|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Fri 10 Nov 10:37
After hiding, deleting and redacting the WhatsApp messages in the Salmond enquiry they must now think they`re untouchable....Well think again.
Kate Forbes last week handed over all her messages (unaltered)to the Westminster enquiry .
https://holyroodcom.cmail19.com/t/t-e-vtijtit-jkitjtjrb-r/
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Fri 10 Nov 18:04
I actually quite like Forbes but with her personal religious beliefs I can`t imagine she`d have much time for Alex Salmond.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: donj
Date: Fri 10 Nov 18:13
Is that the Alex Salmond who was found not guilty of all sex pest charges by a jury of mainly women you mean.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Fri 10 Nov 18:30
The same one who admitted to conduct that, and I don`t think I`m going on a limb here, someone like Kate Forbes would think was particularly acceptable.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: sadindiefreak
Date: Sun 12 Nov 12:09
Quote:
donj, Fri 10 Nov 18:13
Is that the Alex Salmond who was found not guilty of all sex pest charges by a jury of mainly women you mean.
Yes the same Alex Salmond who admitted to being a creep but not a criminal.
The things he admitted to doing would get anyone sacked if they did it at their place of work.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Sun 12 Nov 12:55
The lot highlighted are disgraceful but what about Hanvey? Seem to recall he wasn`t a big fan of a certain group of people. I trust you won`t be voting to elect him in your ward, Tenruh 😉
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Sun 12 Nov 13:43
Be your pal again? You have a strange idea of friendship but then you and Parboiled are bosom buddies on here.
Sometimes in life you want to keep quiet then something is said that needs to be challenged.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Sun 12 Nov 16:36
And you keep changing the subject when it no longer suits you, Tenruh 😂
You`ll never, ever win an argument quoting Hanvey. As I said on the other thread, he won`t even be your MP after the next election.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Mon 13 Nov 06:17
Quote:
jake89, Sun 12 Nov 16:36
And you keep changing the subject when it no longer suits you, Tenruh 😂
You`ll never, ever win an argument quoting Hanvey. As I said on the other thread, he won`t even be your MP after the next election.
He may not be my MP, but neither will the nuSNP candidate either.
Happy Days
FREE IN 23
Post Edited (Mon 13 Nov 06:41)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: LochgellyAlbert
Date: Mon 13 Nov 09:12
Had dealings with Hanvey on behalf of my wife, he is very helpful and responds promptly to any questions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Mon 13 Nov 12:46
Not sure what you`ll be free of, Tenruh. If not SNP it`ll be Labour.
I suspect our thinking may be aligned more than you think. The difference I suspect is the delivery. I think it`s fair to say we both accept change is needed and that the current political setup feels like a bunch of people milking the system. Hopefully not putting words in your mouth but that`s my thinking. There`s too much status quo and empty words rather than real reform and the reason for this seems to be people protecting their own interests or not wanting to jeopardise promotions.
Independence is not the silver bullet that will solve this, but my view is it would make change easier provided the right party is in power at the start. I would hope it`s not the SNP who seem to prefer centralised service delivery, which doesn`t work in diverse countries like Scotland.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Fri 19 Jan 17:14
So it has been confirmed that neither Nicola Sturgeon, John Swinney nor Jason Leitch retained any of their WhatsApp messages pertaining to the COVID pandemic. I have never been a member of a WhatsApp group and have no idea how the technology works but doesn`t it need just one member of the group to retain their messages to have a record of all messages or would that only include messages relating to conversations they were part of? (the opening post on this thread said Kate Forbes handed over all her messages).
You`ve got to smile at Douglas Ross`s outrage at the news given that Sunak kept none of his messages and Johnson `lost` a lot of his when he switched phones.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Fri 19 Jan 20:04
As far as I`m aware you are correct in your theory on deleting WhatsApp messages Wee Eck. If so then it would have appeared to have been a coordinated effort to suppress evidence from the public inquiry. A public inquiry which is there so that lessons can be learned and lives can hopefully be saved in the event of a future pandemic. I wonder what was said in those messages that they couldn`t dare ever let the public read them. Could have just been bad mouthing other public figures or inappropriate `banter` but still now well never know.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Fri 19 Jan 20:12
All you need is one person to have the messages in that group UNLESS the person has manually gone through and chosen to delete for all rather than only their device.
I assume this pertains ONLY to official Hollywood devices rather than personal ones?
Presumably some messages have been released as I`ve seen ones from the likes of Ken Thomson.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Fri 19 Jan 21:02
As with most things relating to the SNP I find the reporting of this in the media rather vague. Why have they not asked about messages of other group members which might have included NS`s input? Why isn`t there a policy decided independently of the ruling party regarding the retention of WhatsApp messages? In the days before the internet were politicians expected to keep a record of all phone calls with colleagues?
There are so many questions around this but all we get are the outraged headlines.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Fri 19 Jan 21:42
You mean like the headlines when Boris Johnson somehow lost all his messages as well? A number of tv shows took great delight in showing Johnson bumbling through his explanation as to why he no longer had these messages.
Also these weren`t phone conversations. WhatsApp messages are written communication. Had they been letters and they were subsequently burned in blazer by government officials out th back we`d all be up on arms as to why. All they had to do was click `archive` and the conversation is saved. Would have taken up a few mb`s of memory at most on a server somewhere. There aren`t many questions around this at all. There is only one. Why did all the members of this group chat decide to delete their messages.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Buspasspar
Date: Fri 19 Jan 22:05
Question .. from an auld man .. Why are the People who are running this Country .. Also the heads of all the other parties using Whats App as a means of private important decision making communication ?? .. a wee bit Fred Karno surely
We are forever shaped by the Children we once were
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Fri 19 Jan 22:15
TOWK, I know they weren`t phone conversations but they probably contained a lot of the sort of inconsequential information that was exchanged in phone conversations before the internet. You seem to be jumping to a lot of conclusions without knowing all the facts. How do we know all members of the group deleted their messages? Could it be that all the information relevant to decisions was preserved in other official records? Despite the missing WhatsApp messages in the UK inquiry I don`t recall anyone saying that it wasn`t possible to follow the `audit trail` of decision-making.
Post Edited (Fri 19 Jan 22:16)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Fri 19 Jan 22:56
If I was in a position of power, there`s absolutely no way I`d be communicating things over WhatsApp. I`m no conspiracy theorist but the idea that Facebook would own that data is frightening.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Dave_1885
Date: Fri 19 Jan 23:13
Quote:
jake89, Fri 19 Jan 22:56
If I was in a position of power, there`s absolutely no way I`d be communicating things over WhatsApp. I`m no conspiracy theorist but the idea that Facebook would own that data is frightening.
Im sure there is a statement from FB that they dont own any access to the messages in WhatsApp, which is why they cant then relocate and reload any deleted conversations etc. I may be wrong on this, but Im sure Id heard it come up in some other enquiry (possibly a Meta one).
In regards to actually using WhatsApp, its a great tool for large group chats with co-workers - Ive used it in my last 5/6 jobs within logistics and its quite easily the best form of communication you can use for large groups.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Sat 20 Jan 10:44
If you work in the public sector you`re advised that things like WhatsApp messages are FOIable. It`s not suggested you delete them, but warned to be mindful of what you share.
I`d be worried about that data being held by private companies, especially the likes of Meta who are hardly going to confess to holding all that data.
I remember working with a tech company in the early 2010s and all the staff had the camera and mic covered on their laptops (this was before built in sliders). I thought they were mad but they were very serious about it.
Post Edited (Sat 20 Jan 10:45)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: LochgellyAlbert
Date: Sat 20 Jan 11:18
Seems Scottish Government didn`t use WhatsApp to run the country, unlike the VIP lane along with UK government.
Yoons obviously not happy, still looking for BJ`s and Sunaks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Sat 20 Jan 11:22
I heard a discussion about retaining messages on the radio this morning with an ex-SNP advisor and an ex-Tory advisor. One problem is the sheer volume of electronic messages. The SNP guy said he accompanied an MP on a flight from London to Scotland during which the MP received about 2,000 messages!
They seemed to agree the current issue was more about reputational damage rather than lost information.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Sat 20 Jan 11:28
I can tell you right now that many public sector bodies routinely delete electronic messages on platforms like Teams very frequently. When I worked for a local authority we got FOId constantly. It was almost always lazy journalists looking for a story and almost always the response was a link to something publicly available on the website anyway.
The media purposefully misleads and twists things to sell papers. I can tell you right now that there will be papers sat with two stories waiting for a council decision and both will criticise the decision. Like if the council spent £50k on Christmas lights it would be a disgrace, if they didn`t they`d be Scrooge`s (or appeasing other faiths).
Only official correspondence is supposed to be recorded so it`s not surprise that WhatsApps and the like are deleted.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Sat 20 Jan 11:44
If WhatsApp was used to discuss government policy and reach decisions then it IS official communications. When the Tories either intentionally or through incompetence destroy communication we all quite rightly see through the excuses yet when it`s the Scottish government doing the exact same, the exact same, some are running around doing mental gymnastics to excuse their actions.
We all know what went on here. In between the discussions about lock downs and restrictions they were probably all throwing out some rather inappropriate comments/jokes about political opponents and media types. As always with these type of things it`s the cover up and lack of respect for the public that they are supposed to be serving that rankles with me.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Sat 20 Jan 12:00
So what`s the answer? Have a separate WhatsApp group for `banter` and jokes at the expense of opponents which can be deleted as appropriate?
We`re always told the purpose of this inquiry is to learn from mistakes to ensure the next pandemic is dealt with more efficiently but I`m sure the media were also looking for some juicy titbits they could use to show politicians in a poor light. The media in this country is predominantly right-wing Unionist so I don`t see a problem with a few commentators trying to restore some kind of balance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Parboiled
Date: Sat 20 Jan 12:17
Yoons are indeed happy LA.
We’ve got a totally out of his depth thicko as FM, an ongoing polis case into missing cash, now this scandal which confirms what anyone but die hard Nats knew all along- Sturgeon is a devious lying chancer…
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Parboiled
Date: Sat 20 Jan 12:19
Jings the Nat camp are so dim they deleted all messages except the ones saying delete all messages!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Sat 20 Jan 12:46
It`s all a distraction from the sh**show down south. How is that a good advert for the Union? As ever with Parboiled it`s `All Quiet on the Westminster Front`.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Sat 20 Jan 13:11
Or is the Westminster sh**show being used to distract us from the Holyrood sh**show?
Post Edited (Sat 20 Jan 13:12)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Sat 20 Jan 13:31
How would that work? Westminster always takes precedence in the UK media and there is very little support for Holyrood in the Scottish media.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Parboiled
Date: Sat 20 Jan 14:33
There’s always the National Eck..
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Sat 20 Jan 15:11
...as I said.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Dave_1885
Date: Sat 20 Jan 15:49
I mean, theres a sideshow and then theres this…..wee eck, just admit its another scandal for the SNP to now try to explain.
Ive been a staunch SNP voter since I turned 18, but at the minute I wont even be bothered voting in the next set of elections. Nobody can defend these politicians in both parliaments, and their oppositions even worse!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Sat 20 Jan 16:00
I wouldn`t say I was defending them but I take what is reported in the media with a pinch of salt. They are always trying to influence public opinion. Politicians have never been highly regarded in my memory and social media now just makes things worse.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: CAPar
Date: Sat 20 Jan 16:15
Statement on Twitter from Nicola Sturgeon :
Statement re UK Covid Inquiry:
I do not intend to give a running commentary on the ongoing Inquiry. Instead, out of respect to all those impacted by the pandemic, I will answer questions directly and openly when I give evidence at the end of this month
However, in light of recent coverage, there are certain points I feel it important to make clear.
Contrary to the impression given in some coverage, the Inquiry does have messages between me and those I most regularly communicated with through informal means.
Although these had not been retained on my own device, I was able to obtain copies which I submitted to the Inquiry last year.
To be clear, I conducted the Covid response through formal processes from my office in St Andrews House, not through WhatsApp or any other informal messaging platform. I was not a member of any WhatsApp groups. The number of people I communicated with through informal messaging at all was limited.
Also, any handwritten notes made by me were passed to my private office to be dealt with and recorded as appropriate.
Throughout the entire process, I acted in line with Scottish Government policy.
I did my level best to lead Scotland through the pandemic as safely as possible - and shared my thinking with the country on a daily basis. I did not get every decision right - far from it - but I was motivated only, and at all times, by the determination to keep people as safe as possible.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Sat 20 Jan 16:27
I`m sure we all agree that it`s good to hear both sides of a story before jumping to conclusions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: LochgellyAlbert
Date: Sat 20 Jan 18:00
Good to see BBC national news covering it, along with a rapidly read few lines from the Scottish broadcasting company!
Hope she sues the erse off them🤔👍
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Parboiled
Date: Sat 20 Jan 20:12
Yes she has a great record going to court ….and losing. At our expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: LochgellyAlbert
Date: Sat 20 Jan 20:29
As much as BJ cost?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Sun 21 Jan 00:37
Quote:
LochgellyAlbert, Sat 20 Jan 20:29
As much as BJ cost?
Usually £20
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Sun 21 Jan 07:02
Quote:
Parboiled, Sat 20 Jan 20:12
Yes she has a great record going to court ….and losing. At our expense
Aye as we`re going to find out once again with Alex Salmonds legal action.
Post Edited (Sun 21 Jan 07:46)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Parboiled
Date: Sun 21 Jan 08:06
“ I will answer questions directly and openly when I give evidence...”
That doesn’t need saying, it is compulsory, but how about truthfully?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Sun 21 Jan 11:26
Is the Crossgate Centre actually for Scottish independence? It`s associated with the "Yes" movement and AUOB but there doesn`t appear to be much detail about their politics.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: LochgellyAlbert
Date: Sun 21 Jan 20:41
Quote:
jake89, Sun 21 Jan 00:37
Quote:
LochgellyAlbert, Sat 20 Jan 20:29
As much as BJ cost?
Usually £20
Jeezs, I have been overcharged!🤔🤪😜
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: LochgellyAlbert
Date: Thu 25 Jan 14:18
Gone away quiet on this thread, Where`s the Yoons?
Obviously NS was speaking for all of us!🥳🥳🥳
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Thu 25 Jan 14:57
She didn`t delete expletives!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Wotsit
Date: Thu 25 Jan 16:39
I can`t believe she was so insulting towards clowns. What have clowns ever done to her?
The enemy travels by private jet, not by dinghy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: OzPar
Date: Thu 25 Jan 23:51
Politicians regularly use WhatsApp as a means of keeping on top of topics. My local MP included me in a small group focused on a specific topic in which I was well-versed. After the matter was resolved, the MP left the group, but the messages remained. Even though this was six years ago, the complete correspondence is still on my phone.
|
|
|
|
|
|
