Dave Llewellyn sat next to me in the public gallery of the Salmond trial as we witnessed the defence witnesses – largely female – who shredded the prosecution case. A few weeks ago, seven detectives of the Serious Crime Squad raided Dave’s home at 5am, handcuffed him and questioned him over conspiracy to murder – in relation to a public Facebook post. Dave has now been charged with a lesser but still imprisonable offence.
You will recall Mark Hirst, friend of both Dave and I, being charged with threatening communication for using the expression “reap the whirlwind” in a political sense – a charge from the Crown Office so outrageous that it was eventually thrown out by the court as “no case to answer”. Well, the Dave Llewellyn case is extremely similar.
Future poet laureate John Betjeman should have been hung, drawn and quartered, oh at least three times, for writing in his famous poem “Come, friendly bombs, and fall on Slough”, if the standard of pretend literalness and credulity being applied by Police Scotland and the Crown Office had been applied to Betjeman. (And no, Dave’s post does not reference bombs.)
The truth is that in Scotland we now have a police, prosecutorial and justice system which is at the disposal of the Sturgeon clique for the pursuit of their private vendettas against political opponents. The fact that I am set to be jailed for “jigsaw identification”, when I demonstrably and provably did far less of this difficult to define activity than the mainstream media, who have not been prosecuted, is further evidence of that, as were the charges against Mark Hirst, and indeed Jeremy Gilchrist.
Please note that all of these political prosecutions have been based on thought crime. People in a small and definable political group – all people I know – are being prosecuted merely for publishing or saying things which annoy somebody in the Sturgeon clique. This is even before the Hate Crime Act, with its further swingeing restrictions on free speech, comes into effect. These are very dangerous times indeed to be any kind of dissident writer or campaigner in Scotland. The interesting thing, of course, is that the political orthodoxy being enforced is superficially liberal-left; a set of right-on beliefs whose exponents are so convinced of their own morality, they are happy to jail anybody who differs.
My personal crime against this orthodoxy is not to accept the mantra that all men accused of sex crime are automatically guilty, and that the “victim” must always be believed, whatever the evidence to the contrary. I also think people accused of serious crime should have the right to be judged by a jury of their peers. These are seriously unfashionable opinions.
On Tuesday I wrote a different post to this. It actually gave the detail of what David Llewellyn posted, and examined it. My article also revealed who was behind the complaint against him, and referred to some interesting history of Llewellyn’s own investigations.
However I received strong advice that to publish my article might itself be construed contempt of court, and that I ran the risk of being instantly jailed rather than free pending appeal, and further that to publish may attract yet another political prosecution from the Crown Office. I therefore did not publish and cannot give you the detail of the Llewellyn case, at least until after its conclusion.
I find this deeply depressing. I should not, in normal circumstances, have had the slightest hesitation in giving you the detail of what is happening to Dave Llewellyn, and more importantly why, in the same way I did with Mark Hirst. I find the notion that my own journalism is successfully being “chilled” in this way highly worrying, and this adds to the sense of injustice I feel in my own case. In fact anger and perhaps even humiliation at the powerlessness – and fear I am becoming a coward – has pretty well prostrated me for three days. I feel somewhat recovered now, and determined to fight on. But for the first time I find myself seriously considering, after my case is concluded, leaving my beloved Scotland and going to live in a country which does not jail dissident writers.
———————————————
Forgive me for pointing out that my ability to provide this coverage is entirely dependent on your kind voluntary subscriptions which keep this blog going. This post is free for anybody to reproduce or republish, including in translation. You are still very welcome to read without subscribing.
Unlike our adversaries including the Integrity Initiative, the 77th Brigade, Bellingcat, the Atlantic Council and hundreds of other warmongering propaganda operations, this blog has no source of state, corporate or institutional finance whatsoever. It runs entirely on voluntary subscriptions from its readers – many of whom do not necessarily agree with the every article, but welcome the alternative voice, insider information and debate.
Subscriptions to keep this blog going are gratefully received.
Choose subscription amount from dropdown box:
Paypal address for one-off donations: [email protected]
Alternatively by bank transfer or standing order:
Account name
MURRAY CJ
Account number 3 2 1 5 0 9 6 2
Sort code 6 0 – 4 0 – 0 5
IBAN GB98NWBK60400532150962
BIC NWBKGB2L
Bank address Natwest, PO Box 414, 38 Strand, London, WC2H 5JB
Bitcoin: bc1q3sdm60rshynxtvfnkhhqjn83vk3e3nyw78cjx9
Ethereum/ERC-20: 0x764a6054783e86C321Cb8208442477d24834861a
Subscriptions are still preferred to donations as I can’t run the blog without some certainty of future income, but I understand why some people prefer not to commit to that.
Stay in Scotland Craig. If you move house, go and live in one of the Scottish islands, no not Islay -home of the malts- (too accessible), but the Outer Hebrides, where most folks are ‘laws unto themselves’. To arrest you or search your house, the mainland bobbies will have to subject themselves to a rough crossing on one of those ancient unreliable ferries. (What the hell is Sturgeon doing about those rusting ‘state of the art’ unfinished ships?) You will have plenty of time to hide your records etc. If Lady Dorrian persists with her jail sentence, use the time profitably. How about writing your memoir? I have no doubt time will vindicate you.
Good news. Lord Advocate Wolffe and Solicitor General Alison Di Rollo have resigned from the scandal hit Crown Prosecution Service. The excellent Jackie Bailie is in the vanguard of a clamour to separate the Parliamentary and prosecution aspects of the job. This news, like your verdict was held back until after the election. I wonder why??
But sturgeon will have the login air flight from eriskay to islay diverted to Edinburgh where our man craig can be locked way permanently as a threat to her national security…
Achnababan- Ha Ha- but remember there’s many a true word spoken in jest!!
“Good news. Lord Advocate Wolffe and Solicitor General Alison Di Rollo have resigned …”
Aye, but temper yer expectations. Replacements will be nominated by Sturgeon. The SNP’s, Shadow Attorney General at Westminster is Angela Crawley. Crawley attained her Law degree after becoming an MP. A Shadow Attorney General that’s never practiced law, that’s truly an innovation.
Within the cult, personal loyalty to the leader is ALL. Ability, qualifications and experience count for naught.
Dinnae care how low-calibre they be .., jes gimme a puppet!!
The Rangers fiasco, where two innocent men were maliciously prosecuted is estimated to cost at least £100million in costs and damages- that would pay for a few new ferries. The other fiasco, Salmond’s judicial review -, where the SNP Government were forced to capitulate after their legal team threatened to walk out, left Scotland being called a ‘Banana Republic’ by the MSM, including the Sturgeon friendly ones. The good news is Roddy Dunlop, formerly in the SNP Government’s ‘stable’ of advocates for more than a decade is now on Craig’s legal team.
A cynic might say that to succeed in the SNP all you need is a vagina and a rabid liberal viewpoint. Of course I might be wrong …
Try groomed by the IVLP.
It disnae dae ony herm tae have a close association with the John Smith Centre for Public Service either.
Six, “lucky” SNP MSPs received interns from the JSCfPS this year. These include Sturgeon, Yousaf & Gilruth.
The JSCfPS is run by catastrophic ex-leader of Scottish Labour, Kezia Dugdale.
The Board of the JSCfPS is as follows:
“Public service”!
Now that is funny – in a vinegary sort of way. You might define it as “serving each other with the public’s money”.
@Stevie Boy May 24, 2021 at 12:04-will a self-declared vagina suffice?
On the photos I could see, the ferries look quite respectable. OTOH, I am afraid that living on the outer islands may requite a genetic predisposition to thrive in cold rain and wind, while Craig’s health is not robust. Similarly, more and more places in Siberia are getting good internet connections… Abkhazia could provide a good combination of climate, real estate prices and inaccessibility to any outside police actions.
Little web search using Cyrillic: house with a swimming pool and a playground, 200 m from the Black Sea may rent for as little as 25 dollars a day. Would my investments crash, I could consider it myself.
DunGroanin
My money’s on Vladimir
All this UK parliamentary and European fuss over a Belarusian journalist.
Not a word from these self-same ‘free press’ protectors about Julian Assange, Craig Murray et al? It’s not long since the plane of Bolivian President Evo Morales was forced to make an unscheduled 12-hour stop in Vienna after it was denied overflight rights by a number of European countries. It was believed Edward Snowden could be on board.
Par for the course Goose. “Putting whistleblower protection at the top of the agenda” is just nonsense, hey they are interested only in cherry-picking cases which offer potential profit or publicity while leaving the vast majority of whistleblowers unprotected. Chair of APPG Mary Robinson should resign over the groups dodgy transparency and accountability revealed by Norman Lamb.
A survey with regards to the efficiency of whistleblowing protection in the UK has predictably and discernibly been broken for some time.
https://www.appgwhistleblowing.co.uk/
I’m not condoning Belarus’ behaviour and Lukashenko is a brutish thug of a leader for sure.
But western hypocrisy and selective outrage is equally intolerable. Israel laughs at international law all the time with western political apologists lining up to condemn their critics.
Raab is calling for immediate sanctions over this Minsk incident:
“The UK calls for the immediate release of Mr Protasevich and other political prisoners held in Belarus.
“The UK is working with our allies on a coordinated response, including further sanctions.
“The UK also calls for the ICAO Council to meet urgently to consider the regime’s flouting of the international rules safeguarding civil aviation.”
Israel used British passports to carry out assassinations in Dubai and the worst they faced was (allegedly) a stern rebuke.
I’m addressing the whistleblower protection Goose in isolation not Belarus. I’m steering clear of Lukashenko as off-topic
I was just making that clear. Because so many deliberately misconstrue criticism of western hypocrisy as support for the other side when it’s perfectly possible to condemn both : glaring western inconsistency and authoritarian brutes.
I’d agree on the corrupted ideals of those who should be the last line of defence for whistleblowers and edgy journalism. Glenn Greenwald has written about how even the mighty American Civil Liberties Union(ACLU) isn’t what it once was.
Flight destined for Vilnius lands in Minsk. That’s taking the piss even by Ryanair’s standards.
The sheer hypocrisy of Westminster on Belarusian actions in which their president hijacked a plane and kidnapped a dissident journalist. Westminster is currently doing the exact same thing with Julian Assange, a journalist held without charge for reporting the truth. Westminster is holding him on the orders of the USA they want him extradited, to the US where he’ll surely be tortured and eventually killed.
Closer to home we have the useful idiots Stewart McDonald SNP MP and John Nicolson SNP MP doing down Belarus and Russia, on the kidnapping of a dissident journalist whilst their boss back home in Scotland Sturgeon the Betrayer, is also attempting to imprison journalists, (and a ex-FM) who report the truth, such as Craig Murray, Mark Hirst, Stuart Campbell and of late David Llewellyn.
It all stinks of hypocrisy from top to bottom.
An outraged Ursula von der Leyen has vowed sanctions will be imposed on Belarus; but not on Israel which targeted journalists with bombs supplied by EU.
Dominic Raab in the HoC calling the Belarusian actions a serious breech of international Law, however Raab the UK’s Foreign secretary forgets that the very House that he stands in has broken International Law on multiple occasions, none more so when the house intimidated, beat up, and killed the livestock of the people of the Chagos Islands, before forcefully removing them from their homelands to allow a US airbase to move in.
Of course the real outrage at Belarusian actions is aimed at stopping Nordstream II and the Yamal-European pipeline.
A canny Vladimir Putin is hopeful new opposition parties popping up in Minsk who have his supervision and blessing,will demonstrate ostensible democracy and bring Belarus into the fold.
You have done your part Craig, no need to feel a coward as you are far from that. Leave it up to the big man you don’t believe in to sort it out.
British justice seems so irreparably messed up.
It seems to exist only to criminalise the poor, immigrants and refugees, the weak, the estranged, the vulnerable, the victims, the working classes, loners, blacks, children, those that missed out on opportunities and chances.
All and anybody but the real criminals.
Now, having got bored of criminalising all those vulnerable categories, it criminalises reporters, activists, artists, campaigners, and redoubles its efforts to criminalise all those that access Britain’s dwindling mental health support.
With any resistance to this criminalisation also criminalised, what hope is there? What a truly sick place!
“All and anybody but the real criminals”
Why did police arrest the corrupt mayor of Liverpool but not Johnson, Cameron, Jenrick or Hancock?
Re Jenrick:
The i – The Robert Jenrick and Richard Desmond scandal shows the corruption at the heart of British politics: Our country has a political system which operates around private dinners, party donations, lobbyists, favours and questionable relationships – link
The Craig blog meltdown continues.
Remember old Wedgie – “it’s policies, not personalities”
Are there any policies from our pathetic political classes? Just virtual signalling and nothing that will help anyone.
Any support for Mr. Murray (except from the fascist tory daily mail readers)? Anything from Mr. Salmond? Any support for Mr. Assange from the Nictator?
Racist white supremacist Tucker Carlson has shown much support for the unfortunate Mr. Assange.
Didn’t you find it odd that the English press portrayed the Nictator as a great leader to the detriment of Boris the buffoon?
And then there’s the Jactator in NZ. Another that escapes criticism.
Maybe it’s time to form new alliances.
Soothmoother,
“The Craig blog meltdown continues.” That was a very aggressive post, as if you are celebrating the position that Craig Murray is in. He could be in jail anytime soon, and you seem to be rubbing his face in it. His blog will probably melt down further then, or alternatively it might come alive ..like “Free Nelson Mandela???”
However, I do agree with some of what you wrote, but you are not very polite.
Tony
I refer to the host as Mr Murray. I refer to the blog as the Craig blog.
The Craig blog family have called me a “curtain twitcher” (which I find funny) and also made fun of my username in the past and yet I have never used any derogatory references to anyone at anytime. Ask the mods.
There is a meltdown because the SNP leadership has been revealed to be corrupt and the Craig blog family (my name for the regular posters) are having a difficult time dealing with it.
Mr Murray is in trouble for supporting truth and reporting the Salmond trial. Who is supporting him?
That’s the bit that makes me aggressive. Mr Murray puts his freedom at risk for truth and what does he get in return?
Iain Lawson sketches out the Dave Llewellyn case:
https://yoursforscotlandcom.wordpress.com/2021/05/24/the-fascist-state/
How incredibly similar to the other cases
Ian,
cheers for the link, although I couldn’t glean much more about Dave’s predicament, except the unsurprising fact that it involves a couple of SNP luvvies.
But I was struck by Iain Lawson’s comment that:
“The gift of anonymity is not a right, it is a privilege …. subsequently used aggressively as a political weapon…”
I’d literally woken up this morning thinking “anonymity” & “elephant in the room” – how fkd up is that? I’d hate to imagine how sad my actual dreams are :-)))
Anyway, it was with this thought that Iain’s words resonated.
It almost seems that by invoking the “victim’s right to anonymity” mantra, it creates a sufficient upwelling of sympathy & compassion so as to preclude any rational criticism of it as an underlying concept behind these stitch ups.
Needless to say, I ought to more accurately say “complainant’s” rather than “victim’s” right to anonymity, but that simply reflects the emotional heart strings that are plucked as part of this scurrilous ploy, whereby the two words are presumed interchangeable.
It is absolutely critical to dissect this question of anonymity being a privilege rather than a right or the actions of belligerent lawfare hoaxers will completely undermine the rationale behind affording anonymity to those victims who actually ‘need’ it, for reasons of physical safety or age.
There’s also something insidious about invoking this order of the court, willy nilly, that revolts my inner feminist.
If it’s a question of physical safety, utterly horrifying violence or a child victim, that would seem to be a no brainer. But if it is simply used as a shield against shame or embarrassment, then why?
Surely that presupposes that the crime and the stigma somehow go hand in hand?
Again, why?
A person is a ‘survivor’ as much as a ‘victim’ in sexual assault cases, so why are they presumed to feel shame or suffer discomfort, disproportionately to other ‘victims’ of crime, whilst seeking justice?
I’m not saying it’s a walk in the park, but who exactly are we protecting the accusers from? the accused? or the sexist mentality of a society that apparently confers disgust on the victim of a disgusting crime?
Didn’t we use to do that with domestic violence? Assign shame to the victim for putting up with or being subjected to shameful abuse…….until we didn’t.
Not sure I’m managing to get to the root of what seems to be unsettling me, but there is something there which reminds me of the fake Woke warriors castigating people for criticising professional, adult women in media. As if criticism constituted a physical threat or attack simply because they are directed at a woman.
That to critique the work of an internationally renowned, top flight (or as “top” as MSM gets), front page, nearly middle aged journalist provokes a twatter of virtual &, as sure as night follows day, main stream attacks & accusations of misogyny or incitement to hatred &/or violence toward a “young woman”, infantilising an accomplished, professional adult woman (I’m thinking of Lorenz & Greenwald here).
Any self respecting feminist has spent more than enough time challenging this ‘othering’ of women, this portrayal of the “fairer sex” as delicate flowers who need shielding from the harsher realities of human interaction.
So not only is the disingenuous flag waving entirely transparent & cynical, but by exploiting genuine issues around gender injustice it undermines the very real concerns, rationale & work championed by generations of wide awake feminists.
In the case of AS, the use of this “anonymity” order gets even more fkn sly.
That anonymity was granted across the board, irrespective of the individual accusations or the persons making the allegations, makes a complete mockery of the idea of vulnerable persons needing protection.
I can’t remember all the pertinent details of the AS trial (mainly because no one is allowed to mention them!) but “hair pinging” got mentioned a fair bit. What possible reason could you give for needing anonymity when making such an allegation in a court of law?
Let alone the fact that a jury concluded that all the allegations were unproven or utterly false, based on the evidence presented (which again, can’t be mentioned). And in the case of the most egregious allegation, proven beyond doubt to be an absolute fabrication & therefore, any sane person would assume, a criminal act of perjury?!
I understand that there is a similarly ‘protected identity’ argument at play in Llewellyn’s case and I wouldn’t be surprised if it is even more spurious than those made in the AS & CM trials…..
…..but I’ll probably never know, because whatever you do, “Don’t mention the SNP”, ooops, sorry, I mean the “complainants”, or maybe I should simply jerk those heart strings & go with “victims”.
Of course, the other “cheek” to this absolute “arse” of stinking hypocrisy & injustice, is that we can spend all day reading 101 variations of unsubstantiated, unproven, licentious & vile accusations against persons named & identified by all’n’sundry, who despite the fundamental principle of innocent till proven guilty, will forever be tarred by the filthy brush of MS character assassination, & probably lose their livelihoods & financial security in the process.
Can’t help but wonder, if I were as duplicitous & immoral as these ‘complainants’, could I go to the police and say Sturgeon’s husband repeatedly raped me up the arse when I was a boy? Make up a whole slew of scandalous & horrifying allegations, leak some juicy bits to the press, demand anonymity, bankrupt the man through the law courts & foment such media speculation that lexisnexis & the algoryddims forever associate Murrell with my bleeding arse? then fail to get a conviction, be proven a liar & still come out smelling of roses?
I guess if I was targeting the decolonisation malcontents, the State & all it’s multitude of agents would be breaking down my door to get a statement.
“I find the notion that my own journalism is successfully being “chilled” in this way highly worrying…”
True, without a doubt. And a shame ‘cos it sounds like that would have been (& eventually will be, hopefully) a great read.
But from time to time, it’s worth reminding oneself that it’s not unwise to choose your battles thoughtfully so that one “lives to fight another day”, and it in no way reflects poorly on your own character.
I know using such a war like analogy may sound melodramatic or bellicose, and that suggesting we have to pick & choose the conversations we’re inclined to ‘risk’ having is, in terms of our ‘civilised’ notions of freedom of speech, downright offensive.
But I find myself disinclined to shy away from the term ‘War’ (with a capital ‘W’), even if that feels like a ‘defeat’ in & of itself.
It goes without saying that war can be economic or ideological as much as it can be an armed conflict. Indeed, they are just assorted tools in the same arsenal and perhaps form a predictable pattern or progression from one to the other. And perhaps in acknowledging the earlier stages, we are more able to avoid the later & more bloody stages, wherein all of us Plebs are ultimately shovelled off somewhere to be culled en masse…. be that in a trench or in a nursing home (?).
…..Of course, from Iraq to Afghanistan, Yemen to Libya, Syria & Somalia, Venezuela, Brazil, Bolivia, Korea, Cuba, Central & West Africa & goodness knows where else, people will no doubt scoff at my sanctimonious & (overly)privileged bleeting about ‘pre-empting’ a bloody war, when they know full well that, for them at least, a bloody war has been in full effect for decades now.
But, aside from that comfortable inconsideration on my part, I no longer feel overly alarmist to frame my concern within the context that there is a very dangerous ideological War being perpetrated. A War couched in terms of “isms”, be that neo-liberalism, capitalism or socialism, globalism, internationalism, nationalism or whatever, and that it is in fact no less about supremacy & profit than any other aggression in our collective past.
The fact that this ideological battle fuels & underpins the actual blood’n’guts wars, that less fortunate/privileged people than myself have to deal with, is also not lost on me.
I think that these ideological aggressors, alongside a most surprising assortment of cohorts & collaborators, invent, exacerbate &/or utilise a whole host of other tribal’isms, such as regionalism, racism, sexism or religionism (?!), to create a fog behind which they are able to operate with relative impunity (as long as busybodies like CM keep their noses out or get put away).
Vested interests are feverishly entrenching a narrative & status quo through legislation, robbery, perception management or bog standard bombs’n’bullets whenever that ‘status quo’ is threatened. All the while leaving ‘civilised’ norms behind in tatters – from Geneva Conventions to torturer, Nuremberg Principles to Wars of Aggression (that “Supreme!” war crime), freedom of speech to censorship & criminalisation, right to assemble & protest to needing police authorisation, from privacy to mass surveillance, journalist to stenographer, scientific debate to scientific orthodoxy.
Were I forgiven for invoking that reference to ‘war’, then those oft quoted words about the first casualty being ‘truth’ would render the predicaments of JA, CM and so many others entirely predictable & about as hum drum as drones over Pakistan, albeit just as abhorrent.
And, in light of Murray’s decision not to ‘move forward’ with his Llewellyn story, maybe it wouldn’t be entirely ludicrous to quote a US General who said, whilst experiencing a ‘setback’ at the Battle of Lake Jangjin during the slaughter of Nrth Korea:
“Retreat, hell! … We’re not retreating, we’re just advancing in a different direction.”
I appreciate that none of all that makes your situation any less troublesome, but perhaps worth bearing in mind to counter those occasional feelings of powerlessness, humiliation or cowardice. To fight is to be bold & to be bold is to fight, there is no shame in suffering the blows as it simply proves that you are effective in what you do.
With all that in mind, the “Stay calm, Carry on” mantra just sounds like some cynically contrived psyops horsesh!t
I’m feeling like “Lose yer Sh!T, be Angry” would be more appropriate.
Crikey! I even find myself wondering how long until I’m not allowed to write this sort of diatribe, let alone think it, before it’s deemed seditious, subversive or an incitement to rebellion?!?
…..Ah well, wonder what’s on the telly……..
Behold the following inevitable consequence and otherworldly facility, with myriad unintended repercussions and many anxious real life, real time worries for corrupted systems administrations and perverse elite exclusive executive office operations ?????
Yes ….. most definitely, certainly. ‘Tis guaranteed by the very nature of current rapid stealthy progress of intelligence processing and virtually remote free to air internetworking presentation of novel results …… Quantum Communication for Resolution of Revolutionary Earthed Matters.
amanfromMars 1 Wed 26 May 06:33 [2105260633] ….. just saying on https://forums.theregister.com/forum/1/2021/05/25/echr_ruling_uk_ripa_surveillance_laws/
Hobson’s Choice ?
“We all want to have control over our personal information, and to have a government that respects our right to privacy and our freedom of expression.” …. Megan Goulding
How very naive of any lawyer to even think that such is possible and likely from governments which need control of personal information in order to protect their privacy and freedom to abuse with suppression of expression and subversion of information exposing their misdeeds and endemic systemic failings. The law is such an ass centre stage in right dodgy command performances of fascist foe and fake friend alike.
On Tuesday I wrote a different post to this. It actually gave the detail of what David Llewellyn posted, and examined it. My article also revealed who was behind the complaint against him, and referred to some interesting history of Llewellyn’s own investigations.
However I received strong advice that to publish my article might itself be construed contempt of court, and that I ran the risk of being instantly jailed rather than free pending appeal, and further that to publish may attract yet another political prosecution from the Crown Office. I therefore did not publish and cannot give you the detail of the Llewellyn case, at least until after its conclusion.
I find this deeply depressing. I should not, in normal circumstances, have had the slightest hesitation in giving you the detail of what is happening to Dave Llewellyn, and more importantly why, in the same way I did with Mark Hirst. I find the notion that my own journalism is successfully being “chilled” in this way highly worrying, and this adds to the sense of injustice I feel in my own case. In fact anger and perhaps even humiliation at the powerlessness – and fear I am becoming a coward – has pretty well prostrated me for three days. I feel somewhat recovered now, and determined to fight on. But for the first time I find myself seriously considering, after my case is concluded, leaving my beloved Scotland and going to live in a country which does not jail dissident writers. …. Craig Murray, Historian, Former Ambassador, Human Rights Activist
But that is the Old Guard’s doing to try and protect itself from the inevitable understandable rough justice/reap the whirlwind slaughter of the justifiably enraged and more fully educated and entertaining and engaged mob, and the new kids on the block and brave-hearted young lions and lionesses in position of power and control commanding secrecy and secure intelligence briefings want no part of that ancient parcel of perverted grief and corrupting despair because of the nowhere good and great it so quickly leads to nowadays with all of this new fangled and entangling command and control of all personal information with national, international and internetional intelligence. To not think so must surely have one personally identified as quite dim and not at all suitable for anything involving and investigating the use and/or abuse and misuse of critical infrastructure intelligence machinery.
IT’s a Madder Mad Mad Mad World than ever it was or ever could be in 1963 and something all pervasive which cannot be in any way conveniently avoided and left unaddressed and ignored in a can being kicked down the road whenever the colossal herd of rogue elephants in Situations Rooms/Oval Offices/Cabinets/Underground Bunkers on live rampage.
What country do you expect to find that does not jail dissident writers? Certainly not the United States, where I live. As you know, the U.S. and the CIA are the ones responsible for the atrocities inflicted on Julian Assange, and he is not even an American citizen. Steven Donziger is one example. I am glad to hear that you are recovering from whatever has sent you to your bed. Good luck, sir.