Blanket Corporate Media Corruption 406

It is disconcerting to be praised by a website whose next article warns of a “plague of sodomites”. Sometimes truth-telling is a difficult act because truth is a simple matter of fact; who might seek to exploit that truth is a different question. I almost certainly have little in common with the anti-gay people who chose to commend me.

It is however incumbent on those who know truth to reveal it to the best of their ability, particularly if it contradicts an untruth being put about widely. The lie that WikiLeaks is acting as an agent of the Russian state is one that needs to be countered. Wikileaks is much more important than a mere state propaganda organisation, and needs to be protected.

Political lying is a sad fact of modern life, but some lies are more dangerous than others. Hillary Clinton’s lies that the Podesta and Democratic National Congress email leaks are hacks by the Russian state, should be countered because they are untrue, and because their intention is to distract attention from her own corrupt abuse of power and money. But even more so because they recklessly feed in to a Russophobia which is starting to exceed Cold War levels in terms of open public abuse.

Clinton has made no secret of her view that Obama has not been forceful enough in his dealings in Syria, and within her immediate circle she has frequently referred to the Cuban missile crisis as the precedent for how she believes Russia must be faced down. It is her intention to restore US international prestige by such a confrontation with Putin in Syria early in her Presidency, and perhaps more to the point to restore the prestige of the office of POTUS and thus enhance her chances of getting her way with a probable Republican controlled senate and congress.

The problem with a game of nuclear armed chicken is we might all end up dead. The Americans do not read Putin well. As my readers know, I am in no way a fan of Putin. He believes he has a personal vocation to restore Russian greatness and has been ever more consumed by a religious devotion to the Orthodox Russian Church. It seems to me highly improbable Hillary can make him back down over Syria. I am no more a fan of Assad than I am a fan of Putin. Nevertheless to risk nuclear war over a desire to replace Assad with rival swarms of vicious disjointed Saudi and Al-Qaeda backed jihadist militias, scarcely seems sensible.

Is Trump any less dangerous? I don’t know. I simply fail to understand the cultural background from which he springs, and what I do understand, I dislike. Were I an American, I would have backed Bernie Sanders and I would now back Jill Stein.

It is worth noting that Hillary’s claim that 17 US Intelligence Agencies agree that Russia was the source of the leaks is plainly untrue. All they have said is that the leaks “are consistent with the methods and motivations of Russian-directed attacks.” Under extreme White House pressure to state that the Russians did it, that extremely weak statement was the only thing that the US Intelligence chiefs could cobble together. It is very plainly an admission there is no evidence that Russia did it, but the appalling corporate media have reported it as though it “proves” Hillary’s accusation of Russia is true.

Bill Binney is like myself a former recipient of the Sam Adams Award – the World’s foremost whistleblowing award. Bill was the senior NSA Director who actually oversaw the design of their current mass surveillance software, and Bill has been telling anybody who will listen exactly what I have been telling – that this material was not hacked from Russia. Bill believes – and nobody has better contacts or understanding of capability than Bill – that the material was leaked from within the US intelligence services.

I was in Washington last month to chair the presentation of the Sam Adams Award to heroic former ex-CIA agent and whistleblower John Kiriakou. There were on the platform with me a dozen or so former very senior and distinguished officers of the CIA, NSA, FBI and US Army. All now identify with the whistleblower community. There were speeches of tremendous power and insight about state abuse, from those who really know. But as usual, not one mainstream media outlet turned up to report an award whose previous winners and still active participants include Julian Assange, Edward Snowden and Chelsea Manning.

Similarly my statement of definite knowledge that Russia is not behind the Clinton leaks has caused enormous interest in the internet. One article alone about my visit to Assange has 174,000 Facebook likes. Across all internet media we calculate over 30 million people have read my information that Russia was not responsible for these leaks. There is no doubt whatsoever that I have direct access to the correct information.

Yet not one single mainstream media journalist has attempted to contact me.

Why do you think that might be?

406 thoughts on “Blanket Corporate Media Corruption

1 2 3
  • Mark

    ‘Matter of fact…’ we don’t know what Sodom exactly did. As for ‘truth-telling is a difficult act because truth is a simple matter of fact’? How far go, when there’s an audience to win or lose? Plus persecution. Having said this, you do brave on.

    • craig Post author

      I fear you might not have understood my first paragraph so have added another sentence to make it clear.

      • Mark

        With you there, Sodom has nothing to do with same sex lovers. And neither is the (supposed) author of said books.

          • Shatnersrug

            Yes but not Craig’s misuse you’d need to take that up with the site that chose those words.

          • Mark

            Think I meant shame’less’ but the article overall, is the punch – and obviously what’s important. How far do the lies go, and over Syria, ‘mainstream media journalists’ have excelled themselves. Plainly not reporting evidence, with those on the ground or out that loop, telling an entirely different story. As Vanessa Beeley, for instance writes, ‘why everything, you hear about Aleppo is wrong’. Not sure we’ve ever seen mainstream quite do a Syria and surrounding issues before, and as this post rightly alerts, the magnitude of concerns because of this. The last two lines say it all.

  • Bobm

    “Yet not one single mainstream media journalist has attempted to contact me.”

    Why do you think that might be?
    Craig. Do you subscribe to MEDIA LENS?

    Please invite all your readers to r.ead, and possibly subscribe

  • RobG

    I fear that it’s now all gawn too far, Craig. The total trampling of the law and civil society in USUK now makes them effectively police states (and the present UK prime minister has been an architect of this), aided and abetted by the whores in the mainstream media.

    However, what you say about the present leaks coming from US intelligence sources sort of confirms my own beliefs: that there’s a strong likelihood of some sort of military coup in the US.

    Last month General Joseph Dunford, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, faced the Senate Armed Services Committee and was asked about enforcing a no-fly zone in Syria. Here’s his brief answer…

    This was part of a 15 minute testimony that General Dunford gave, and those who listened to all of it might be drawing the same conclusions as I.

  • philw

    Totally agree about the dangers of Clinton. She keeps repeating her intention to have a ‘no-fly zone’ in Syria. Putin is a great pragmatist, but I dont think he could back down on this even if he wanted to – he is replaceable. The Russians have been pushed back right to their borders. And on Syria they are backed by the Chinese and Iran.

    If I was eligible I would also vote Stein.

    • Habbabkuk

      I wonder if our Transatlantic Friend Lysias – who has now said couple of times that he will be voting for Jill Stein (and has contribute substantially to her campaign) – could make himself useful by telling UK readers a little more about Mrs Stein, some inside info the MSM won’t have relayed to the sheeple, what she really stands for, whether she has announced fleshed-out policies in various important areas and so on?

      Craig now having mentioned Mrs Stein for the first time (I believe), this would be an excellent opportunity for our TF Lysias to contribute something both substantial and useful from his Washington D.C. vantage point.

      Thanks in advance.

      • RobG

        Yup, the trolls are definitely getting nervous.

        After everything that’s come out about Hillary Clinton recently, in saner times it would have totally trashed her chances of being ‘elected’ the US presidency.

        But no, down is up, black is white, war is peace, etc, etc.

        And of course Jill Stein is totally evil (although it will all be totally rigged, I predict a high turn out for Stein).

          • Habbabkuk

            That is precisely the sort of info our Transatlantic Friend Lysias would be well placed to supply.


            But lest we get too excited about the hanging chads and various other Florida shenanigans let us remember Irish-American Chicago Mayor Richard Daley and his Cook County shenanigans which gave the saintly Irish-American J.F. Kennedy victory in 1960.

            (That’s something you won’t be hearing from our Irish-American Transatmantic Friend… 🙂 )

          • Paul Barbara

            @ Habbabkuk October 22, 2016 at 21:27

            JFK was certainly no saint, but he was infinitely better than ANYTHING that has come up as POTUS since, and that includes the peanut farmer.

          • Habbabkuk


            Well, you may be right but since he only did a couple of years (as opposed to a full term or even two full terms) all judgements of that kind must remain speculative.

          • Habbabkuk


            I notice you didn’t contest my point about the election having been stolen for him (just like Bush)….

    • Tom Welsh

      “Putin is a great pragmatist, but I dont think he could back down on this even if he wanted to – he is replaceable”.

      Everyone is replaceable, although it would take a very great disaster or a series of blunders for Mr Putin to lose the confidence of the majority of Russians.

      What Western leaders have unfortunately failed to grasp is that Mr Putin is the very best they can do as far as Russian presidents are concerned. I have seen him described as the most moderate politician who could possibly be accepted as president of Russia.

      If he should be overthrown or killed – and I devoutly hope he is not – Russia would immediately become very much harder, very much less willing to make concessions or even to negotiate. The bear would begin to show its claws.

  • Knopperz

    Truth is a simple matter of fact?
    Truth..Lie… those are artificial (relative) Objects that can be shaped and formed by Will.
    Its part of the basic dualistic Mindset, while in reality there are only probabilities.
    The corporate Elites know that… they shape Reality however they need it.

    Pretty soon you can no longer distinguish fact from fiction –>

  • Mick McNulty

    The difference between Republicans and Democrats is the difference between being dragged down by a crocodile or an alligator. As a lefty-supporter of Trump…the lesser of two evils…I’ve recently heard he despises and threatens Iran. So, WW3 either way?

    • Mick McNulty

      If asked to choose between Trump or Clinton I choose we all use toilet paper on both sides.

    • Tom Welsh

      “The difference between Republicans and Democrats is the difference between being dragged down by a crocodile or an alligator”.

      Thanks – I very much like that. Indeed, I may quote it some time (with attribution, of course). Would that be OK?

  • Habbabkuk

    “Why do you think that might be?”

    There could be several reasons for this, Craig:

    1/. They ascribe less importance to the question of the origin of the leaks than you do

    2/. Laziness

    3/. You are not considered credible and/or trustworthy

    4/. They think they might have better sources to tap.


    But what I really wanted to take you to task for is the following:

    “He { Putin } …. has been ever more consumed by a religious devotion to the Orthodox Russian Church.”

    Are you serious? Really serious?

    A First in history might be expected to know a little more about the incestuous relationship between the Orthodox Church hierarchy and the Russian state (Greece is another example btw) – one which works very nicely for both parties (and which even survived the early Leninist persecutions and killings).

    • Republicofscotland

      I suppose one could draw a, if not a similar conclusion, then a likening to the over bloated upper chamber at Westminster, known as the House of Lords, which has appointed members of the clergy. As far as I know, and I’m sure I will be corrected if wrong, very few national parliaments cater for such needs of the clergy. I recall that Portugal however does.

      • Habbabkuk

        No, I don’t believe any serious person would attempt to draw that conclusion or “likening”.

    • Tom Welsh

      Yes, thank goodness the upper reaches of Church and State hierarchies have never worked together at any other place or time.

    • Ba'al Zevul

      I have to say I did a small double-take on the Orthodox Church item myself. Perhaps it was the way it was expressed. Putin was from the start assiduous in getting the Church back onside after its long eclipse under Communism, and I have the impression it now plays much the same role as it did in mediaeval times – distracting the faithful from any dangerous thoughts about the government. I imagine “consumed by a religious devotion” was intended sardonically (others can do it too, Habba, and better than you) – but the fact remains Putin finds the Church very handy both in promoting national identity and unity and in providing a tradition he can exploit, as the Tsars did. ‘Intertwined ‘ might be better than ‘incestuous’, then. I have little doubt Putin is as robust an atheist as his old KGB mentors.

      As to the unanimity of the media chorus, that goes without saying. Journalism is largely dead. A journalist is now someone who is trained not to recognise, let alone question a narrative, but instead to transmit it unchanged to the masses. Ultimately a journalist may aspire to write slightly critical but wholly unresearched op-eds, become known to the public, and ultimately work for the covernment as an advisor. They are then in a position to create the narrative (see Alistair Campbell et al).

    • Pyewacket

      Regarding your comment about Church & State relationships. A televised clip, showing Trump and Clinton at a post debate dinner for the USA’s high and mighty, clearly showed that the prospective Presidents had a Cardinal sat between them. No doubt in case fisticuffs broke out, or to limit the bad language.

      • Ger

        You are absolutely right, the dinner is a long standing tradition between the presidential candidates, but yes the clergyman was placed as a buffer between the two. With a little persuasion Clinton and Trump did shake hands, although it was almost under the table and out of sight of the cameras.

  • Anon1

    Edward Snowden I have some respect for, though he landed himself in an unfortunate position as propaganda tool for the oh-so open and democratic regimes of Russia and China.

    Assange is just a smarmy egoist with a god complex, whose ‘leaks’ reveal next to fuck all.

    • Knopperz

      You are judging Assange by your Emotional Feelings toward him…not by Logic.
      Yes, he is a controversial Person… but that isn’t the Topic of what he’s doing.

      He is revealing the Inner Workings of our Top Elites…granting us a peak behind the Curtain…and that deserves Respect. He is literally putting his Life on the Line for EVERYBODY since nobody else is willing doing it.

      • Trowbridge H. Ford

        Quite right, and other spies, especially Rick Ames, Robert Hanssen et al., have done so.

        Snowden went from being a special forces goon to a most serious leaker when he learned that they might get rid of him the same way they got rid of GCHQ?MI6 agent Gareth Williams, and fled to China and Russia because he knew that they would at least protect him from murder.

        • Ben

          I don’t care about personal history, unless it’s ongoing. Once you put your head above the parapet making it a target, you have a new tabula rasa by my reckoning.

          Try as they might to scrape shit up to indict him, Snowden comes up clean in my estimation.

    • Paul Barbara

      @ Anon1
      October 22, 2016 at 19:02
      ‘…whose ‘leaks’ reveal next to fuck all.’

      Which is why they are so eager to get him in jail…..yep, that’ll make a whole lotta’ sense to the ‘Queen of Hearts’.

  • Trowbridge H. Ford

    I certainly agree with what you say about Hillary whose husband tried to have me killed when he was POTUS, and about Trump, but don’t agree with your contradictory claim that Obama is both softer on Syria than she while stating that the intelligence community was “…under extreme White House pressure to state that the Russians did it (the hacking).”

    The American intelligence community has been out to get rid of Putin’s Moscow ever since G.H.W. Bush was Vice President, the vicious bastard who is now portrayed as some kind of rational loser.

    • Ben

      They’ve never ended their cold war against Russia or former Soviet. They back-stabbed Gorby and played Yeltsin, the drunken flunky, like he was their personal court jester.

      I wonder if Craig had a vote, how it would go. The one thing I have in common with him would be a pyrrhic vote.

    • Tom Welsh

      “…ever since G.H.W. Bush was Vice President, the vicious bastard who is now portrayed as some kind of rational loser”.

      Would that be the same vicious bastard who has always strenuously denied being in Dallas the day John F Kennedy was murdered?

      • Republicofscotland

        “Would that be the same vicious bastard who has always strenuously denied being in Dallas the day John F Kennedy was murdered?”

        There’s a picture I recall of Bush, (allegedly )standing in a group, the day JFK, was killed by the “Magic Bullet.”

        Also I recall Bush had aspirations to fill Reagan’s shoes, at the time of the assassination attempt. Coincidence?

    • Paul Barbara

      @ Trowbridge H. Ford October 22, 2016 at 19:08

      I certainly agree with you about G.H.W. Bush. Anyone who thinks differently would be well advised to read ‘Access Denied: For Reasons of National Security’. He was far worse than Killary Clinton.

  • RobG

    The cringeworthy vermin – and total traitors – from GCHQ are too afraid to address me directly (one reason being that I’d cut all their funding and put the lot of them in jail), but that aside, maybe they can explain why Hillary is so wonderful?

    It’s a comedy; it really is.

  • Trowbridge H. Ford

    Oh, forget to respond to your question of why no corporate media outlet has contacted you.

    All reporters loathe to be told and shown that they have gotten something really serious seriously wrong.

  • Republicofscotland

    “Why do you think that might be?”


    Some will be to afraid to do so, others will stick with the official narrative even if they don’t believe it. As for the networks, all will conform to Washington’s desire to blacken Russia’s name. The CIA infiltrated the press decades ago, god alone, knows how many hacks across the pond are on their payroll.

    As for Hillary a confirmed war hawk, if she become POTUS, and it looks likely, (Soros’s smear campaign looks like paying dividends) then her handlers, who write her foreign policy, will confront Putin, a man with a entrenched attitude, that could tip the scales in favour of all out war.

    In my opinion, if Trump wins and it very unlikely, it won’t really make a difference. Trump is a very, very good friend of the Clinton’s and in my opinion the whole run in to the vote, feels somewhat stage managed, as too who can throw the most mud. I sometime wonder if Trump has intentionally sabotaged his own campaign.

    I’d say today that US presidents, black white, women men, are nothing more than figureheads, corporate America, such as big pharma, and powerful lobby groups run the show from behind the scenes. In my opinion, most senators have been bought and paid for long ago. If those behind the scenes, want a full frontal confrontation in Syria, then it will inevitably happen.

    • Tom Welsh

      “…Trump is a very, very good friend of the [Clintons]…”

      Didn’t he buy them a while back?

    • Knopperz

      I just hope gary johnson and jill stein reach at least 5% each…
      That will also make a big difference….and people dont seem to realize that.

  • Tom Welsh

    “As my readers know, I am in no way a fan of Putin. He believes he has a personal vocation to restore Russian greatness and has been ever more consumed by a religious devotion to the Orthodox Russian Church. It seems to me highly improbable Hillary can make him back down over Syria”.

    It troubles me that, on the face of those words, you dislike Mr Putin because he wishes to restore his country’s greatness and because he is religious. Those don’t seem to me to be good grounds for dislike or disapproval. Indeed, I fervently wish that the UK could find a leader with the same qualities. Leaving aside the question of religion, is it just Russia that you think should not aim for greatness – or all nations? Do you think that Great Britain, and Scotland if it regains its independence, should be explicitly pledged to remain small, humble and unimportant?

    You remark about how unlikely it is for “Hillary” to make Mr Putin “back down over Syria”. Has it occurred to you that the reason for this is that his policy and his aims in Syria stem from his Christian belief, his desire to save lives, and his respect for law? Many Syrians are Christians – and have been since the Christian religion was invented – and people still speak Aramaic, the language that Jesus Christ spoke. The Syrian Christians still mingle, as they have always done, on friendly and tolerant terms with their Sunni, Shia, Alawite and other compatriots under their tolerant, secular government. Their lives are threatened by the harshly intolerant, cruel, violent, murderous terrorists who have been deliberately thrust into their country by the US government and its partners in crime. Hundreds of Christians have been crucified and murdered in other horrible ways; entire Christian communities have been utterly destroyed.

    Mr Putin, poor benighted soul that he is, thinks this should stop and the Syrian Christians – together with those of other religions or none – should go back to living in relative peace and friendship. That can be done only if all the vicious terrorist murderers are either killed or expelled. Yet Western governments, backed by the Saudis, the Turks, and the Gulf State medieval monarchies – and the Western media – are doing everything in their power to help the terrorists and thwart the Syrians and Russians. Why? Apparently because they have decided to hold a grudge against Mr Putin and Russia.

    As to law, please note that both Mr Obama and Mr Putin have studied law. Their practical attitude to laws, including international law, could hardly be more different. mr Putin respects and obeys the law whenever he can – which is, to all intents and purposes, always. Mr Obama completely ignores it unless it suits his purpose.

    • Republicofscotland


      Very interesting comment, and another perspective, is always welcome, and although I feel Putin domestically has removed opponents, I do understand that Russia needs a strong and forthright leader, to stand up to Nato and her Middle Eastern allies, such as Saudi Arabia and Israel.

      I recall Chomsky, saying that US, (governments) were/are outwardly violent with regards to foreign policy, and that Russian (governments) were/are the opposite, less violent in foreign policy, but far stricter with it own citizens.

      But I agree, that Nato and it’s allies, are in most part the aggressors, around the globe.

  • Tom Welsh

    Has anyone else noticed how odd it is that the two candidates in the current US presidential election ar known to everyone as “Trump” and “Hillary”? How come one is called by his surname, whereas the other gets the friendly intimacy of her first name? Surely it can’t be because of the other Clinton, who ceased to be president so long ago. Then why? In any case, why not call her “Mrs Clinton?” (It would also be polite to refer to “Mr Trump”).

    • Republicofscotland

      I’d say the name Clinton, is to badly tarnished, Bill saw to that, On Jan. 26, 1998—Bill Clinton famously told the nation, “I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky.” Clinton later confessed that he did indeed have an “improper physical relationship” with Monica Lewinksky, a 24-year-old White House intern.

      As for Trump, isn’t he widely known in the States, as The Donald?

  • Resident Dissident

    Indisputable facts

    Wikileaks does not do leaks which would embarrass the Russian regime.
    Those who make such leaks stay well clear of Wikileaks. They do not trust Wikileaks as an impartial organisation,
    There are IT experts who have identified strong similarities between the attacks on Podesta and the DNC and those conducted by the Russian regime in the past. Whether all those experts are independent of the US authorities or whether their technical assessments are correct are not something that I have the technical knowledge to determine – and I suspect the same is the case for Craig. I very much doubt that this matter can be proved one way or the other.
    Assange has been paid by RT for documentaries he has produced on their behalf.
    A Sam Adams award dinner in Moscow was sponsored and attended by a member of the FSB supervisory board
    Assange has little or any record of being critical of the Putin regime – despite their appalling record with regard to internet freedom and secrecy, matters which Assange leads us to believe that he cares about deeply.
    The Russian regime has been behind other cyber attacks

    If you think Putin’s motivation arises from a religious devotion then I am afraid you do not understand the man – Putin is only using the Orthodox Church to support his own personal goals. When I was in Moscow in the spring I had a long conversation with an Orthodox priest, who was fluent in English and he repeatedly made the point as to how Putin and some of the church leaders were using the Church to support a Nationalist agenda and his Power Vertical. Increasing defence spending while at the same time allowing inflation to cut pensions (witness the Prime Minister/s comments on the matter), and cutting back on health spending didn’t impress the priest as demonstrating Christian values.

    You are also very wrong to equate dislike and disagreement with the Putin regime with Russophobia – this was exactly the same tactic which was employed by the fellow travellers towards those who opposed Stalin. It was disreputable then and it is now. There are many millions of Russians who do not agree with what Putin is doing – even if they cannot express this disagreement openly for obvious reasons. There are also many who support Putin. or more correctly the nationalist line that he is taking – but those who believe in free speech (or say that they do) need to understand that supporting one view or other should not result in facile accusations of Russophobia. Those who truly love Russia and Russians should at least acknowledge that they are an intelligent and educated people who are capable of many different views other than those of their current leaders.

        • CE

          Hello. 🙂

          Still a Polskaphile I’m afraid. Not long back from a week in Zakopane, what a beautiful place. Shame about the current government/political situation though, both here and there.

      • Resident Dissident

        I suggest you look a little further behind that page and tell us what Wikileaks has leaked and published from the Russian Govt in recent times – there is plenty that is embarrassing but you won’t find it on Wikileaks.

        • Sharp Ears

          GRINDED it is as far as I am concerned.

          And though spell check disapproves of grinded, it is actually not a new word. It has been used historically in various senses (the OED lists a number of examples from the 19th century and earlier), and a Google Ngram suggests the word was more common in the 19th century than it is now. Still, use of grinded seems to have bottomed out in the middle of the 20th century, and it might sound wrong to many English speakers, especially outside the U.S. (The Grammarist)

  • Resident Dissident

    “Has it occurred to you that the reason for this is that his policy and his aims in Syria stem from his Christian belief, his desire to save lives, and his respect for law? ”

    Perhaps if he didn’t bomb aid convoys and hospitals or prop up a regime that barrel bombs and gas its opponents I could take this comment seriously – or perhaps I missed those bits in the Bible.

    • Tom Welsh

      I’m tempted to ignore your comments, as they seem so insincere or badly-informed as to be trivial. However, just for the record…

      “…bomb aid convoys and hospitals or prop up a regime that barrel bombs and gas its opponents…”

      That’s because the Russians have not bombed aid convoys or hospitals – they go to great lengths to avoid doing so, unlike the Americans.

      They are not “propping up a regime”. They are supporting the legitimate, democratically elected secular government of the Syrian nation. Anyone who has taken the trouble (and run the risk) of visiting Syria will tell you that the great majority of ordinary Syrians support Mr Assad and his government, and the Syrian armed forces which are doing their best to save the lives of civilians – even after over 100,000 soldiers have been murdered by the US-sponsored terrorists.

      As for “barrel bombs” and “gas”, you are breathing from an empty oxygen tank there. The whole “barrel bomb” thing is beyond ridiculous. In what way is a crudely-constructed “barrel bomb” worse than a far more powerful 1-ton bomb as dropped by NATO forces? Andy why would a government attack its own civilians anyway? Of course many of Syria’s cities, towns and villages are riddled with terrorist vermin who both disguise themselves as civilians, and hold innocent civilians as human shields. And they are quick to tell the Western media about such invented “atrocities” – just as the Western media is always quick to snap them up.

      The “gas” thing was completely refuted last year. On the one or two occasions when an investigation was launched, it was proved conclusively that the rockets used were not nearly powerful enough to have come from any government-held area. Moreover, recently actual poison gas factories have been pinpointed in ISIS-held areas of Iraq and Syria; it has been documented that the ingredients for such gases as sarin and mustard gas were shipped to the terrorists in Syria from Turkey (most likely in some of your “aid convoys”); and that even the Americans are now complaining loudly that the terrorists are using poison gas on them and their allies.

      • Tom Welsh

        Here is a small cross-section of the hundreds of articles I could show you, rebutting your accusations.

        “U.N. has testimony that Syrian rebels used sarin gas: investigator”

        “How Long Has ISIS Been Stockpiling Chemical Weapons?”

        “Terrorists & their paymasters hold Aleppo civilians as human hostages – VA senator”

        “How the US Armed-up Syrian Jihadists”

        “US Soldiers Resist Obama’s Support of Al Qaeda”

        “A new kind of war: Russian journalist and war expert on what they learned in Syria”

        “Destroying Syria: a Joint Criminal Enterprise”

      • Resident Dissident

        “I’m tempted to ignore your comments, as they seem so insincere or badly-informed as to be trivial.”

        And yours were just sycophantic drivel.

        The gas thing has not been completely refuted – there have now been 3 UN sponsored examinations of the facts (the latest which concluded yesterday) that have all concluded that the Syrian regime was behind gas attacks. You can of corse ignore these as they come from a partial and biased source. Please don’t bother with the usual Shushanka ulitsa diversions on the subject – I am sure that in your mind Mr Putin is a saint who is incapable of no wrong whatsoever. Just remember your predecessors said exactly the same about Uncle Joe and those who were invited into Budapest and Prague.

        • Tom Welsh

          Resident Dissident, you wrote: “The gas thing has not been completely refuted – there have now been 3 UN sponsored examinations of the facts (the latest which concluded yesterday) that have all concluded that the Syrian regime was behind gas attacks”.

          Please read the beginning of the first article I cited (from the Chicago Tribune – not exactly a Russian source), and tell me where it says that the UN investigation “concluded that the Syrian regime was behind gas attacks”.

          “U.N. has testimony that Syrian rebels used sarin gas: investigator
          May 05, 2013|Reuters

          “GENEVA (Reuters) – U.N. human rights investigators have gathered testimony from casualties of Syria’s civil war and medical staff indicating that rebel forces have used the nerve agent sarin, one of the lead investigators said on Sunday.

          “The United Nations independent commission of inquiry on Syria has not yet seen evidence of government forces having used chemical weapons, which are banned under international law, said commission member Carla Del Ponte”.

        • Tom Welsh

          23 June 2014 – The Joint Mission of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons and the United Nations (OPCW-UN) announced today that the removal of Syria’s chemical weapons material is now complete.

          ‘The removal of the most critical material for destruction began in early January, in line with an agreement brokered by Russia and the United States, by which Syria renounced its chemical weapons material and joined 1992 Chemical Weapons Convention.

          ‘The focus in recent weeks had been on the removal of the remaining 7.2 per cent of the declared chemical weapons material which had been difficult owing to volatile security conditions.

          ‘“With this last movement, the total of declared chemical weapons materials destroyed or removed from Syria has reached 100 per cent,” the Joint Mission stated in a news release. “The most operationally challenging task within the effort to eliminate the Syrian chemical weapons programme has come to an end.”’

        • Tom Welsh

          “Just remember your predecessors said exactly the same about Uncle Joe and those who were invited into Budapest and Prague”.

          I have no idea what you are talking about. I am a British citizen, and have absolutely no connection with Mr Putin or Russia. I merely collect information, assess it, and form my own judgments.

          By the way, what connection exists in your mind between Joseph Dzugashvili (alias “Stalin”), a psychopathic atheist Georgian bandit who attained control of the USSR and who personified Soviet Communism, and Vladimir Putin, a religious, law-abiding Russian leader? There seems to be such a connection, but why? Why?

          • Habbabkuk

            Joe Stalin – an Okrana informer under the Tsars

            Vlad Putin – a KGB agent and informer under the Soviets.

            All clear, Martian?

          • Fredi

            Here’s a trustworthy British citizen saying it as it is. The corporate media feed us nothing but lies.

            Free Western woman goes by herself to Syria, says everything western media tells you is wrong

            Part of channel(s): Syria (current event)
            What’s really going on in Aleppo? Are Assad and Putin exterminating the population for sport? Is it a war against US-backed “moderates”? That is what the mainstream media would have us believe. Vanessa Beeley, an independent investigative journalist who just returned from Aleppo has the real story: the US backed “moderates” are the terrorists.

            More from this woman:

            Journey To Aleppo Part I: Exposing The Truth


        • Tom Welsh

          “Possible Implications of Faulty US Technical Intelligence in the Damascus Nerve Agent Attack of August 21, 2013”, by
          Richard Lloyd
          Former UN Weapons Inspector
          Tesla Laboratories Inc.|Arlington, VA
          Voice: 509-979-3995; e-mail: [email protected]
          Theodore A. Postol
          Professor of Science, Technology, and National Security Policy
          Massachusetts Institute of Technology
          Voice: 617 543-7646; e-mail:
          [email protected]
          Washington, DC
          January 14, 2014

          “The Red Line and the Rat Line”, by Seymour M. Hersh

      • Habbabkuk


        “They are supporting the legitimate, democratically elected secular government of the Syrian nation.”

        Have you just flown in from another planet?

        Secular, yes – but “democratically elected” (and therefore “legitimate”??

        But convince us. Start by naming the candidates who stood against “President” Assad Jnr at the last election for President and the main political parties in the country.


        • Loony

          Do governments attain legitimacy via democratic elections?

          Who elected the House of Saud? Who elected the Emir of Qatar? Are their governments illegitimate? Should we bomb them for their lack of democracy?

          Who elected Viktor Yanukovych? – Oh sorry that one would be the Ukrainian electorate, but what happened to him? I guess I will have to consult the BBC to find the answer.

        • Tom Welsh

          “But convince us. Start by naming the candidates who stood against “President” Assad Jnr at the last election for President and the main political parties in the country”.

          That turns out to be laughably easy. You can see a good account at the page,_2014 Wikipedia is not usually very reliable in matters of modern politics, because of its pronounced pro-American government line. However, even Wikipedia admits on that page that

          “Presidential elections were held in Syria on 3 June 2014. It was the first multi-candidate election in decades since the Ba’ath party came to power in a coup. In late April 2014, Bashar al-Assad announced he would run for a third term in Syria’s first multi-candidate direct presidential election”.

          “Turnout 73.42%
          Nominee Bashar al-Assad Hassan al-Nouri
          Party Ba’ath Party NIACS
          Popular vote 10,319,723 500,279
          Percentage 88.7% 4.3%”

          ‘A total of 24 candidates, including 2 women and a Christian, submitted applications to the Supreme Constitutional Court for the presidency.[33][34][35] Of these, two candidates other than Assad met all the conditions to run, including the support of 35 members of the parliament.[36] The two other candidates chosen to run are seen as “mostly symbolic contenders” and “little known figures”‘.

          “The Supreme Constitutional Court announced on Wednesday 4 June that turnout for the election was 73.42%, with 11,634,412 of the 15,845,575 Syrians eligible to take part voting. The number for Syrians eligible to vote is based on the government’s data of all Syrians living in Syria and abroad over the age of 18; this includes all Syrians in government-held territory, rebels-held territory, refugees, newly naturalized Kurds, and declared Syrian expatriates.

          “The number of invalid papers was 442,108, or 3.8%”.

          Of course, the election was held under wartime conditions (Wikipedia and other Western sources call it “a civil war”, which of course it is not – it is a war fought by a nation trying to defend its people against a ravenous horde of violent barbarians paid, armed and urged on by the US government). Very few nations have ever chosen to change their leaders in the middle of a war.

          • Resident Dissident

            Comedy Gold – 22 candidates did not meet the conditions to run, millions had been driven out of the country as refugees and the other 2 candidates were puppets put up to try and give some legitimacy. Thank you for exposing your own democratic standards – no wonder you like Mr Putin.

          • Tom Welsh

            May I remind you that you challenged me to “[name] the candidates who stood against “President” Assad Jnr at the last election for President and the main political parties in the country”.

            I did exactly that. Now you start quibbling about other matters. May I point out that, whereas there were three candidates (including Mr Assad) in the Syrian election, there are only two in the current US election? (Neither of whom is credible, decent or even remotely human, but that’s a different issue).

            “The conditions required to be a candidate in a presidential election are the following:

            A candidate must be Muslim
            A candidate must have the support of no less than 35 members of the parliament
            A candidate must be 34 years old or older
            A candidate must have lived in Syria for 10 years before the election
            A candidate must be Syrian by birth, of parents who are Syrians by birth
            A candidate must not be married to a non-Syrian spouse”

            I don’t suppose you will find much to complain about there. In Britain, we have traditionally allowed clowns like Screaming Lord Such and Nick Clegg to stand for election – and Clegg actually was elected, demonstrating the foolishness of the British voter – but the Syrians take the more practical approach of ruling out the obviously unsuitable right at the outset.

    • Republicofscotland


      You must be one of the few, who still believes the UN convoy was bombed, countless pictures widely available show the vehicles mostly structurally intact, not conducive with bombing. Infact the UN side show in my opinion was staged to take the bad look off the US, who several days earlier killed 60 odds troops during a agreed ceasefire.

      I’ll add this today in the Western press, we hear and read of the vicious slaughter in Aleppo by Russia and Assad forces.

      Yet when it come to Mosul in Iraq, and the attack on it by Nato and its allies, its is described as liberating Mosul.

      The stench of hypocrisy is overwhelming.

  • Sharp Ears

    Media Lens Retweeted
    WikiLeaks ‏@wikileaks · 17 hours ago

    Red baiting opponents 2016 style: “Russia” and “Putin” were mentioned more times during the US presidential debates than any other subject.

    Then a table of most used words in the debates.

  • bevin

    “Yet not one single mainstream media journalist has attempted to contact me. Why do you think that might be?”

    The media has changed very quickly during the past ten years or so. The number of those employed as reporters has fallen enormously: and those who are left have deep and justifiable feelings of insecurity. The old fashioned reporters, whoever they worked for, were much more independently minded, they took themselves and their profession much more seriously. And were almost all very cynical about information received from the government. They also tended to see themselves as workers rather than part of the Establishment.

    The news media today is increasingly staffed by people who see themselves as freelances, and aspire for positions in PR or the government, they are very competitive but, unlike the old days when reporters competed for scoops and vied for the approval of the readers, they are competing for patronage. They aren’t looking for scoops but for chances to discredit radicals, suppress bad news and ‘get in on the ground floor’ by giving concealed support to political campaigns.

    Interviewing a Craig Murray or arranging for Julian Assange to appear on TV annoys the Boss, he remembers who was responsible for the embarrassment ensuing and that person’s job is in jeopardy. The way to get ahead in the media now is to lend a hand in developing a propaganda campaign, to spread vile rumours, charges of pedophilia for example; to discredit a whistleblower or to harass honest men, the way that Oliver Kamm has harassed Neil Clark.

    The good news is that the mainstream media is losing its credibility-you can almost watch it fading away- so that its ability to cause damage is limited now, in time. If it doesn’t get a war started soon it never will.

    Mere months ago, for example, it was enough for trolls just to sneer at RT or Sputnik to discredit them as “state owned propaganda vehicles.” Now no well informed person can fail to use these outlets to balance the one sided propaganda of the BBC or any of the US news oligopolies.

    Within the last couple of years we have seen campaigns from the media, on the matter of Scottish Independence and then Corbyn, quite without precedent for their dishonesty and crudity, and the victims have come out of their ordeals not weakened but strengthened by the unanimity of the Establishment’s disdain. Something similar happened over ‘Brexit’: nobody believed a word that the likes of Cameron and Blair said, if Blair, Straw and their Cabinet members had been against the EU Brexit would never have won.

    The real question that people in Craig’s position face is whether to do the MSM the favour of shoring up their credibility by giving them interviews. And this is particularly the case because there is no doubt that they will do everything in their power to distort, misrepresent and trivialise anything that you tell them.

    • CE

      “Mere months ago, for example, it was enough for trolls just to sneer at RT or Sputnik to discredit them as “state owned propaganda vehicles.” Now no well informed person can fail to use these outlets to balance the one sided propaganda of the BBC or any of the US news oligopolies.”


      Truly amazing, especially if you’re not a Russian Trollbot. Hideously off the mark yet still references “well informed persons” in relation to the propaganda arm of criminal klepto-state, pat yourself on the back.

      • Loony

        Not so amazing. You can obtain more information from RT than from any western news source. This does not mean you like Russians, merely that you despise the venal spewers of PR nonsense that monopolize western media sources.

        A long time ago now an Englishman demonstrated the only way to deal with western media. It is, after all, the only language they understand

        • Republicofscotland


          I find little establishment bots such as RD and CE, rather amusing, as they twist and contort, to do down just about anything Russian. Yet, the worst propaganda machine on the planet the BBC, is right on their doorsteps, but the obedient little bots, never notice it, how convenient. ?

          • CE

            “The worst propaganda machine on the planet the BBC” 😆

            Keep em coming boys.

            The BBC is off course an imperfect institution and a lot of it’s reporting towards Scotland leaves a lot to be desired but come it’s incomparable to state controlled media of a criminal state like RT.

          • Macky

            CE; “The BBC is off course an imperfect institution and a lot of it’s reporting towards Scotland leaves a lot to be desired but come it’s incomparable to state controlled media of a criminal state like RT.”

            I suggest that the explanation for this sort of comment is best explained by this;

            “People in Russia are brainwashed by their state TV”
            “How do you know?”
            “I heard it on the BBC”


          • Resident Dissident

            The only one I see twisting and contorting in this thread is yourself. – if I tried to do down all things Russian I am sure Mrs RD would deal with me before anyone on this blog. I am a Russophile who think that it deserves much better leaders. Using a parallel logic it would be easy to label you as an Anglophobe which I suspect to be the source of your Scottish Nationalism. Nationalists who hate their neighbours do not have a very good track record.

        • CE

          Ok, you’ve outdone them with that one.

          “. You can obtain more information from RT than from any western news source. This does not mean you like Russians, merely that you despise the venal spewers of PR nonsense that monopolize western media sources.”


          And it’s not about “liking Russia”, of course there are a great many things to like about Russia and it’s people. It’s about opening your eyes and recognising Putin and his abhorrent regime for what it is.

          • Republicofscotland


            You’re wasting your time, bots like CE, have been strenuously conditioned over long periods of time, to denounce all things Russian. Logic doesn’t come into it, you won’t read comments from the establishment bots, decrying Britain’s allies, not even those will neferious regimes, who buy billions of pounds of weapons such as Saudi Arabia, or Bahrain.

    • Rhisiart Gwilym

      Excellent commentary, as usual, Bevin. I’ve lifted this post of yours whole, to re-post on media-watching websites that I frequent. Thanks as always for you deeply-informed, savvy assessments of our realities. Pity we don’t see more of your input here on Craig’s comments, and less from the already-identified trolls. But for them there’s always the DR.DADE way – which I practice assiduously when skimming through the comments here looking for the names whom I know from past experience to be actually worth reading: With known trolls, Don’t Read. Don’t Answer Don’t Engage. You know, the likes of Hab, Res.Diss., etc.

      Practicing the DR.DADE response lightens the load greatly of extracting the worthwhile stuff from Craig’s comment tails.

  • CE

    “No doubt whatsoever”, “100% certainty”.

    You really need to be careful with throwing comments like this around, Craig. For some unknown reason you have 100% faith in Julian but this categorically not the same thing. And for someone with first hand experience and knowledge of Putin I find out disappointing that you resort to RT tropes like “Russophohia”.

    Not for the first time, I fear Julian has used your own noble history of genuine whistleblowing against you and is leading you a merry dance.

    Oh and Jill Stein is an anti science idiot.

    All the best.

    • Resident Dissident

      My dad always told me that the only people who are 100% certain are usually fools – one of many excellent pieces of advice that he has given me.

        • Tom Welsh

          No, of course not! RD seems to disagree with me about many things, but in this he is absolutely correct. I remember Bertrand Russel, in his “Liberal Decalogue”, saying something like, “Never believe anything absolutely – even what I tell you”. Other interesting quotations:

          “Even if your mother says she loves you, check it out. Believe nothing you hear or read without verification”.
          – Professor Mike Foley of the University of Florida (according to his student Billy O’Connor –

          “Nothing is always absolutely so”.
          – Theodore Sturgeon (“Sturgeon’s Law”)

          “Don’t believe anything. Regard things on a scale of probabilities. The things that seem most absurd, put under ‘Low Probability’, and the things that seem most plausible, you put under ‘High Probability’. Never believe anything. Once you believe anything, you stop thinking about it”.
          – Robert Anton Wilson (A precursor of fuzzy logic)

          “Following Korzybski, I put things in probabilities, not absolutes… My only originality lies in applying this zetetic attitude outside the hardest of the hard sciences, physics, to softer sciences and then to non-sciences like politics, ideology, jury verdicts and, of course, conspiracy theory”.
          – Robert Anton Wilson, in an interview in High Times (2003).

          • Tom Welsh

            “RD seems to disagree with me about many things, but in this he is absolutely correct”.

            Whoops! Apologies. I should have written “… in this he seems to me quite likely to be correct”.

    • Tom Welsh

      You are right; it’s not Russophobia but hatred of and contempt for Russia that is being assiduously stirred up. You should ask yourself, “Why?” Because when a 750-kiloton Yars warhead detonates in your vicinity, you will only have microseconds to wonder what went wrong.

      • CE

        Yes of course, Putin is completely innocent and hasn’t been doing anything to provoke the West and/or Nato. 🙄

        • Republicofscotland


          Putin and Russia, have come to the aid of a long time ally in Assad, that may be a difficult concept for you to grasp, as the West, turned on Saddam and Gaddafi, when he no longer dsnced to their tune.

          Nato, and its allies such as Saudi Arabia and Israel cannot be allowed to swan around the globe, and regime change or install puppets governments, to suit their needs.

        • Loony

          Maybe Putin has provoked people, maybe he hasn’t, who knows? You provide no evidence.

          However Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia used to be part of the USSR. Now they are part of NATO, At the time of the collapse of the USSR the Russians were promised that NATO would not expand eastward.

          Many former members of the Warsaw Pact are now members of NATO.

          The west sponsored a coup in the Ukraine and overthrew the government that was recognized as the lawful government. The west has imposed sanctions on Russia.

          NATO organized a military exercise which brought NATO troops (including German troops) to the Russian border. German troops arrived in position on June 22nd – the anniversary of Operation Barbarossa.

          So lots of people have been provoking lots of other people. Is there not a saying about removing the mote from thine own eye -perhaps you should look it up.

      • Resident Dissident

        Putin, his KGB friends and the oligarchs do not equal Russia – please understand rather than trying to appease them. I do have more appreciation for their intelligence than to think they will blow us up – together with their children, whores and investments.

        • Republicofscotland

          “together with their children, whores and investments.”



          That one little sentence, says more about you than all your other comments on this thread put together, you’re a ugly person on the inside.

          • Resident Dissident

            No I just don’t like Russian oligarchs having run into not a few in my time.

          • Republicofscotland

            “No I just don’t like Russian oligarchs having run into not a few in my time.”



            Well bloody well, watch where you’re going, you sound a clumsy fool.

          • Tom Welsh

            “No I just don’t like Russian oligarchs having run into not a few in my time”.

            Nothing beats personal experience. Did you meet those Russian oligarchs in Russia, or abroad? And when – during the 1990s, or since? There are oligarchs and there are oligarchs. For instance, no one calls Donald Trump an oligarch, but he is one.

        • Loony

          Why not read some German history – the Germans were very good record keepers. I think you will find that the Wehrmacht war diaries contain words to the effect

          “Russians very rarely surrender. Even when their position is hopeless they fight to the last man”

          Of course things could have changed – but you are likely going to have to go all in to find out. The question is why would you want to.

          • Habbabkuk

            Well, they couldn’t really win, could they.

            Shot by the Germans if they held their positions, shot by the political commissars if they retreated……

          • Resident Dissident

            “Russians very rarely surrender. Even when their position is hopeless they fight to the last man”

            You think I don’t know that – but they also do not appreciate weakness, and indeed they will only respect and listen to you if you take a firm position. When you have been married to a Russian for over 20 years you do learn about these sort of things.

    • Ben

      Hmm. Where did you read that, CNN?

      She’s neither anti-science or anti-vaccination, which is where this canard originated.

      She is a bit limited, and is on record as a tone-deaf musician, but she does not deserve to be jackassed by repeated and re-repeated hearsay.

      • CE

        Various sources but HuffPo or Salon I think. She’s quite clearly pandered to anti vaccine morons, if not been quite outright in her own thoughts.

        FFS she was even spluttering nonsense about WiFi being bad for you a few weeks ago.

        • Ben

          Two of the most establishment entities are PuffHo and Salon…Daily Beast, Politico even more so.

          Coronations (for Hillary or anyone else) leave me cold.

        • Paul Barbara

          @ CE October 22, 2016 at 21:30
          ‘Various sources but HuffPo or Salon I think. She’s quite clearly pandered to anti vaccine morons, if not been quite outright in her own thoughts….’

          More power to her elbow… ‘”Vaxxed : From Cover-Up to Catastrophe”[Full”Movie]Online’:

          ‘….FFS she was even spluttering nonsense about WiFi being bad for you a few weeks ago….’
          Yep, a woman after my own heart – one who speaks the TRUTH:

          Talking out of your posterior, about something you know nothing, and care less, about.

          As for all your anti-Russian and anti-Putin spouts, you can’t care very much about Poland…have they not had enough of wars? Are you REALLY intentionally supporting the government and MSM drumbeat to war?
          In the run-up to WWII, Poland was brutalizing and killing German residents – and was even planning a ‘lightning strike’ on Germany! I don’t need to remind you how that panned out.

  • fred

    “Yet not one single mainstream media journalist has attempted to contact me.

    Why do you think that might be?”

    Last Monday you wrote a piece called “A Peculiar Coincidence” which turned out to be very inaccurate on all counts, about bank accounts being frozen which it turned out to have not been frozen and interviews being cancelled which turned out to have been postponed to allow legal representation and internet access being cut by a “state actor” leading people to believe it was cut by America or Britain when all the time it was Ecuador who had removed Assange’s privileges.

    it could be that you were not aware of the facts or it could be that you were aware and your intention was to deceive and either one would be a reason for the media not to contact you.

    • Ben

      Fred; Diplomatic channels of comms are difficult to verify, but it makes sense that Kerry, as suggested by some, threatened ‘dire consequences’ wrt Assange. Ecuador claims they wish to avoid the appearance of influencing US elections but ask yourself;

      With all their local issues of import, do you think they really are all that concerned with the outcome in the US?

    • Republicofscotland

      Of course all your, comments are completely accurate, bigging yourself up, because you happen to find out that the Ecuadorian government cut Assange’s internet connection, doesn’t mean you know more than Craig on this partucular thread, or do you profess differently?

      Stick to what you’re good at, which is SNP bad.

    • Paul Barbara

      Even Jack Ruby said ‘Democracy was finished in America’ just days before his ‘contracted’ cancer killed him.

      • Habbabkuk

        Seconded. But that’s Mary for you, still unreformed. She specialises in visiting the sins of the parents onto the children (and, evidently, even the grand children) – and vice versa!

    • Republicofscotland

      Thank you Sharp Ears, for that very interesting link.

      One wonders if psychosis, is hereditary, I hope not. ?

    • Sharp Ears

      Hillary’s surprising ties to Tony Blair

      Hillary Clinton and Tony Blair, the former prime minister of Britain, enjoyed a close personal relationship that allowed them to collude on a number of foreign policy issues behind the scenes.

      Blair went from helping the former secretary of state make moves in the Middle East to joining former Clinton insiders at a well-connected consulting firm whose work has stoked concerns that the Clintons help their friends profit off their personal ties.

      Additional details about Blair’s relationship with Clinton have emerged in several batches of private emails that have been released by the State Department at the end of each month, including those published Wednesday.


      • Resident Dissident

        I wonder if this is the same person who claimed that Hillary was behind the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and then behind their removal at a later date – that person clearly suffered from a demonstrably irrational hatred of all things supported by the US and other western democracies.

  • fwl

    Always learn something here. I hadn’t heard of Bill Binney nor Jill Stein. Jill needs sure needs some promotional work (can back at 2000/1). Shall read up on both.

    • Paul Barbara

      There is a film about Bill Binney – A Good American’, but it’s not on the web yet.
      I saw it 3/4 weeks ago in North London.

      Bill and Annie Machon did a Q&A after it.

      • Resident Dissident

        I am not pushing Hillary, I am not a great fan – just pointing out that I cannot find support for Craig’s claim. It’s called nuance you should try it sometimes.

        • fred

          It wouldn’t make much sense anyway, Hillary must know it was America that backed down. Kennedy agreed to remove American missiles from Turkey but wanted it kept quiet.

          • Byjimja

            “Hillary must know it was America that backed down. Kennedy agreed to remove American missiles from Turkey but wanted it kept quiet.”

            That’s not quite right. US missiles in Turkey had already had a withdrawal order issued before the ‘crisis’ occured, though the order had not yet been executed, they were being replaced by Polaris subs. The US refused Krushchev’s offer of simultaneous withdrawal despite knowing that their own missiles in Turkey were already obsolete. A twisted game of brinkmanship played at the risk of several hundred million lives. What fun.

      • Resident Dissident

        I also don’t think trying to force the Russian regime to comply with a no fly zone in Syria would be very effective – there are lots of other ways of putting pressure on Putin.

    • craig Post author

      Yes. Of course if you put back the four words you omitted from the start of my quote that becomes axiomatic.

  • CE

    And now Julian has invoked the Rothschilds to defend Putin on twitter. House on the wikileaks bingo 😆

    I actually do have a great deal of respect for Craig, I hope he sees sense at some point but it must be difficult when he’s in so deep, but wikileaks is done. There possibly was a time when Julian could have saved it by cutting himself off, but that’s long gone.

    Anyone comparing The BBC(an imperfect state institution) to RT(state controlled propaganda) needs to go for a lie down or to educate themselves.

    • Joe

      The idea that the BBC, in terms of its coverage of international affairs since the Iraq invasion, is NOT state controlled propaganda, is a hilarious one.

      • CE

        As I said absolutely incomparable to RT. As is Britain to Putin’s kleptocracy.

        If they were state controlled funny the government was furious with them during EU ref.

        • Loony

          You are off your trolley – the UK is immeasurably more corrupt than Russia.

          Take a look at the mountain of corpses piled up as a consequence of UK foreign policy. Take a look at exactly what is meant by “infinite re-hypothocation” and then ask why the UK is the only place in the world where this is legal. If you are looking for information about this on the BBC then you will likely be disappointed – ask why that might be.

    • RobG

      Total bullshit.

      Wikileaks, as always, has shown the political establishment and the media to be the totally corrupt crock of shite that they are.

      Trolls like you are finding yourself in a smaller and smaller place.

    • kailyard rules

      As far as Scotland’s move to Independence is concerned, the BBC is state controlled propaganda against Scotland’s Independence.

  • Joe

    “Why do you think that might be?”

    The mind boggles Craig! 😀

    More power to you in keeping up the good work.

    • Loony

      Just imagine the unbridled joy if Goldman Sachs pulled out of the UK. For the British it would be comparable with VE Day – maybe there should be a special holiday to celebrate the wondrous news.

      Somehow I guess they are just joking around and creating false hope for their own perverted amusement.

    • Resident Dissident

      Yes a lot of the money laundering of the Russian’s oligarch’s ill gotten gains has been through London – which is of course how we pursue the double whammy of cleaning up our affairs while at the same time applying some pressure on Putin and his friends. Seizing their private property in London, stopping the payments of their kid’s school fees and the credit cards of their wives and mistresses, denying them access to our courts for their libel actions and matrimonial disputes would all be a start.

      • Loony

        That makes eminent sense. You put pressure on criminals by telling them “we will no longer continue our criminal collaboration” That you have been providing active assistance to criminals also makes you a criminal – or at least it would if the rule of law were applied. But hey the British are so progressive they have progressed way beyond the need for law.

        As it happens just like Russia – except the Russians are too thick to use the “progressive” mantra as a cover for their crimes.

        • Paul Barbara

          What Russian crimes? Russia is assisting the lawful Syrian government to battle a ruthless, blood-thirsty invasion of thugs, organised, armed and paid by the US and it’s assorted War Criminal partners.
          There will be civilian deaths, given the thugs using and intermingling with captive civilians, but their blood is on the hands of those who arranged the brutal invasion of head-choppers (like the US, UK, France etc.).

          • Loony

            Do you really think people like Abramovich made their money through working double shifts in the local salt mine?

          • Resident Dissident

            Taking most raw materials out of Russia without a licence was a criminal offence, as was holding a foreign bank account or investments without permission of the Central Bank of Russia. The oligarch’s raped and stole from Russia by setting up foreign companies to divert raw materials overseas with the proceeds going into their bank accounts. This process started under Yeltsin and accelerated dramatically under Putin. But of course anyone who points out this theft from the Russian people is a Russophobe.

          • Tom Welsh

            Loony, where does Abramovich live nowadays? If he is such a dreadful oligarch, and if he has the approval of Putin, you would expect him to reside in Moscow close to the seat of power, wouldn’t you?

            RD, if as you say corruption accelerated rapidly under Putin, how on earth have Russian per capita GDP, average salary, and pensions increased so sharply since he has been in charge?

          • Loony

            Tom – I do believe that Mr. Abromovich lives in London.

            No doubt he has the opportunity to reminisce about the old days with a number of his compatriots who also reside in London. People like Len Blavatnik, Eugene Shvidler, Alexander Knaster, Konstantin Kagalovsky, and Abram Reznikov – all of whom love the UK so much they have taken up permanent residence.

            Where their money came from is a mystery – and will likely remain so as the Proceeds of Crime Act cannot be applied to Russians for reasons that are too obvious to state.

          • Tom Welsh

            So, Loony, why do you think all those rich, powerful oligarchs have chosen to leave their native country and flee to good ol’ corrupt England? (Or, no doubt, many of them, to the good ol’ corrupt USA). Could it conceivably be because Mr Putin made Russia too hot to hold them? Which might be why they are so keen to stir up libels about him.

            Rather than me doing a second-rate job, why don’t you read this: Begin, if you like, with the heading “The (imperfect) Putin model”. The article explains very clearly that the oligarchs installed Putin expecting him to be a compliant puppet. But, as soon as he could he restored the force of law and prosecuted them for their crimes. That is why Russia’s return to prosperity has been so amazingly rapid since 2000; and that is why the neocons are so desperate to crush it and regain control, so they can go back to plundering Russia as they di in the 1990s.

        • Resident Dissident

          The way the City rationalised laundering the money from Russian oligarchs was that transferring money between countries and holding foreign investments was not a crime under British law.

          • Loony

            That is OK as long as they rationalized it. Presumably if Peter Sutcliffe had been better at rationalizing the murder of women then he also would not have committed a crime under British (sic) law.

          • Tom Welsh

            When committing crimes, especially wholesale, rationalization is certainly very important. As are friends in high places (readily available, in corrupt countries, with the application of sufficient funds).

            “Il est défendu de tuer; tout meurtrier est puni, à moins qu’il n’ait tué en grande compagnie, et au son des trompettes”.
            (“It is forbidden to kill; therefore all murderers are punished unless they kill in large numbers to the sound of trumpets”).

            – Voltaire

    • Sharp Ears

      The banks, having brought the country to collapse in 2008, are now resorting to blackmail. No Brexit otherwise they will leave.

      Their hands are ‘quivering over the relocate button’ according to their spokesman Anthony Browne.

      Brexit: leading banks set to pull out of UK early next year
      Anthony Browne, head of the British Bankers’ Association, warns that major lenders are poised to hit relocate button

      • Paul Barbara

        Fine. Just change the law so no one, or Corporation, can take more than £200 out of the country when they leave.

      • Tom Welsh

        “No Brexit otherwise they will leave”.

        Fine. Let them leave. Then we can have a few decent public banks that will deal honestly and enrich the state. And maybe some honestly run private banks. Let the vast oligarch-infested conglomerates go back to their natural home – the USA.

        • Tom Welsh

          Having thought it over a while, let me rephrase that more appropriately.

          Let them fornicate off – and don’t let the door hit them on the way out. The air will smell a lot cleaner when they are gone.

    • Dave Lawton

      “The UK, principally the City of London, is the centre of all criminal money activities, worldwide.
      Crime is, at present, the main driver of the UK economy.”
      Spot on Rob.

      ‘But the City of London is the goose that lays the golden egg.’
      Its apologists say, to ring-fence it with superstition:
      ‘If you disturb it, you do so at your peril, for it’ll just fly away,
      And use much needed capital to enrich another nation.’
      They overlook that the goose is giving off toxic fumes,
      And that it fouls its own nest in the murkiest of lairs,
      Where it’s geared to privatizing public assets and hiding the profits –
      The golden goose turns what’s ours into theirs.”
      Heathcote Williams.
      The Red Dagger.

  • Nahdmi Auchi

    Leaked from US intelligence services: it wouldn’t be the first time CIA cast out a scapegoat to contain a legitimacy crisis and a nuclear ultimatum:

    Think of it: Trump the Jeremiah loses; Clinton is theatrically ruined for her corrupt and infuriating elevation to the presidency with a scripted media catharsis that restores [sic] our faith [sic] in America. Kaine, the up-and-coming CIA cadre succeeds her. CIA remains in control.

  • Paul Barbara

    No matter which pile of guano ‘wins’ the US election, there is one very powerful force which no one seems to have mentioned.
    Israel, to put it mildly, has a great deal of influence on US politics and military adventures. Somehow, I don’t believe they would want WWIII breaking out next door, with nuclear-armed adversaries. Sort of ‘NIMBY’.

1 2 3

Comments are closed.