Our Scotland - www.our-scotland.org

Rinty · Posted: Fri Mar 21, 2008 10:52 pm Post subject:

Point to one instance of me breaching sub judice rules.

You will have nothing to worry about then, but I will still have to pass your idea on to the crown office and to the defence team.

I thought you were not involved with the SSP Amber?

It wouldnt surprise me if the SSP had plants in Solidarity as that is the kind of orgainsation that they have sunk to become, it wouldnt do them much good though.

I will be passing this on to the SSP executive though and when I have your ID they should know that as well.

Rinty · Posted: Fri Mar 21, 2008 10:54 pm Post subject:

BTW Amber, I have now texted all of those who you have accused to let them know, they are contacting their lawyers re your comments on Monday.

Amber · Nationalist Joined: 28 Feb 2008 Posts: 168

Oooooooh. Scary.

Rinty · Posted: Sat Mar 22, 2008 9:26 am Post subject:

You might think this is a joke Amber, coming here with blatant lies and rumours, accusing Solidarity members of perjury and the SSP members of conspiracy. You said that it was lawyers and journalists that gave you the information and then changed that to SSp and Solidarity members.

Unfortunately this is very serious and you will have to back up your allegations now to clear this up.

You have still to tell us who you are, it is beneath cowardice to hide behind a pseudonym and accuse people of crimes.

But your allegations of a conspiracy involving the SSP and Crown Office simply has to be looked into now, even if it just to rule it out.

It is my opinion that you are probably just a liar or fantasist but this is far too serious to just walk away from.

If what you are saying is correct then it is crucial for a fair trial that the SSP members who have infiltrated Solidarity and conspired with material witnesses in conjunction with the crown office to interfere with due process is brought to the fore.

I know that youre assertion that more than one of the four solidarity members are dealing with the crown office and changing their story is nonsense.

But the suggestion that the crown office are even agreeing sentencing in advance due to a deal is in itself a serious ofence and something that simply must be followed up on.

You are probably a fool, but we now have to find out.

Thanks.

Aventinian · Posted: Sat Mar 22, 2008 11:28 am Post subject:

Ha, Internet law.

Oh yes, serious business indeed!
_________________
The resident pantomime villain.
'Socialists cry "Power to the people", and raise the clenched fist as they say it. We all know what they really mean—power over people, power to the State.'

youatethebabyjesus · No Longer a Wean Joined: 18 Mar 2008 Posts: 60

and these socialists expect people to vote for them. petty and childish, little wonder both parties are a joke. contacting lawyers over internet chat.jeeeeeezo.

Fedayn · Posted: Sat Mar 22, 2008 12:08 pm Post subject:

jimtrot · No Longer a Wean Joined: 16 May 2007 Posts: 62

Sorry for the delay in responding to your post on the 19th I thought about replying to it in detail then realised that it was just another example of the obscurantist diversionary tactics that are your forte.

Of course, after TS's use of the overdramatic "black arts" gibberish those attacked were bound to extend that metaphor in an ironic manner. After all if TS was happy to sling crap, he should expect to get splashed a bit.

As you pointed out, only in two of the articles is the phrase "cabal of witches" used and in both this is attributed to a source close to Sheridan. I don't know the identity of the source(s) but, since you would seem to be better placed to know, perhaps you would enlighten us.

As to my reference to "Juan" Kerr. Thank you for pointing out my error. This was a typo and what I intended to say was "going bald." The point I was trying to convey in a mildly humourous manner was that, given that Kerr now seems to be your partyette's main spokesperson on this issue, he must be tearing his hair out at some of your wilder flights of fancy.
_________________
Not Brit - 'S Albannach a tha mise.

The cause of Labour is the cause of Scotland and the cause of Scotland is the cause of Labour - apologies to James Connolly

Rinty · Posted: Wed Mar 26, 2008 10:03 am Post subject:

Jim, Hugh Kerr doesnt take part in this site so I dont see the need for you to bring him up in every post. Why would the suggestion that a Soldarity member is going bald or not be part of this conversation? I dont see the need to bring him up and wonder why you insist on trying over and over again. You win or lose the debates with the people on the forum, when you lose those debates it is pointless trying to win points from somoen who isnt here to defend himself, especially petty points about their hair or referring to them by nicknames.

You were gullible enough to fsll for the 'witches' spin so I dont see much point in anyone listening to your views on any of this. The obvious conclusion is that you will believe every and any story from the SSP re Tommy without question and even when it is pointed out to you that the story is made up, you still dont question the rest of the chinese whispers.

If, by revisionism, you mean revising the idea that tommy or his comrades called the SSP women witches or a cabal of witches is revised to the actual truth, which is that they didnt, then I am guilty.

You should really ask whoever told you about the 'witches' comments and question whatever else they told you. This sort of spin has been going on since before tommys resignation. My favourites are the one on Kevin W's blog where an anonymous poster under the name of Mary Whitehouse appeared telling what seemed like convincing story about two meetings held in the 80's in Militant about the sexual behaviour of Tommy. She had named the person who brought it up and the dates etc. Then it started to unravel when ex-Millies started to say that they didnt remember it, but fell apart when Douglas Blackstock, the person she claimed brought the complaints, appeared on the site to tell us that it didnt happen.

Then, on another blog, I read a poster sympathising with Catriona grant about the stressful time the poor wee sould had in court, as she had claimed Tommy asked disturbing questions about her personal life. I was able to stop that one by pointing out that it wasnt in the court transcript.

The trouble is that SSP members take this picture built up abut Tommy and frame everything else using those lies. Meanwhile the people who tell the lies about witches and tommys questioning in courts are not challenged by SSP members over this. I know, I used to be one of them.

But when it came out in court that the key players had a secret meeting before the EC where Tommy resigned, I started to see the whole thing in a different light. They claimed it was just a meeting to discuss tactics, but why didnt they tell the members of this before? One person told me that they were shocked at the EC when they heard the stories, but it turned out that the evidence in court was that this person was discussing it at Alans house a few days before the meeting.

Just before the court case Allan Green told the membership that the minutes contained no intimate details of tommy's personal life, yet we now know that this wasnt true.

In court Green said that the notes for the minutes were given to him by Barbara Scott, Scott told the court that she hadnt seen them since she gave them to Green to keep. Yet a few days after the court she 'found' them under her bed!

To me, at that stage, it became clear that the whole situation had been manipulated by a small group of people. I decided then that it mattered more to me that these people were stopped than whether or not tommy had a consensual sexual relationship years before.

It was difficult, but once I knew they had been lying to me and questioned everythng that they said and they simply couldnt answer my questions.

The SSP should be hoping that the eleven witnesses are not brought to court again. Their performance the last time cost them 90% of their vote, this time around it would be worse for them.

Rinty · Posted: Wed Mar 26, 2008 10:06 am Post subject:

News of the World to avoid charges in Solidarity case

Solidarity, Scotland's Socialist Movement, question the objectivity
of the Crown Office in matters relating to the Murdoch press
following the revelation that the newspaper will not face charges
over a clear breach of the law in reporting a Solidarity candidate
during last year's Scottish election campaign.

The News of the World published a story concerning Irene Lang, a
Solidarity council candidate in Glasgow, last April that breached
the 'Representation of the People Act 1982' by lying about Mrs Lang's
personal circumstances. The paper accused her of fraudelently being
on benefits claiming a back injury. There was no truth in the story
and as such, under the act, becomes a criminal offence during an
election campaign. Despite a clear breach of the law the Crown
Office have decided to drop the case. Mrs Lang said:

'When I took the evidence to the police station, the officer told me
that it was a clear and obvious breach of the law. Yet, for some
reason, it is deemed to not be 'in the public interest' to proceed
with a criminal investigation or prosecution. My reputation has been
damaged and there is no doubt this interfered with the election
campaign where local voters were led to believe that I was fraud.'

Solidarity Co-Convenor, Tommy Sheridan, who won a defamation case
against the same newspaper in 2005 added;

'Murdoch's media empire have been allowed to interfere with the
electoral process and deliberately spread lies about a Solidarity
candidate. Yet the authoritities allow them to get away with it
despite admitting that there is clear evidence that they broke the
law. The public need to know what is going on between the Crown
Office and News International. It is one law for them and one for
the rest of us.'

Mrs Lang's lawyer, Aamer Anwar, has written to the PF and the Lord
Advocate, seeking clarification on the decision.

Yesterday it was revealed in the Herald newspaper through a Freedom
of Information request that Lothian & Borders police had only
allocated 2 police officers and 800 hrs of police time to investigate
the bugging of Tommy Sheridan's car, a mere fraction of the resources
allocated in the investigation relating to Sheridan's victory over
the New of the World, which has has now topped a million pounds,
forty thousand police hours and 14 police officers for 18 months.

ENDS

Rinty · Posted: Wed Mar 26, 2008 1:57 pm Post subject:

Defend Tommy Sheridan - article in latest Scottish Left Review by Phillip Stott & Jim Monaghan

http://www.slrp.co.uk/test1/index...task=view&id=129&Itemid=1

Amber · Nationalist Joined: 28 Feb 2008 Posts: 168

jimtrot · No Longer a Wean Joined: 16 May 2007 Posts: 62

Rinty · Posted: Wed Mar 26, 2008 2:35 pm Post subject:

"Let's see the evidence then decide whether it was was worth investigating"

And your evidence will now be part of the case.

Amber · Nationalist Joined: 28 Feb 2008 Posts: 168

Oh Rinty, you're a one.
xx

Rinty · Posted: Wed Mar 26, 2008 3:19 pm Post subject:

Yes Jim, very good. There is really no point in continuing is there? You dont address any of my points and though I answer your every question you just pretend that I dont.

There are no hitstrionics or raw nerve. That is the internet debates tactics of kids on bebo, if you are getting nowhere, try to paint the other person as barmy Smile

tommy referred to dark arts as to many people referring to political plotting. To suggest that this means he is then the instigator of lies that he called people witches in ludicrous.

But, a you are obviously in denial about these close frinds of 20 years lying about the witches comments then I can see that you will believe their version no matter what. So whats the point in continuing?

BTW my comments on Scott and Green are not subjudice as they are not charged, as far as I know. If they are charged then my commenst would be innapropraite from the time they are petioned to appear in court.

Green said in court that he hadnt seen the notes for a long time and thinks that they may have been destroyed. BUT, just a month before (May 26th) he claims in a letter to SSP members to have 'frequent access' to them. Scott says in court that she hasnt seen them since she left them with Green. Yet just days later thay are found in her bedroom. Meanwhile, in the SSP forum, during the case, a member of the SSY says that he surprised to hear the evidence from Green and Scott as he has seen the notes and knows where they are!.

Now, you may be too loyal to question those members motives, and there may even be a feasible explanation. But the SSP dont ask questions of their leaders anymore and will not question the level of manpulation going on around the case.

jimtrot · No Longer a Wean Joined: 16 May 2007 Posts: 62

Rinty · Posted: Wed Mar 26, 2008 7:10 pm Post subject:

"see you still haven't answered my point about the "cabal of witches" statement being attributed to sources close to Sheridan."

Yes, that is also a lie, part of the whole creation of a mythical monster creation.

Tommy's use of that phrase was nothing, absolutely nothing, to do with wtiches. I believe the first time it was used, certainly the first time I heard it, was by a journalist. I assumed he had been told it by an SSP member, parhaps I am wrong.

By the time it got to the first SSP conference after the split, Leckie made the 'broomstick' comments knowing that the whole room understood it to be a reference to Tommy calling her a witch. It's not nice watching you squirm on this Jim, you should just back out. You have admitted yourself that you were wrong, then you tried to say that you hadnt heard anyone n the SSP say this, now you are trying to slip away saying that some only said it was souces close to Tommy.

Either way, there is no gettng away from the fact that a myth, based on a lie, was created and that SSP members like you geefully swallowed it hook line and simker.

Fedayn · Posted: Thu Mar 27, 2008 7:27 pm Post subject:

Rinty · Posted: Thu Mar 27, 2008 7:45 pm Post subject:

n this thread we are talking about the witches remarks, but they are not the only case of this happening as I pointed ut. JT akes a point of saying he must believe people as they have been comrades for twenty years. I am attempting to point out that the same people lied about the witches comments and that should make him think.

All either of us can do is claim to believe one person or another as we were not part of the alleged events from all those years ago and not at the meeting in 2004.

I know that I was lied to by the people who accuse Tommy.

It didnt end there either, some were saying on a left network that they had been sujected to interrogation about their personal life by Tommy in court, it wasnt true. If those who accuse Tommy are telling the truth they seem to go to great lengths to build an image of him based on rumour and suggestion. The witches comments are on the most obvious cases.

The night before the SSP NC in May 2006 a member of the SSP called me on a fake premise and then started to tell me about stories about Tommy, not those in the case. Why would he do that?

In this forum we can now no longer discuss issues relating to the perjury charges, as we do not have the full details of tommys charges that pretty much covers the whole original case from noon today.

But in this thread, on the issue you refer to, we can still discuss it.

Now, I would assume that you M, Jimtrot and the 'not an ssp member' amber will join me in demanding that Gail Sheridan is reinstated to her job and back her and her union branch on that.