An Extremely Boring Video. Do Not Watch It. 502


I have managed to get hold of a copy, which you can see here, of my lengthy interview with Sky News about the Skripals yesterday, which Sky refused to put online because they allege I was boring. With the warning you might therefore be very bored, you may watch it if you wish.

Kay Burley then appeared to suggest in reply to persistent questioning from Teymoor Nabili that Sky News could not put the interview online as they did not record it and do not hold a copy, which is plainly untrue (and would be illegal under their broadcast license).

My perspective on the interview itself was that the interviewer became aggressive and sarcastic, increasingly shrill as the apparent effort to discredit me was not going well, and resorting eventually to asking about any old extraneous matter but the Skripals. I strongly suspect it was not me being boring, but the strange performance by Kay Burley, which motivated Sky to bury the interview.

But you must judge for yourself.

It is my policy when invited by journalists, to give considered and courteous answers to the particular questions which they ask. This is as opposed to what politicians do, which is to spout pre-prepared soundbites irrespective of what they are asked.

I appreciate that mine is a very old-fashioned approach, and may lead you to be frustrated about areas I did not cover. I also make no attempt to look slick or sound glib. I realise in this modern age that may not be good PR, but my belief remains that in the long term people will see me as a polite and thoughtful old gentleman, and feel less disposed to share the obvious contempt towards me of the media and politician classes.


502 thoughts on “An Extremely Boring Video. Do Not Watch It.

1 6 7 8 9 10 11
  • Paul Patience

    I felt the interview took on a frustrated tone and general annoyance.
    Your style isn’t slick by any means and that may throw them and/or lull them into a feeling of superiority.
    Those of us who have worked around the globe with peoples of all faiths and none, all nationalities have one thing in common the response to aggression is defence.
    But when it’s not met with aggression in return it is shown for what it truly is, a weak position.

  • Roy Moore

    Yes, I seen most of it, and “shrill” is the only word to describe Kay Burley during the interview. So shrill, in fact, it was painful to listen to. It ramped up my tinitus an octave or so. I suspect the reasons it has disappeared are twofold. Kay’s performance was embarrassing, There was not a high enough number acheived on Sky’s point scoring criteria. All credit to Craig Murray for not rising to the bait.
    Kay Burley should reflect on her attitude & not respond with cheap shots towards the guest.

  • Mark John Maguire

    What a fascinating interview! I am inclined to disagree with Craig that the interview was axed because she became shrill and shown to disadvantage (which is certainly true!) but by reason of her 1) failing to damage Mr Murray’s credibility, which seemed to be the main intention; and 2) because it became clear that the Sky interview with the Head of Porton Down had been significantly edited. Kay Burley called the suggestion that it had been edited in such a way as to lessen the exposure of the UK government “outrageous” and yet it was abundantly clear from the interview that there had been editing, as Craig Murray and others suggested. This may, of course, have been quite innocent – but the only way we could know this is if the entire interview with the Head of Porton Down was shown. It has not been and therefore the suspicion must remain…

  • Alexandra Thompson

    Disgusting performance from interviewer. Shrill and aggressive but Mr Murray is to be applauded for maintaining a calm and gentlemanly response. Shame on you Sky!

    • Jon

      I doubt you’ll be censored for that here – criticism of the Murdoch empire is expected 😉

      Anyway, your comment above is intact – might have fallen into the spam queue. When that happens, a moderator needs to release it manually.

  • Dr David Andrew Skyrme

    Thought the interview was anything but boring! By pulling it they have simply fuelled the conspiracy that anyone who offers alternative possible theories on the case is silenced.

  • TJ

    The interview was most enlightening, my only criticism would be at the very end, if it was Russia it would constitute an act of war and so we would be at war with Russia, and similarly if TM and BJ have lied about it being Russia they, together with anyone who helped them should be arrested on suspicion of and/or attempting to pervert the course of justice, conspiracy and aiding and abetting at the very least, and then charged, tried, convicted and sentenced per the sentencing guidelines as is the law demands.

  • Stan

    Splendid interview, Craig. How refreshing to see someone covincingly answer all the questions so clearly and succinctly, first time on TV to my knowledge. All this despite Ms Burley ridiculously dwelling on the minutiae of the other interview you criticed Sky about, which was the only boring part of the interview. And you answered the question about your attititude if Russia was eventually proven to be guilty (clearly designed to demonstrate you are a Russian troll) perfectly . The interview deserves a much wider audience.

  • Colette Annesley

    ‘Extremely boring’ was quite far the best approach for responding to the insistent questions and non-sequiturs. You’re to be applauded Mr Murray for maintaining such polite composure and returning to the *actual appoint at each departure.

    Illuminating interview in terms of its juxtaposition in interviewer/interviewee styles: antagonist and (allegedly) ‘dull’.

    Well done for making sure to remind the public how the original 35 question interview had been edited down to 3m 46s with precise reference to the final (edited) answer not coalescing with the (original) question (No. 16) posed.

    Disappointing post-production representation from Sky News: editing the precise chronology produced ‘factual inaccuracies’ which were misleading. Question: was this in error – or by design?

    I noted that Sky’s scrolling headline repeated the allegations that you’d challenged in parallel with that part of the ‘debate’ between you and Kay Burley. Unintentional irony on the part of Sky News?

    Hearing you restate the CEO of Porton Down’s *actual words* whilst Sky repeated in *scrolled writing* something entirely different and erroneous made for problematic ‘news’ coverage.

    Your appropriate parallel of the ‘Salisbury poisoning’ with Iraq and the non-existence of WMDs appears not to have been acknowledged. Kay Burley could have usefully noted that Weapons Inspector, the late Dr David Kelly also worked at Porton Down and that his death still remains without adequate/proper explanation.

    • Anthonymolyneux

      Totally agree sky have decided to try and spin us a pack of lies remember Mr Kelly mysteriously killed and as you say very allegantly the Iraq war Wmds at the time I was not convinced even more so now alternative agendas to deflect the shambles of this Tory government Neil Mitchell has exposed the U.K. government and the lies and fraud of Rbs Grg 16 000 plus businesses put into administrative control then some into bankruptcy senior Rbs staff Ross Mcewan and sir Howard Davies telling lies to the Tsc meeting of MPs Rbs have stolen 1.6 million pounds from myself and no one has been arrested if you watch Rt watch the interview with Neil Mitchell if I had enough money I would leave the uk immediately and go to live in Russia ?? and Spain this country has gone to the dogs when a senior government minister Boris Johnson come out with such stupid comments and now trying to deny what he said it’s a joke he was happy to play tennis with a Russian lady if she paid him £160 000 the mans a fool and an embarrassment to all us uk residents Mr Putin I apologise to the Russian people although I have never had the opportunity to visit your country the people who I know have speak very highly and have given me a very good remarks about your beautiful friendly people one day I may be able to visit but in the mean time the uk government will blame Russia but rest assured a lot of the uk residents don’t believe a word they say

  • Orlando Quarmby

    Wow – how belligerent was the SKY wifey in the last third of that interview. The fact that they edited an interview is undisputed fact. That they did it in a way that presented a particular conclusion is also beyond dispute. And boy were they pissed off that Craig Murray had had the temerity to pint that out – so much so that that almost became the subject of their interview with him. No doubt explains the reason it hasn’t been made available online by SKY – – pure spite.

  • anti_republocrat

    OMG. Yes, it’s boring every time the interviewer interrupts you and asks a question you were just about to answer.

  • Davve Grogan

    Hi Craig

    Thought you were anything but boring. I was fascinated by your successful attempt to be logical and fair with the evidence whilst she was trying to discredit you wherever she might. Are n`t Sky and Boris bosom buddies?

    Thanks for holding our end up…keep it up

  • gremlins3

    Am wondering if the same source of pressure which had caused that edit was also brought to bear on KB. That is not to excuse her but it might explain why she so obviously lost control when she was not able to quash the argument that the edit had taken place and why (or otherwise discredit Craig to discredit that allegation). However the end result was an interview which only repeated and strengthened that allegation and more besides, plus made her look over-eager to pick on that particular point. Probably not what was wanted.

  • Kiza

    This horrible woman behaves like a pre-torture interviewer. I felt like if Mr Murray said one more critical thing about HMG, she would snap her fingers and men in helmets and boots would burst into Mr Murray’s home and place handcuffs and a sack over his head to whisk him away. I was also thinking – this is probably how Bloody Gina behaved in Thailand.

    Have you noticed her hyper-aggressive body language: when she prepares for an attack she places her right arm on the hip and trusts her hips forward and her head back, a bit like a cobra. But the whole interview could be summarised in one sentence: how dare you traitor challenge what the authorities say (tomorrow I may be one of those in authority)!

    If dissenters are treated like this in the public media one cannot imagine what goes on in public and secret prisons of this nation. Baha Mousa would know.

  • Ian Mac

    The talentless Burley believing she can dictate the interview with constant interruptions and snide remarks. Our media is a shambles. Well done Craig completely owned that odious woman.

  • Ceredig

    I think what we watched here was the media equivalent of the pratfall with bucket of whitewash. Porton Down said they couldn’t identify the nerve agent as coming from Russia, you said you agreed with that. Burley, at that point, should have said ‘thank you Mr Murray, good night!’ Instead of which she flailed around for another 15 minutes not knowing where she was going or what she was doing. I have never seen a more amateur performance.

  • JAMES KANE

    Well I would not have seen it anyhow. Stopped watching anything involving KB years ago. ‘Journalism’ at its worst. So bad they could not put it on air.

  • Assunta Ferrari

    Sorry sir but your delivery was indeed longwinded and plagued with two many ” errms”…For the very low intellrct exigencies if Sky audiences whose main mode of intra societal communication is invarisbly adversarial and curt compounded by a short attention span you are better off developing a quick fire quick witted authoritative style of verbsl exchsnge redolent if that in your written approach on this blog. Comparzble indeed to the style adopted irritatingly but effectively by “Burley Kate” herself

    • Gegenbeispiel

      Assunta, per James Kay, that would be journalism at its worst: Burley is on a par with the proven (and fired for it) liar Boris Johnson and the likes of Mark Regev.The authoritative style works well in writing, because the writing though concise has been thoughtfully edited. In speech it comes across as mere parade-ground bluster and bullying, no matter whether the tone is Etonian (B. Johnson) or only partly successful in covering up Northern English (Burley).

      The inescapable fact is that many low intellects in England like liars, particularly successful ones like Johnson, possibly because they are so accustomed to serving and existing under them. As Milo Yianopoulos wrote, obfuscation and misdirection are essential to the English conservative style of “leadership”.

  • TonyT16

    Seems to me that Boris Johnson is in such a position of power in government and within the Conservative Party, that he is not only unsackable whatever he does, but more secure in his position than anyone else in the cabinet. To all intents and purposes he has assumed the role of prime minister without the title and without being directly answerable in that role. BJ has propelled the anti-Russian assault and he has dictated the Brexit policy. He has firewalled himself very deftly through the support of right-wingers in the Party – and has human shields Theresa May, David Davis and Private Pike Gavin Williamson to take the political bullets and keep him covered.

    Smarter guy than many think.

    Without Boris being sorted out, we are on the road to dark times.

    .

  • Ghifari AL Mukhtar

    Dear Mr CM, you’re a man of substance tenacity & conviction, you’re indeed a voice of hope. All I can offer you is prayer /dua and Solidarity.

  • Assunta Ferrari

    Are you the Scottish womsn who once led the Scottish Labour rediment. . Or were you boss of the Tory arm,. ???
    I ve quite forgotten which of you is which but I do recall both are rug munchers.

  • Lee Denness

    I listened to George Galloway praising Sky yesterday but after I saw the Kay Burley interview referenced here I was sorry to realise that Sky chose to be less forthright later in the day. They interviewed Craig Murray, but didn’t broadcast the interview and when he complained, suggested that maybe it was because he was boring. I rather think the truth is that the Sky interviewer could neither persuade Mr Murray to say it definitely wasn’t Russia who was responsible for the Skripal poisoning, nor would he say that it was possibly our government that was responsible…. Repeatable headlines ad nauseum.
    Remember the old series: Your mission (Kay Burley), should you chose to accept it, is to trick Murray into …….. if you fail, your interview will not be broadcast, “live”! And to quote that old chestnut, (if changed slightly), they’re all in it together.
    And so it goes. The government have no proof, they can get no proof, they can offer no proof, so it’s all smoke and mirrors as per usual, the Tory way of doing things.
    Meanwhile the fact that the foreign secretary tells lies to suit his own ends appears not to matter one jot!
    Is it remotely possible that this whole business was a way / scheme offered to others of getting back at Russia for the messing they do in western democracy?

  • Hugh Beaumont

    Yep – she came with a full 6 shooter, saving the nuclear options for foreboding failure. Every question designed to entrap – like a clever lawyer in a deposition, having alternative routes setup for both yes or no answers.

  • Robert HARNEIS

    Dear Craig,
    If there was any justice you would get some sort of journalistic award for your series of articles on Skripal and that is what worries me. I do hope you will be very careful because if there is a list you are very definitely on it and they have no honour and no scruples. They will smear you if they can. You have committed the unpardonable crime of making our rulers look stupid and dishonest. As a semi retired journalist living near Strasbourg I watch events in the UK with fascinated horror. True things are not much better here. Not because of Brexit of which I approve but because of this obsession with grovelling to the US and doing whatever they want regardless. I am so moved that I have instructed my daughter to buy me your book (which indeed I noticed in the ‘boring interview’) for my next birthday. What a troubled young woman! This let me tell you, despite a grave risk of divorce as our house is already crumbling under the weight of a lifetime’s book hoarding.
    I now expect the government and its intelligence lackeys to pull every dishonest trick in the book to find a connection with Russia. They clearly have the OPCW in their pockets.
    Best wishes
    Robert Harneis
    Strasbourg

  • marcello

    Kay Burley is clearly out of her depth. She becomes combative, defensive and rude to try and compensate for her incompetence and astonishing lack of knowledge. Clearly, the segment was shelved because Kay Burley made a dreadful mess of this interview .

1 6 7 8 9 10 11

Comments are closed.