PETER Mandelson is the gift that keeps on giving.
When Mandelson was appointed, Douglas Alexander states: “good news for you, for the government and and for the country”.
Last month, Douglas said “he should not have been appointed”.
Files released this week show the long-running political friendship between Douglas Alexander and Mandelson.
Some snippets from their exchanges:
Douglas heaps gratitude and appreciation on Mandelson. Douglas states: “As usual your judgement is vindicated.” Douglas says again: “I would value your counsel.” And then Douglas admits “very little enthusiasm for Labour in Scotland”.
There have been far greater thefts of public money by Labour and the Tories – PPE, PFI, MPs’ expenses – and we have to remember that despite BBC digging, no public money was stolen by Murrell.
Does this mean that Baillie and Sarwar were lying through their teeth when they were talking about Sarwar as first minister? Surely not.
Mind you, it does explain their dirty tricks and political dirt-digging and lying at every turn.
Maybe Labour would be better investigating why Baillie never answers any questions about the radioactive leaks from Faslane in her constituency (kept hidden from Scots) and why no-one in Labour is demanding answers and investigations. This, to me, just confirms that they are not one bit interested in the welfare of Scotland – only its resources and as a dumping place for their nuclear submarines.
Wes Streeting said Joani Reid should not be tainted by her husband’s activities but Labour lose all control when it’s the SNP.
And, of course, the unbiased BBC will not be asking any questions of Douglas Alexander and Anas Sarwar and their long-standing relationship with Peter Mandelson – they are too busy feasting on the SNP. In other words, they are still too angry with the election results for Labour despite all the help given from the BBC and the media.
Winifred McCartney
Paisley
THE full details of aw the bizarre stuff Peter Murrell purchased wi oor hard-earned money have now come oot at his court case. My emotions towards Peter, though, are now not just anger but also a mix of great sadness that such a high-profile guy within the SNP is likely to end up behind bars due to, in my view, a compulsive spending habit that was that strong he risked everything for it – and lost big style!
I read a piece online titled, “The Psychology Of Spending: Why We Buy Things We Don’t Need”.
It stated: “Emotions play a huge role in the psychology of spending. Many people shop to cope with stress, boredom, sadness or even happiness. Buying something new can give a quick
mood boost, but it rarely lasts. Retail therapy is real but can often lead to regret later.
“We live in a world where everything is available fast. One-click shopping and same-day delivery make it easy to get what we want right away. The psychology of spending is tied to our brain’s reward system. When you buy something, your brain releases dopamine, making you feel good for a moment. But that feeling fades and you may want to buy something else again to get it back.”
Let’s face it, we all know someone that buys loads of stuff that they hardly ever or never use or wear but normally that is with their own dosh! Unfortunately, in my view, Peter Murrell’s compulsive spending behaviour was so strong. he resorted to crime to fund it. Cold, hard logic would have told him the brutal consequences for him if he was caught and also resulting in him being a pariah within the SNP and independence movement generally. It still didn’t stop him, though!
I’m sure he earned good money due to his high-profile position within the SNP and many of the items he purchased could have been funded using his own resources. But then again, that is bringing logic into the equation, and something tells me Peter’s heid was definitely not in a logical place, but in an entirely different realm completely!
Ask close family members of gambling addicts why their loved ones stole from their purses or brought the whole family to bankruptcy to fund their compulsive habit, despite said loved one having a well-paid job. Ask drug addicts in similar circumstances why they resort to crime to fund their habit. Clearly, I could go on regarding alcoholics, etc.
I have to stress I’m in no way condoning what Peter did. Both my partner and I have direct debits with monthly amounts ending up in the SNP’s coffers, so we ain’t happy bunnies!
However, having given careful consideration to this tragic case – and I might be totally wrong regarding my amateur psychological assessment of what led to Peter’s downfall – something tells me, given the totally bizarre nature of Peter’s spending habits, that I’m not that far away!
Aye, there’s nout queerer than folk, as they say!
Ivor Telfer
Dalgety Bay, Fife
PISH and nonsense, Ms Riddoch (Swinney could act boldly, announce an internal inquiry and change direction, Jun 4).
Police Scotland has spent millions of pounds investigating the Murrell case, what new evidence does anyone think a public inquiry would throw up?
The SNP treasurer has sent an email to SNP constituency association treasurers explaining what has been done, since 2022, to improve the control and governance of the use of members’ money and donations.
I and other ordinary members in my constituency association have been sent a copy to review.
What are the established facts?
One man betrayed the trust of his friends, his wife and party members to steal money from the SNP. Murrell went unchecked because the party’s financial system remained a “what worked before the party’s support suddenly expanded” system, in effect giving one person control of the day-to-day SNP cheque book.
That Mr Murrell chose to exploit this fiscal weak point of control for his own ends, betraying the trust put in him by not just Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon but John Swinney
and others who had been Murrell’s friends since school or university days, is for Mr Murrell and Mr Murrell alone to explain.
The SNP, as a party, have taken a bloody nose and it hurts. The answer is not to give them another kicking in public, picking at scabs real or imagined, but leave them to get their nose straightened and put up a defence to prevent embezzlement happening in the future, as far as this is ever possible.
I ask for an end to the “Whit iffery?” which currently abounds around this theft of SNP members’ funds and donations. A “Whit iffery?” based, in the main, on nothing more than ignorance, unfounded suspicions, spite and hearsay.
Peter Thomson
via email
WHAT was Keane thinking of, taking the Maccabi Tel Aviv job in the first place? Israel had already been blockading Gaza, “mowing the grass” and throttling its fragile economy for 17 years – and done everything to prevent the Palestinians taking part in international football.
Israel bombed their national stadium in 2006, 2012 and again during the total obliteration of Gaza we’ve been watching for the past 32 months.
Stuart Littlewood
New Galloway
ANDY Burnham is unwilling to say that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza. Burnham states: “I can’t judge things of that enormity from where I am as mayor of Greater Manchester.”
However, Israeli Holocaust and genocide researchers Amos Goldberg, Omer Bartov, Daniel Blatman, Raz Segal and Shmuel Lederman have all identified Israel’s actions in Gaza as genocide.
Goldberg writes: “What is happening in Gaza is genocide because the level and pace of indiscriminate killing, destruction, mass expulsions, displacement, famine, executions, the wiping out of cultural and religious institutions ... and the sweeping dehumanisation of the Palestinians create an overall picture of genocide, of a deliberate, conscious crushing of Palestinian existence in Gaza.”
Other genocide scholars, including Martin Shaw, author of the book What Is Genocide?; Melanie O’Brien, president of the International Association of Genocide Scholars; and Dirk Moses, senior editor of the Journal of Genocide Research, have drawn the same conclusion.
The United Nations Genocide Convention placed prevention at the centre of international law.
Rejecting credible evidence of genocide risks undermining that legal and moral commitment, and the post-war promise of “never again”.
Terry Hansen
Wisconsin
Share