing an election. The Clearance and starvation of Westminster unionism. 1928 Universal Suffrage. Devolution 2000. Iraq War 2003 to 2013. The country is still in turmoil because of foreign interference.

    Scotland has trade and family links to the US. Many American visitors. Scottish invention and discovery shaped the modern world. Led on to the internet to join the world.

    Like

  12. Well said, John. Let he or she who is without sin etc…

    SNP/Alba in the north east of Scotland. SNP/SNP in the south of Scotland.

    Do your homework folks.

    Like

  13. This contribution is prompted by this: “Of the 2003 Iraq war, the invasion and what followed, she said astonishingly that it was (only): ‘the wrong direction.’ Feel free to swear. I just did.”

    (By the way, the source quoted viz. Steven James writing on the World Socialist Web Site is – to put it mildly – very, very far left field in his negative critiques of Scottish self-determination, the SNP, the Scottish Government, left wing supporters of Scottish independence (‘faux’ socialists), the British Labour Party etc., etc.!)

    The above selective quote comes from the FM’s appearance at the Council on Foreign Relations, Washington DC on 11 June, 2015 where she delivered a speech entitled “Assessing Scotland’s Future” before responding to many questions. (For a full transcript see: https://www.cfr.org/event/assessing-scotlands-future )

    Her speech focused on Scotland’s EU membership and the potential implications of the upcoming Brexit referendum for UK democracy as a multi-country state dominated, due to size, by England. It did not stray further into foreign policy until the Q&A session.

    In response to the chair the FM stated: “There are, you know, some differences in (inaudible) foreign policy between the Scottish government and the U.K. government. But there are many, many areas in which we share a view and—and which the—the Scottish government would be and are very supportive of the position of the U.K. government.”

    I would argue that the political leaders of many countries that we in Scotland might aspire to be similar to post independence – Norway, Denmark, Ireland, Iceland, Finland, New Zealand etc., etc. – then and now would be perfectly content to say exactly the same about their views relative to those of the UK – in general terms.

    The chair asked: “So for an American audience, … what’s important for us to understand about where are the similarities and where are the differences when it comes to relations with the United States?”

    The FM responded: ‘We would be and if Scotland had voted to be independent, this would have been absolutely the case. We would consider ourselves to be a key ally of the United States. We want to work constructively within the world community to make sure that we are playing our part and resolving some of the conflicts and some of the issues of challenge that we live with in the modern world. We would want to be a continuing member of the NATO Alliance to play our part in collective security.’

    Later on, again in response to the chair: ‘… very directly to United States audience that Scotland sees itself as your friend and your ally and somebody that wants to—to work with you across a whole range of—of ways and, in that respect, I hope the visit has been successful in getting that message across.’

    Again, candidly, would any of this be seen as exceptional coming from the prime minister of say Norway, Denmark, New Zealand etc. etc. – at a general level and in the context of brief answer to an audience member’s question? Of course, Scotland will need to have its national debate about NATO membership on another day.

    There followed a further series of questions, one of which resulted in the ‘offending’ response on Iraq:

    FM: ‘My—my party—my party wasn’t in government at this point in our recent history but my party took a very different view over the war in Iraq in the 2003 invasion of Iraq. We—we opposed that conflict, so there are some issues where we have taken a different view.’

    ‘There may well be issues in the future where we—we take a different view. But, you know, the war in Iraq and we were not alone in the international community in terms of countries that thought the invasion of Iraq and what followed (ph) on from that was the wrong direction to take. But we would always be and always—we will be a responsible voice in terms of these international issues.’

    So what is being selectively quoted – the offending ‘wrong direction’ – was not a carefully crafted policy position on the Iraq war. And it followed directly a clear statement of opposition to the Iraq war in front of a US foreign policy establishment audience. And then the FM immediately followed by this stating opposition to nuclear weapons.

    ‘The difference of opinion between the Scottish government and the United Kingdom government on defence …. My party does not support the nuclear deterrent and does not support the renewal of the Trident nuclear deterrent.’

    IMHO when one has this context, it hopefully helps in giving some useful perspective!

    Liked by 3 people

  14. John

    ‘We would consider ourselves to be a key ally of the United States.’

    Do you think The USA OR UK will allow Scotland to become independent if the FM had said otherwise.

    This article was just another attack on the First Minister. Unionists are doing a lot of this they don’t need any help

    Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.