Oops, Schillings Did It Again! 66

A couple of weeks ago, I posted in genuine admiration of Ryan Giggs. Now Schillings have set out to destory his reputation, and rook him of several hundred thousand pounds at the same time. Guido has a good graph:

Plainly Ryan Giggs internet skills are not great, or he could easilly have discovered that would happen.

Schillings did the same thing for Alisher Usmanov, Britain’s second richest man. Schillings had written to all UK mainstream media what is known as a “chilling” letter. It stated that the Uzbek billionaire Usmanov had been in jail in the Soviet Union as a political prisoner, and had been pardoned after President Gorbachev came to power, and that anyone who published anything different would be sued. Our useless mainstream media has still, to this day, not published anything different.

In the interest of veracity I posted what I knew from my time as British Ambassador in Uzbekistan. Usmanov was never a political prisoner. He was a gangster jailed for extortion. He had not been pardoned by Gorbachev. He was pardoned by the state of Uzbekistan, under his gangster friend President Karimov.

Schillings threatened repeatedly to sue me, but they never did, because they know it is true. They threatened to sue my then webhosts, who were so scared they pulled not only my site but many others on the same server. They particularly threatened many Arsenal fan blogs, as Usmanov was trying to take over the club at the time.

The result was that millions of people worldwide, who otherwise would never have heard of Usmanov, learnt he had a conviction for blackmail as the story went viral. I have been told for cetain that the internet furore directly impacted on the willingness of major Arsenal shareholders to sell to Usmanov. Schillings caused the failure of Usmanov’s bid to take over Arsenal. If they had allowed the truth about him to live quietly in a small corner of the internet, that would not have happened.

Even though Schillings never did sue, our power-serving mainstream media has still never mentioned the truth about Usmanov’s criminal past, even when he was last month announced as Brtian’s second richest man. That is why the freedom of new media is so important, and why Ryan Giggs is wrong.

But if you have enough money, you can with effort even influence new media. The Usmanov/Craig Murray affair used to feature prminently on the Wikipedia “Streisand Effect” page linked to above. It has been edited out – when and by whom? It has also disappeared from Usmanov’s own Wikipedia page. And recently on Arsenal blogs, there have been a rash of commenters calling for Usmanov to take over, often repeating the same long comment across several Arsenal blogs. That kind of money buys a lot of trolls.

66 thoughts on “Oops, Schillings Did It Again!

1 2 3
  • Dick the Prick

    Sorry, but could we start at the beginning in HTF is he Britain’s second richest man? Doesn’t just buy lawyers, apparently!


    Hi Craig, As an avid United fan I completely agree with you, I honestly do not care about dalliances with women by footballers unless they have promoted their marriage to gain commercial success.

    However, where I depart is on English Law, I use twitter and like it, but I would like to see the UK government make a stand against the American owners by blocking the site for a month. And keeping a suspended suspension overhanging Twitter so they self regulate.

    The only way to protect English Law and sometimes it can be as daft as a brush is to make the necessary changes that are modern and kept up to date as technology progresses.

    And the only way to hurt Twitter is to ensure their expected IPO is dented by the threat of suspension. I am sure many other countries will follow our lead.

  • Andy Manson

    Schillings, a london law firm specialising in defamation, privacy and reputation management – as described o their website. It’s starting to look as if, in order to recover from this, they’re going to need…a london law firm specialising in defamation, privacy and reputation management!!

  • mary

    A tekkie might find out who it was. This entry was there on 22.6.2010 on http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Streisand_effect&limit=500&action=history

    “On 22 September 2007, several websites and blogs, including that of Boris Johnson, went offline when site host company Fasthosts pulled the plug on various sites while aiming to take down Craig Murray’s blog. This followed Alisher Usmanov’s objection about allegedly defamatory material on Murray’s blog. Murray, the former British Ambassador to Uzbekistan, had written a book portraying Usmanov in a bad light. Usmanov hired a legal firm to silence Murray, but this backfired when it became a cause célèbre, and the offending material reappeared throughout the blogosphere. The material, which Murray insists is true, was never removed from his site or book, and Usmanov has never sued despite all his threats.”

    On 29.6.2010 it had disappeared
    See these details under ‘edit’ and ‘history’ –
    (cur | prev) 02:52, 29 June 2010 (19,314 bytes) (→Examples: Removed poor examples that have nothing (or very little) to do with the internet. The Streisand effect is an internet phenomenon, after all.) (undo) (Tag: blanking)
    / is the ip address of the ‘editor’ concerned.

    • craig Post author


      Am I understand it can be undone and reestablished? There were lots of links cited I think, esp from bloggerheads, but I really haven’t got time to look them all up. But if it can be reinstated with one click…

  • mary

    21 May 2011
    Breaking news: An unnamed premier league footballer has just launched legal action against twitter for revealing that he is the subject of the Imogen Thomas Super Injunction.
    Meanwhile in a completely unrelated story Ryan Giggs’s lawyer has just bought a new speed boat and has made a late entry onto the Sunday Times rich list 2011.

    The spoils of law??!!

  • Tom Welsh

    “An unnamed premier league footballer has just launched legal action against twitter…”

    One can only hope that this turns out REALLY REALLY badly for the “unnamed” footballer and his legal parasites… er, advisers.

    All I can see right now is a forest of fingers being extended by Twitter, the california courts, the US federal courts, the US federal government, etc. etc.

  • kingfelix

    It is disingenuous to frame the issue of superinjunctions as being about ‘human rights’ because, clearly, this recourse is 1) only available to very wealthy people, and 2) in the process, it is silencing others rights to speak out. It is a bit much that a judge can rule that a person may seek financial gain from disclosing their story, when the wealthy people taking out the injunctions are just as open to allegations of seeking legal recourse to protect their earning power / image rights.
    One superinjunction even sought to prevent a person from contacting Members of Parliament – how can that be permitted in a democracy? How can we have a judge simply remove such fundamental rights? This is getting into the whole pre-cog thing of punishing people not for what they disclose, but simply for what they know. Maybe the Ryan Giggs’ of the future will simply have people’s minds erased under the terms of a legal order. Along similar lines, there was mention that an MP had been targeted by a superinjunction, clearly a direct assault on the principle of parliamentary privilege. It must not be allowed to stand.
    (Note to Craig, why does it seem impossible to insert a proper line break between paragraphs, it looks hideous – Using Firefox, PC.)

  • kingfelix

    Sorry, the other point I wanted to make is that it seems a high-profile footballer can block disclosure of an affair, yet the poor funny-haired guy from Bristol who was paraded as a prime murder suspect in the nation’s media, yet was actually wholly innocent, he is not getting much relief from our judicial system, when it comes to the business of protecting people’s rights. Perhaps Scotland Yard shoud’ve issued a superinjunction to cover all the suspects in their investigation. Oh, but then, how would Murdoch et al fill their rags with prurient nonsense (the Guardian and the other broadsheets were just as shameless)

  • mark_golding

    On a different tack the powerhouse behind Schilling is ‘Andrew Call my Bluff’ Caldecott QC – always at the sharp end of media law and I respect his argument for privacy when children are involved.

    Remembering the Hutton Inquiry I was however disappointed in Caldecott’s inability to pin-down Scarlett and the emotional diversions of Campbell away from the ‘dossier’ and lies –

    was it the razor sharp brain of Martin Smith that neutralised the existence of a quiet rebellion Dr David Kelly was compelled to enact out of dismay and repulsion as Britain and the US headed for an inevitable war with Iraq? Or was it Hutton’s brief to protect the establishment?

    Government pressure also produces ‘a lot of trolls’ keen on recognition and power. Yes, David Kelly was a maverick in today’s hostile society, much like Craig – but David bless him, paid the ultimate price.

  • Ruth

    When it comes to protecting the interests of the Establishment including illicit activities there are many lawyers who limit the defence of their clients to the boundaries set.

  • Roderick Russell

    Ruth – When it comes to the interests of the high establishment, particularly where the intelligence services are involved, honest lawyers (and human rights organizations) are usually too scared to act at all.

  • Dick the Prick

    It’s lovely that it’s taken celebrity to attack the judiciary. Private Eye have been taking the piss out of Assange but that would never hit the front pages. Get a footballer, some totty and a stupid arse judge and that’s a story. If UK judges want to go global, cool – let’s see the dominion of their fake legitimacy, their unorthodox writ. Supreme judges have to go through select committee grilling & approval – if they want to be political, allow them to engage in politics.

  • Ruth

    Roderick– When it comes to the interests of the high establishment, particularly where the intelligence services are involved, honest lawyers (and human rights organizations) are usually too scared to act at all.

    I agree but it’s known in ‘criminal circles’ that there are certain firms and chambers that collude and should be avoided at all costs.

  • mark_golding

    Spin doctor and master of deception, Alastair Campbell dismissed Major General Michael Laurie evidence that the Iraq dossier was designed to make a case for war in a recent letter to Sir John Chilcot, the chairman of the Iraq inquiry.

    Campbell said that evidence at the inquiry into the suicide of David Kelly, Gilligan’s source, disproved the BBC’s central claim – that Downing Street inserted intelligence into the dossier knowing it to be false.

    Obviously words from the mouth of a – “top end of the fee scale for paid public speaking” – troll. Dr David Kelly was betrayed, his family traumatised, his wife forced to move from a house and community she loved – and you quote from an inquiry into this man’s death? Who would want to listen to a man like you devoid of compassion and respect?

    Your emotional cries for everyone to read your submission to the Inquiry rather than Newspaper headlines has been heard. I have read the transcript and in your first weasley replies to Sir Roderic Lyne you said this:

    15   SIR RODERIC LYNE:  But you weren’t proactive.  You and your
    16       office were not proactive in pointing out to them that 
    17       a claim that had referred to munitions, essentially
    18       battlefield weapons, was being represented in a quite
    19       different and much more alarming way by some newspapers. 
    20       You just let that ride, you didn’t take any action to
    21       straighten the story?
    22   MR ALASTAIR CAMPBELL:  Well, I didn’t, and so far as I can 
    23       recall…

    Nuff said Mr Campbell – your recollection is correct; the rest of your waffle is beyond the pale.


  • Jon

    The inclusion of the Murray/Usmanov item in the WP article was re-added yesterday by ‘AndyFatBoyMorris’, possibly in response to your piece?
    It was redeleted today:
    The reason given is thus: “(rv – source doesn’t mention SE, not very high quality either -Blog?)”. “rv” means “revert” I believe, and obviously SE refers to the title. Looks like ‘Will Beback’ felt that an online source is not authoritative.

    • craig Post author

      I feel pretty sure it is a paid troll doing the deleting. The Streisand effect is a blogosphere phonomenon, so to claim that the hundreds if not thousands of blogs which carried the Usmanov story don’t count.

      Is there an appeal to some uber-editor?

  • mark_golding

    The popular media are preparing themselves for the glitter and pomp of President Obama’s visit to the UK on Tuesday. There is much ado-with a state banquet, organic beef-burgers in the garden of No. 10, a belated look at the Royal wedding venue and the thrill of designer dresses by glamourous First Ladies – and more.

    Some of us will look behind the exchange of presents, the school visits, the veterans party and pre-prepared speeches by coherent and orderly writers; some of us will ponder the real reason for this timely visit. As a precursor to what will be discussed let us remind ourselves how President Obama’s administration blackmailed HMG by threatening to end a mutual agreement on intelligence sharing that must ultimately affect the safety of British citizens.

    Claim No CO/4241/2008

    Britain’s Court of Appeal authorized the release of a previously *secret* summary of CIA documents detailing the treatment of former Guantanamo Bay detainee Binyam Mohamed.


    Amid increasing numbers of ordinary citizens rebelling in the Middle-East and the prospect of democratic elections in Egypt and Tunisia it is clear Obama is stuck between a rock and a hard place in his negotiations with Netanyahu. Britain and America have declared that Israel should cease settlement expansion and return borders to the 1967 agreement. Israel has ignored this statement,immediately announcing new settlement building programs. Israel (and MOSSAD) is getting annoyed again.

    On a broader picture the rise of Asia and Latin America and the dire Western economic climate means the conventional wisdom that shaped our destinies since WWII by groups setting the rules and operating beyond national laws is, well, weakening. The 20/80 rule or 20 percent of the causes of anything are responsible for 80 percent of the consequences now lives in the dinasaur era.

    Our bankers realize they won’t get paid after peddling loans to developing countries, as they did in good times, then pressure the International Monetary Fund to bail out those same governments when they suddenly default on their debts.

    The elite have become nervous – people power – the seeds beneath the deceptive snow have sprouted and are growing rapidly. Protests have already begun in Europe over pay and services, meanwhile Germany is forging ahead peddling high technology to Asia and beyond.

    America is dying and taking Britain down with her demise.

    That I believe is the REAL reason for the Obama entourage next week.

  • Courtenay Barnett

    As the prostitute said to her pimp: “ My – he has a huge injunction”.

    But – more seriously – there are others in high places inside/outside Britain who use the same tactics as Usmanov:-
    This is the man who bankrolled the Tories for a decade.
    And this is an example of the same strategy used by Usmanov and his lawyers:-
    In context:-

    Dear TCI Journal Readers,
    Over the last few months we continue to be the subject of multiple technical attacks upon our website. We encountered another similar such attack again this morning [May 11].
    With aid from some European friends of ours we are now having to restructure the technical backbone for the Journal in order to address the multiple different forms of attack that we have had to endure over the last three and a halfyears. This may require a week, possiblytwo, starting tomorrow.
    We feel the latest adjustments will carry us to at least until the British Special Prosecutor Helen Garlick and her team finally complete their work and what has actually being going on in the Turks and Caicos Islands over the last few years is clearly laid out for everyone to see, and those responsible brought to justice.
    The site will be down during this period.
    [email protected]

    And, in summary:-
    “… two court injunctions and a plethora of bad international press. …”
    “The use by jailed Ponzi scammer Bernard Madoff of Cayman Islands accounts that were linked to a Belize Bank “back side” financial flow channel, has reignited interest in Belize and its number one investor, Lord Michael Ashcroft, the deputy leader of the British Conservative Party and its former Treasurer, who is a citizen of the United Kingdom, Belize, and the Turks and Caicos Islands.
    On March 13, 2009, we reported: “we have learned how some of Madoff’s international operations were conducted. At 3:30 pm every day Madoff Investment Securities employees would call banks in Grand Cayman, Cayman Islands, and tell them to ‘roll the accounts.’ That was insider language for ‘lend the money.’ In some cases, money was moved to the Belize Bank, which was described by a Madoff insider as a ‘back side’ for secretive banking operations in the Cayman Islands and Switzerland.”
    The report also stated: “Madoff’s London operation were handled out of a one-room small office located at 43 Newell Street. Every time Madoff visited the office, the London staff was extremely nervous. According to a Madoff insider, the Madoff London office was nothing more than a “front” operation. There may have also been some synergy between Madoff’s London operations and American International Group’s (AIG/CIA), which reportedly is missing $500 billion from a similar small office pass-through operation in London.” In addition, Charlesworth Shelley Hewlett, who died from “unusual” causes in January, was the accountant who audited the books of Antigua-based Stanford International Bank from his small office between fish and chips shops in north London.
    Ashcroft’s holding company owns Belize Bank, as well as a number of other assets in the country. Ashcroft has also plied funds to Belize’s two main political parties, which means that Ashcroft wins any election in the Central American country, even though when one of the two major parties loses. Ashcroft donated generously to the 2003 campaign of former People’s United Party Prime Minister Said Musa, the victor, but also was a major donor to present Prime Minister Dean Barrow of the United Democratic Party, who defeated Musa in 2008.
    In August 1999, The Times of London reported that Ashcroft’s name appeared in Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) files on drug trafficking and money laundering in Belize. Ashcroft promprly sued the Rupert Murdoch-owned paper for libel.
    The deputy Tory leader is chairman of BB Holdings, the holding company that owns Belize Bank. Ashcroft has owned the bank since the 1980s.
    Ashcroft’s son operates Belize Bank in the Turks and Caicos Islands, another favorite off-shore banking location. On February 22, 2009, The Timesof London reported that Britain’s Electoral Commission was investigating campaign donations to the British Conservatives that originated from an overseas network of companies through Bearwood Corporate Services (BCS), a reputed Ashcroft company which is owned by Bearwood Holdings, which is owned, in turn, by Astraporta UK with Stargate Holdings of Belize being one of Astraporta’s major shareholders. On September 27, 2008, The Daily Mirrorof the UK quoted former Belize Prime Minister Manuel Esquivel, whose one-time close relationship with Ashcroft has grown cold, as saying, “Everything he [Ashcroft] does operates out of the Belize Bank. After he bought it, many new laws were passed which everybody widely believes – and I don’t think he would deny – were basically written by his lawyers. Everything just escalated to where he became the boss.”
    On June 17, 2005, Belize House of Representatives member Mark Espat stated in the Belize House that “For 15 years now, the Carlisle Group of companies, led by Mr. Michael Ashcroft and sporting various disguises such as the Belize Bank, the Belize Holdings and more recently, Mercury Investments, Pillow Talk and E-Com, has pursued a scorched earth campaign to gain control of Belize’s most profitable public company – BTL [Belize Telecommunications Ltd.] . . . Throughout this conspiracy to control and suck dry BTL and its Belizean consumers, it would appear that this government has been an all too willing accomplice. As it has appeared to the Belizean people, the relationship between the conspirator and his accomplice is a ‘Master-Puppet’ relationship.”
    In 1998, Ashcroft merged Carlisle Holdings with his Belize Holdings Inc. (BHI). The global firm owned a number of cleaning companies, including OneSource.
    Madoff’s use of Belize Bank as a back side enterprise has taken on greater significance with the connection to a top British politician and, if the Tories beat Labor in the next election, a possible major British government official. The presence of small “front” operations run by Madoff, Stanford, and AIG/CIA in London also pose additional questions as to the relationship between the Caribbean operations of Madoff, Stanford, and Ashcroft to the current global economic meltdown. In addition, AIG/CIA was involved in shady operations from companies it operated in the Cayman Islands and the Netherlands Antilles, as well as New Zealand, Ireland, and France, through various companies it controlled, including Lumagrove Finance Company Ltd., Palmgrove Finance Company Ltd., and Maitengrove Finance Corporation.
    There is also the “Bermuda connection.” In August 2002, The Guardian(UK) reported that the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and Manhattan District Attorney Robert Morgenthau, who has held that job since 1961 and who just recently announced his retirement, placed Ashcroft under investigation as part of a tax evasion probe of Tyco, the Bermuda-based company headed up by later jailed firm’s chief Dennis Kozlowski.
    One of Ashcroft’s major critics was the late British Foreign Secretary Robin Cook. On August 6, 2005, Cook died suddenly while hiking in his native Scotland. Prime Minister Tony Blair, for whom Cook served as Foreign Secretary before resigning in protest over the Iraq war, failed to attend Cook’s funeral.
    Lord Michael Ashcroft mirrors Allen Stanford and Conrad Black, who also basically “bought” their royal titles as Sir Allen Stanford and Lord Black, respectively. Black is serving a prison sentence in the United States for fraud involving his Hollinger Corporation, a global media empire. Ashcroft’s virtual control of Belize also mirrors the control that Allen Stanford once held over Antigua and Barbuda. Ashcroft, like Stanford and Madoff, has also maintained a residence in Florida….”

    When you speak of money and power, these actually can govern the course of legal events, regardless of who is right and who is wrong. The actual ‘ force of money’, an injunction –or – super-injunction, can indeed intimidate, frustrate and cause horrendous expenditures to would be whistle blowers who are compelled to fight legal actions.
    If all else fails there is either the personal smear technique ( of which Craig Murray has been a victim and is well aware) – or – ultimately actual death ( if Dr. Kelly could speak from the grave).
    So finally – speaking of injunctions and super-injunctions:-

  • mark_golding

    FOR THE PEOPLE – Thank-you Courtenay – I read with great interest.

    May I add a post-script from the Hon. Dean Barrow the Prime Minister of Belize:

    Ladies and Gentlemen, my fellow Belizeans: this 2011 agenda is filled with good things. And even crime appears slowly to be giving way to our now resumed, now unstoppable march of progress. For, while 2010 overall was challenging, we did see a sharp decline in the murder rate for two of the last three months of the year.

    There is one regard, though, in which the sense of resolve that every new year brings, is especially needed now. Our climb out of recession, our growth, our social and economic progress, are all being put at risk by a certain foreign marauder and his local fifth columnists. Just before Christmas a judge of the Belize Supreme Court upheld a 43 million dollar London arbitration award, procured by the Michael Ashcroft interests against the government and people of Belize.

    This award was in connection with a grossly immoral, grossly illegal “Settlement Deed” made by the last administration. Under that accord, Ashcroft’s billion dollar banking conglomerates were, contrary to law, exempted in perpetuity from paying their just taxes to Belize. It was as with the similarly outrageous telecommunications Accommodation Agreement also given to Ashcroft by the PUP. And this government decided, in the name of sovereign justice, to resist unto the skies this serial perfidy. We will continue now to do so, certain in the knowledge that this is a campaign of, by, and for, the people.

  • mary

    Thanks Courtenay and Mark for your pertinent comments. Last night I was looking through the comments on Guido Fawkes and the difference between some of the gutter stuff there and the quality of those here is marked.
    Alex Salmond got the better of John Humphrys this morning esp on the farcical g(i)agging order and the fact that the order is outside Scottish jurisdiction.
    ‘Salmond claims ‘overwhelming mandate’
    Scottish First Minister Alex Salmond is meeting the chancellor George Osborne in his campaign to secure greater economic powers for Scotland.
    Speaking to John Humphrys, he attacked George Osborne’s “smash and grab raid” on North Sea oil revenue, which he says could cost 10,000 jobs and billions of pounds.
    “What I’ll be saying to him [Osborne], is that there is a way to get most of the money, but to maintain most of the jobs,” he said.
    “And wouldn’t it be a bit more sensible to do that, as opposed to the rather blunt, panicky, spatchcock, last minute instrument that the chancellor decided on when he was trying to grab as much money as possible in the desperate days before his budget.”
    Discussing the decision by a Scottish newspaper to publish the identity of a footballer who has taken out an injunction, he said the English legal system has “no jurisdiction whatsoever” to intervene.
    The suggestion showed the “arrogance” of the English system, he claimed, and that, in reality, the Scottish and English legal systems have a relationship of “equality not subordination”.
    But, he added, economic and legal powers did not mean an independence referendum was no longer necessary.
    “The mandate I carry is pretty overwhelming” following the elections, he explained, and greater independence was “a matter of respect for a democratic mandate”.
    “Scotland should raise all of its own revenue and be responsible for all its own spending.”
    But “independence, nationality and self-determination are about more than economics,” he added.’

  • mary

    fao Mark and others interested

    Herewith a link to the latest Dr Kelly story which gets murkier by the day. (his dental records go walkies for 48 hours and there was a break in at the dental surgery) from today’s Daily Mail (ie Monday 23 May 2011). This comes ahead of Michael Powers’s scheduled appearance – also today – on the BBC2 programme The Daily Politics to discuss the case. The programme starts at midday.
    Dr Michael Powers QC is one of the group of doctors and was a coroner.
    {http://www.medneg.co.uk/index.htm}. I believe that Aaronovitch is on the programme and like Rentoul, Kamm et al is brought on by the establishment to debunk ‘conspiracy theories’. See Aaronovitch’s book Voodoo Histories the title of which is cleverly designed to disparage and belittle.

  • mark_golding

    Courtenay – yes ‘the struggle’ in so many directions continues..

    My peers here are fully aware I am still troubled by my meeting with the late Robin Cook and although I feel stupid repeating myself, I am compelled to expand a bit on a paragraph in your post. You said:

    ‘On August 6, 2005, Cook died suddenly while hiking in his native Scotland. Prime Minister Tony Blair, for whom Cook served as Foreign Secretary before resigning in protest over the Iraq war, failed to attend Cook’s funeral.’

    Robin had become increasingly annoyed by Israeli settlement expansion in the West and repeated burning of olive trees, a Palestinian life-blood. On a visit to East Jerusalem as foreign secretary he was met by a group of Palestinians and called for an end to all settlement construction in the parts of the city Israel occupied after the Six-Day war.

    Netanyahu was furious and told Blair. Blair called a meeting with Alastair Campbell and Campbell agreed ‘Cook had to go’, some place else. Campbell then went on to destroy Robin’s marriage:


    When I met Robin he was nervous, he held my hand like a baby and I saw fear in his eyes. After convincing Robin who I was, we talked about our mutual hate for the Iraq war. Just before his driver called him to go, he told me Gaynor had said to him, ‘you must get out of politics now.’ Those words have haunted me to this day.

1 2 3

Comments are closed.