I thought I was naive in some areas, but you two take the biscuit. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/mar/12/alleged-assault-led-to-ban-on-alex-salmond-working-alone-with-women
Your problem is not your naivety, but your shallowness. Your knowledge is as wide as an ocean but as deep as a puddle. The allegation that you repeat above didn't stand up to scrutiny. There was no such ban in place as confirmed in unchallenged evidence by the defence. The "belief" of an anonymous witness was found to have zero substance. You would know this if you read more widely than you do. That you still believe the allegations against Salmond despite the court verdict and the availability of the information referenced by ngb in this thread (and referenced less concisely by myself in the Alex Salmond thread) demonstrates clearly that you are only interested in confirming your own biases rather than getting to the truth.
