Lib Mp Carmichael, What A Cock

[Dibbles old paperboy]

So what is your point? I voted Conservative. In what way am I being hypocritical?

There is plenty of proof that the SNP are liars. Apart from anything else they told Scotland that if you vote for the SNP they would keep Cameron out of 10 Downing Street and they would vote down any Queen Speech he made. Tell me how did they get on with that? The SNP also promised they would demand Full Fiscal Autonomy - Sturgeon even went so far as to ask Jim Murphy if he would back it in one of the Leader debates - yet today amongst their list of demands for more powers Full Fiscal Autonomy is missing. Should Sturgeon resign? Indeed just to round up the set what about Alex Salmonds disgraceful attempt to smear David Mundell over the aforementioned leak?

The point is obvious, its ironic that you complain the nationalists are liars and will fight for nationalism at all costs when you can't acknowledge that the unionists have been shown to be liars, using dirty tricks to preserve the Union at all costs and this is a prime example of it.

[Dibbles old paperboy]

Did David Cameron use the leaked memo? How did that go? "You should all vote for Labour to ensure I don't get elected cause Nicola Sturgeon supports me?"

You're trying to hang the wrong person. The Tories were innocent and it's disgraceful that nationalists like you are trying to smear them with your dishonest campaign.

David Cameron has refused to comment several times on what Number 10 knew about the memo before it was leaked. Nowhere did I mention Cameron or the Tories in my previous posts on this thread.

[Stuart Dickson]

The point is obvious, its ironic that you complain the nationalists are liars and will fight for nationalism at all costs when you can't acknowledge that the unionists have been shown to be liars, using dirty tricks to preserve the Union at all costs and this is a prime example of it.

It wasn't the Unionists who inflated the predicted future oil price to the extent that your own advisers disagreed with you. It wasn't the Unionists who claimed to have taken legal advise on an Independent Scotlands admission into the EU, spending £hundreds of thousands of taxpayers money trying to block the Freedom of Information Request that eventually revealed that Salmond had lied and that no legal advise had been obtained. Salmond even said tonight on This Week that he lied saying that his lie wasn't on the scale of Andrew Carmichael's - something that he really should leave to the electorate.

You accuse Unionists of lying to preserve the Union at all costs but you fail to criticise the very same activity that was going on on your side. Look at the ministry of misinformation that is Wings Over Scotland FFS - one of the biggest propagandist machines since the days of Himmler and Der Sturmer.

I like the Nationalists new attempts at morality, but as I've said it would be nice if they'd checked themselves out in the mirror first.

Edited May 29, 2015 by Stuart Dickson

[Dibbles old paperboy]

So what is your point? I voted Conservative. In what way am I being hypocritical?

There is plenty of proof that the SNP are liars. Apart from anything else they told Scotland that if you vote for the SNP they would keep Cameron out of 10 Downing Street and they would vote down any Queen Speech he made. Tell me how did they get on with that? The SNP also promised they would demand Full Fiscal Autonomy - Sturgeon even went so far as to ask Jim Murphy if he would back it in one of the Leader debates - yet today amongst their list of demands for more powers Full Fiscal Autonomy is missing. Should Sturgeon resign? Indeed just to round up the set what about Alex Salmonds disgraceful attempt to smear David Mundell over the aforementioned leak?

I'm not going to go through your list of SNP 'lies' or broken pledges. Can you give me a verbatim quote from Nicola Sturgeon saying the SNP could, all on their own steam, keep Cameron out of 10 Downing Street? The SNP weren't expecting to win 50+ seats at the General Election and were well aware of the number of MPs required to win a UK election. Their main pledge was a vote for the SNP was a vote for a stronger voice for Scotland and during the campaign they said they would look to form alliances with other progressive parties to oppose austerity measures.

Looks like you are putting words into the SNP's mouth, and then trying to condemn them on the basis of not living up to their own words... which brings us back on topic to the kind of tactics Carmichael pulled with the leaked memo - smear Sturgeon as a liar who can't be trusted because of something she never said, whilst er, telling porkies yourself!

[Guest TPAFKATS]

David Cameron has refused to comment several times on what Number 10 knew about the memo before it was leaked. Nowhere did I mention Cameron or the Tories in my previous posts on this thread.

Mundell also managed to implicate himself further when asked during a live interview on Wed. Couldn't manage a straight yes/no denial.

I believe there's more to this as Carmichael in the safest lib seat in Scotland had nothing to gain personally from the leak.

[Stuart Dickson]

I'm not going to go through your list of SNP 'lies' or broken pledges. Can you give me a verbatim quote from Nicola Sturgeon saying the SNP could, all on their own steam, keep Cameron out of 10 Downing Street? The SNP weren't expecting to win 50+ seats at the General Election and were well aware of the number of MPs required to win a UK election. Their main pledge was a vote for the SNP was a vote for a stronger voice for Scotland and during the campaign they said they would look to form alliances with other progressive parties to oppose austerity measures.

Looks like you are putting words into the SNP's mouth, and then trying to condemn them on the basis of not living up to their own words... which brings us back on topic to the kind of tactics Carmichael pulled with the leaked memo - smear Sturgeon as a liar who can't be trusted because of something she never said, whilst er, telling porkies yourself!

I didn't say Sturgeon said it. I said "they" said it. As it happens it was Alex Salmond

Salmond told the New Statesman on 24 March that first the SNP would try to “lock Cameron out” of Downing Street by voting against a minority Conservative government Queen’s speech. “The Tories would have to straight effectively for a vote of confidence, usually the Queen’s speech, although it could be otherwise, and we’d be voting against. So if Labour joins us in that pledge, then that’s Cameron locked out.

“Then under the [Fixed-term] Parliament Act that Westminster parliament’s passed but nobody seems to have read, you’d then have a two-week period to form another government – and of course you want to form another government because this might be people’s only chance to form another government.

“One of Labour’s big fibs has been that the party with the most seats forms the government. No, the party that can command a majority in the House of Commons forms the government as Ramsay Macdonald did [in 1924] ... And the Parliament Act reinforced that, because it limits the ability of the incumbent to dictate an early election, and puts more power in the hands of parliament and indeed in the hands of the party,” claimed Salmond.

[Dibbles old paperboy]

I didn't say Sturgeon said it. I said "they" said it. As it happens it was Alex Salmond

Salmond told the New Statesman on 24 March that first the SNP would try to “lock Cameron out” of Downing Street by voting against a minority Conservative government Queen’s speech. “The Tories would have to straight effectively for a vote of confidence, usually the Queen’s speech, although it could be otherwise, and we’d be voting against. So if Labour joins us in that pledge, then that’s Cameron locked out.

“Then under the [Fixed-term] Parliament Act that Westminster parliament’s passed but nobody seems to have read, you’d then have a two-week period to form another government – and of course you want to form another government because this might be people’s only chance to form another government.

“One of Labour’s big fibs has been that the party with the most seats forms the government. No, the party that can command a majority in the House of Commons forms the government as Ramsay Macdonald did [in 1924] ... And the Parliament Act reinforced that, because it limits the ability of the incumbent to dictate an early election, and puts more power in the hands of parliament and indeed in the hands of the party,” claimed Salmond.

Surprisingly this quote from Salmond does not equal what you claimed it did... which was vote SNP and we will stop the Tories winning and stop their Queen's Speech getting passed. Salmond is specifically saying that if there was a hung parliament and the Tories were the party with the most seats and tried to run a minority government the SNP would vote against their Queen's Speech and encouraged Labour to join them in doing this.

[salmonbuddie]

Thank f**k you did that, Dob, saw it ages ago and it nearly - nearly - made me re-engage. But I am pished......

Edited May 29, 2015 by salmonbuddie

[Stuart Dickson]

Surprisingly this quote from Salmond does not equal what you claimed it did... which was vote SNP and we will stop the Tories winning and stop their Queen's Speech getting passed. Salmond is specifically saying that if there was a hung parliament and the Tories were the party with the most seats and tried to run a minority government the SNP would vote against their Queen's Speech and encouraged Labour to join them in doing this.

Fancy taking on any of the other SNP lies I listed or are you hoping they get kicked in the long grass?

Alex Salmond claimed last night on This Week that the skill in being a politician is in not lying - then when he was challenged by Andrew Neill over the EU legal advice Salmond lied further claiming that all governments have to deny they've had legal advice on any subject. Neill told him that was rubbish and that we knew that Blair took legal advice over the war in Iraq, at which point Salmond changed tack to claim that him lying to the Scottish Electorate over an Independent Scotlands legal position within the EU in the run up to the Independence Referendum was on a whole different scale to that of Alastair Carmichael and his attempt to smear Nicola Sturgeon by claiming she supported David Cameron. He's right of course, it's much, much worse and far more galling and the fact that Nationalists are so hypocritical that they haven't sacked Salmond over it speaks volumes when it comes to the somewhat ridiculous furore they are making over Carmichael.

Of course good old Kenny McAskill has been a bit more honest this week when he had a go at the SNP leadership for being hypocritical. He said that the party were right to challenge David Cameron over his plans to replace the Human Rights Act with a British Bill of Rights but that in doing so whilst opposing votes for prisoners they were being hypocritical in the extreme. He said he had been "as complicit as any" in making what he believed was the wrong decision, yet he claimed it was for the right reasons, to avoid the press from using it as a distraction to turn the Scottish Electorate away from Independence.

Writing in The National newspaper, he admitted that he was "complicit" in the "wrong" decision to oppose granting convicted prisoners the vote in last year's referendum on Scottish independence.

The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) has ruled that a blanket ban on prisoners voting is a breach of human rights.

Mr MacAskill said: "If it is to have credibility on the issue then the Scottish Government will have to change its own position on prisoner voting.

"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.

"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."

Edited May 30, 2015 by Stuart Dickson

[Stuart Dickson]

And the proven lying bigot still has his head in the sand when he's asked to simply provide proof of a claim he made.

Cmon tell the truth, you lied.

It will help with your therapy.

You aren't half boring.

[Stuart Dickson]

So where's the newspaper article regarding the oil price you claimed to have read?

If you provide it I'll never post on here again.

Are you willing to do the same and never post on this forum again if you can't provide any evidence of the newspaper article?

I can't even remember what you are talking about to be honest. There was a post where I got the price of Brent Crude mixed up. It was hardly a major issue. Besides I'm not a politician and I'm not the one with the hard on about trying to get liars to resign. I'm simply pointing out - like Kenny McAskill - that the SNP is a party full of hypocrites

[Stuart Dickson]

Mixed up with what, it certainly wasn't the truth?

If you were that mixed up, why did you repeat it even after being shown proof of its nonexistence?

That's where you got found out as a liar and not someone that just got mixed up.

Can't even remember it Cockles but I doubt that my figures on the oil prices were as wrong as the SNP got it in reality. Now talking about lies, as a nationalist, don't you think that Salmond should be sacked for his outrageous lies prior to the referendum as highlighted above or, in the world of the nationalist hypocrite is being sacked for lying something that only applies if you happen to be a Liberal Democrat?

Edited May 30, 2015 by Stuart Dickson

[Guest TPAFKATS]

So your in denial. A classic liars trait.

The SNP's oil price prediction was from the date of independence started. As has been explained to you several times.

But let's not get facts in the way of your lies.

Of course more relevant than the oil price is the tax take.

An independent Scotland would've had 100% of the oil tax to spend.

[Stuart Dickson]

Well seeing as it wasn't a lie like your now admitting that you did. Then no, our former first minister shouldn't be sacked.

Erm talking about denial.....even Alex Salmond admits it was a lie.

[FTOF]

The last sentence that I've quoted seems to be particularly apt, given fatty's recent posts of complete drivel.

The two cases are not remotely alike, and anyone telling you otherwise is a liar.

Edited May 30, 2015 by FTOF

[cambiebud]

So your in denial. A classic liars trait.

The SNP's oil price prediction was from the date of independence started. As has been explained to you several times.

But let's not get facts in the way of your lies.

Do you ever answer a straight question? I have tried several times to get you to answer the question, should the proven liar and only Liberal in the village, resign? Yes or No?

Edit- sorry cockles, that is aimed at Mr Dickson, not you

Edited May 30, 2015 by cambiebud

[Stuart Dickson]

I'll check what you said tomorrow. My good parents taught me not to trust a liar.

So just to clarify, you'll be campaigning for the person that said we'll be deficit free now to be sacked. Its obvious he lied and how many billions is that costing us.

Edit. In the meantime here's something that might put some lead in your pencil.

http://wingsoverscotland.com/playing-tricks-on-memory/

You clearly don't know what a lie is. George Osbourne didn't lie when he set the target of eliminating the deficit. He clearly made significant progress towards his goal despite the weakness of the European market and despite the continued budget busting being done by the SNP in Scotland so I guess at worst he failed. He certainly didn't lie.

Secondly it's a bit rich for someone who voted for a party who stood on a mandate of significantly increasing the deficit to call for the resignation for a man who didn't cut hard enough, fast enough.

Thirdly it's not me who displays double standards on here. I'm not calling for Carmichaels head for lying whilst looking the other way whilst your own party leaders do the same.

[Stuart Dickson]

Do you ever answer a straight question? I have tried several times to get you to answer the question, should the proven liar and only Liberal in the village, resign? Yes or No?

Edit- sorry cockles, that is aimed at Mr Dickson, not you

Oh FFS you are really thick aren't you. I have answered your question with Just about every single post I've made on this thread. Edited May 30, 2015 by Stuart Dickson

[cambiebud]

Oh FFS you are really thick aren't you. I have answered your question with Just about every single post I've made on this thread.

Haha. Brilliant. Called thick by you! That's made my day!

[Dibbles old paperboy]

Fancy taking on any of the other SNP lies I listed or are you hoping they get kicked in the long grass?

I already said earlier on I wasn't going to reply to your list of 'SNP lies', I'm sure even if I did it wouldn't change your mind. It's already quite clear from your posts that there is a difference between what Alex Salmond / the SNP has said and implied and what you interpret them as having said.

It also seems pointless prolonging the exchange with you when you seem to think there is a direct comparison with Salmond on legal advice about EU membership in the indyref debate and Carmichael's leak and cover up during the General Election. From memory Salmond was accused of lying during the campaign and a full debate was had on that point and an inquiry ordered and he was cleared... while Carmichael leaked a memo by someone who wasn't at a meeting and didn't hear a conversation and then claimed to quote Sturgeon adding the hardly reported caveat that bits of the original conversation may have been 'lost in conversation' and claimed Sturgeon was lying and the SNP couldn't be trusted and therefore no one should vote for them. Carmichael then claimed he knew nothing about the memo he had authorised to leak. After the election Carmichael then owned up after being found guilty by the official inquiry.

The similarities between the two examples are startling.

[Stuart Dickson]

I already said earlier on I wasn't going to reply to your list of 'SNP lies', I'm sure even if I did it wouldn't change your mind. It's already quite clear from your posts that there is a difference between what Alex Salmond / the SNP has said and implied and what you interpret them as having said.

It also seems pointless prolonging the exchange with you when you seem to think there is a direct comparison with Salmond on legal advice about EU membership in the indyref debate and Carmichael's leak and cover up during the General Election. From memory Salmond was accused of lying during the campaign and a full debate was had on that point and an inquiry ordered and he was cleared... while Carmichael leaked a memo by someone who wasn't at a meeting and didn't hear a conversation and then claimed to quote Sturgeon adding the hardly reported caveat that bits of the original conversation may have been 'lost in conversation' and claimed Sturgeon was lying and the SNP couldn't be trusted and therefore no one should vote for them. Carmichael then claimed he knew nothing about the memo he had authorised to leak. After the election Carmichael then owned up after being found guilty by the official inquiry.

The similarities between the two examples are startling.

Salmond was cleared on some technicality that he claimed he had legal advice on some documents regarding EU entry, which wasn't what he was claiming at the time, nor what his legal battle against the Freedom of Information Request suggested. On This Week Salmond clearly thought he had been clever but Neil drew out from him the admission that it was at best "economical with the truth" to which Salmond eventually said regardless it was on a different scale completely to Carmichael. It certainly was. Salmond was trying to mislead a nation into voting for Independence by claiming he had legal advice that suggested Scotland would simply take their place at the EU - when clearly he hadn't done. Carmichael just wanted us to believe that Nicola Sturgeon wanted David Cameron to win the election - something that was probably pretty accurate since, as has been openly admitted by nationalists on here, it suits their agenda.

[Dibbles old paperboy]

Salmond was cleared on some technicality that he claimed he had legal advice on some documents regarding EU entry, which wasn't what he was claiming at the time, nor what his legal battle against the Freedom of Information Request suggested. On This Week Salmond clearly thought he had been clever but Neil drew out from him the admission that it was at best "economical with the truth" to which Salmond eventually said regardless it was on a different scale completely to Carmichael. It certainly was. Salmond was trying to mislead a nation into voting for Independence by claiming he had legal advice that suggested Scotland would simply take their place at the EU - when clearly he hadn't done. Carmichael just wanted us to believe that Nicola Sturgeon wanted David Cameron to win the election - something that was probably pretty accurate since, as has been openly admitted by nationalists on here, it suits their agenda.

Even if what you said was the case (and it's not), in the Salmond example that issue became part of the debate in the indyref campaign and the issue was debated in Holyrood, covered in the media at the time and the results of the inquiry were published before people voted yes or no. There's a world of a difference between that situation which was out in the open and debated to death and Carmichael's leak and lie with the inquiry results being released 6 weeks after they found out who the source of the leak was and 2 weeks after everyone had voted, at which point only then does Carmichael offer his apology and own up to the leak and lying he had anything to do with it.

Why would it be the case that just because some SNP voters might think it helps their cause to have a Tory UK government with only 1 Tory MP in Scotland, that Nicola Sturgeon must have said she would prefer Cameron as PM over Milliband? Is it not equally as plausible that since she has almost nothing good to say about the Tories or austerity programme and couldn't ever imagine being in a coalition with them that she might actually have preferred Labour to have been the biggest party in a hung parliament and to form some sort of coalition with them?

Edited May 30, 2015 by Dibbles old paperboy

[Dibbles old paperboy]

Carmichael just wanted us to believe that Nicola Sturgeon wanted David Cameron to win the election - something that was probably pretty accurate since, as has been openly admitted by nationalists on here, it suits their agenda.

I'd like to believe you are genuinely thick enough to believe all Carmichael did was help us see the truth about Sturgeon's beliefs and it was all rather minor, harmless stuff. As this article shows the leaked dodgy memo was being used to smear the reputation and integrity of Sturgeon and to be used as evidence she and the SNP could not be trusted: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/generalelection/general-election-2015-parties-vie-to-turn-leaked-nicola-sturgeon-memo-to-their-advantage-10156443.html - i.e. you can't trust Sturgeon / the SNP here's proof of why and vote for another party instead. Only the Greens did not seek to make any election capital out of the leaked memo and called the situation correctly, ie. the reputation of the independence and integrity of the civil service was at stake rather than Sturgeon's integrity.

"With the FM effectively saying her party had been set up, and demanding to know who concocted the letter, that did not stop the leaders of the main parties taking full advantage. Ed Miliband described the leaked government memo as “damning”. He said the document revealed the SNP held different private opinions to what it was telling the Scottish electorate.

Jim Murphy, who since he became Scottish Labour leader has struggled to dent polling numbers which suggest Labour face a near wipe-out north of the border, said this was a “devastating revelation that exposes the uncomfortable truth behind the SNP’s general election campaign”. He added: “For months Nicola Sturgeon has been telling Scots she wants rid of David Cameron, yet behind closed doors … she admits she wants a Tory government.”

Ed Balls, Labour’s senior finance spokesman, tweeted that the document had revealed an “unholy alliance” and that if Scotland votes SNP, “Sturgeon gets the government she wants”. Only the Greens backed the SNP, saying the “reputation” of a politically independent civil service was at risk.

[Stuart Dickson]

So Mr Salmond never lied, Well that saved me from looking for it tomorrow.

So the attachment I added earlier was correct as well.

Glad we cleared that up.

No he did. He admitted as much on This Week. No surprise that you can't understand that though when you don't know what the difference is between a lie and a failure to achieve a target.

[Stuart Dickson]

Even if what you said was the case (and it's not), in the Salmond example that issue became part of the debate in the indyref campaign and the issue was debated in Holyrood, covered in the media at the time and the results of the inquiry were published before people voted yes or no. There's a world of a difference between that situation which was out in the open and debated to death and Carmichael's leak and lie with the inquiry results being released 6 weeks after they found out who the source of the leak was and 2 weeks after everyone had voted, at which point only then does Carmichael offer his apology and own up to the leak and lying he had anything to do with it.

Why would it be the case that just because some SNP voters might think it helps their cause to have a Tory UK government with only 1 Tory MP in Scotland, that Nicola Sturgeon must have said she would prefer Cameron as PM over Milliband? Is it not equally as plausible that since she has almost nothing good to say about the Tories or austerity programme and couldn't ever imagine being in a coalition with them that she might actually have preferred Labour to have been the biggest party in a hung parliament and to form some sort of coalition with them?

The point is that they both lied. To me Salmonds lie was the bigger whopper and he knew it.

Some of the biggest issues in the referendum centred around currency, EU Membership and NATO. On each one of those subjects Salmond made claims that were contradicted over and over again. He claimed that he had legal advice that suggested Scotland would get their seat at the EU without the need for a vote - it's transpired he didn't have any legal advice of that sort at all. He claimed that Mark Carney at the Bank of England had told him that he was happy for Scotland to use the pound as our national currency. Carney rejected Salmonds version of the events and indeed went on to warn Salmond that there was clear risks if Scotland was to attempt to use the pound as it's currency without reaching a deal with Westminster. And on NATO Salmond claimed that Scotland would be granted membership despite telling NATO to relocate the Trident bases out of Scotland, despite repeated statements from NATO members including a former NATO General Secretary warning that Scottish Indepedence could have a "cataclysmic" impact on the world, and despite a former NATO commander slamming the SNP White Paper plans for our forces as "amateurish and dangerous". Nationalists even peddled the lie that Independence would mean an end to Scotland being involved in "illegal wars" despite being members of NATO - completely disregarding the fact that NATO took action deemed to be illegal in Kosovo - something that Alex Salmond was very noisy about at the time. Somehow 45% of Scots still voted for Independence which would suggest that Salmonds whoppers were somehow believed. Even Salmond and Swinney's inflated figures based around Brent Crude Prices - shown since to have been utterly farcical - went against their OWN advisers figures. No doubt something it had to do to make it look like an Independent Scotland could balance the books.

All of those lies are much worse than some daft Liberal Democrat claiming that Nicola Sturgeon wanted David Cameron to win and you know it. After all if she wanted Ed Milliband to win she could just have told her voters to vote for Labour instead

Now for clarity, I'm not calling for anyone to resign or be sacked. I'm simply pointing out the utter hypocrisy of the Nationalist campaign to get Carmichael sacked. The revelation that all politicians lie won't have raised a single eyebrow in any home and its time the nationalists stopped making a c**t of themselves.

Edited May 30, 2015 by Stuart Dickson