Keeping Freedom Alive 1184

I want to make one or two points for you to ponder while I am in jail. This is the last post until about Christmas; we are not legally able to post anything while I am imprisoned. But the Justice for Craig Murray Campaign website is now up and running and will start to have more content shortly. Fora and comments here are planned to stay open.

I hope that one possible good effect of my imprisonment might be to coalesce opposition to the imminent abolition of jury trials in sexual assault cases by the Scottish Government, a plan for which Lady Dorrian – who wears far too many hats in all this – is front and centre. We will then have a situation where, as established by my imprisonment, no information at all on the defence case may be published in case it contributes to “jigsaw identification”, and where conviction will rest purely on the view of the judge.

That is plainly not “open justice”, it is not justice at all. And it is even worse than that, because the openly stated aim of abolishing juries is to increase conviction rates. So people will have their lives decided not by a jury of their peers, but by a judge who is acting under specific instruction to increase conviction rates.

It is often noted that conviction rates in rape trials are too low, and that is true. But have you ever heard this side of the argument? In Uzbekistan under the Karimov dictatorship, when I served there, conviction rates in rape trials were 100%. In fact very high conviction rates are a standard feature of all highly authoritarian regimes worldwide, because if the state prosecutes you then the state gets what it wants. The wishes of the state in such systems vastly outweigh the liberty of the individual.

My point is simply this. You cannot judge the validity of a system simply by high conviction rates. What we want is a system where the innocent are innocent and the guilty found guilty; not where an arbitrary conviction target is met.

The answer to the low conviction rates in sexual assault trials is not simple. Really serious increases in resources for timely collection of evidence, for police training and specialist units, for medical services, for victim support, all have a part to play. But that needs a lot of money and thought. Just abolishing juries and telling judges you want them to convict is of course free, or even a saving.

The right to have the facts judged in serious crime allegations by a jury of our peers is a glory of our civilisation. It is the product of millennia, not lightly to be thrown away and replaced by a huge increase in arbitrary state power. That movement is of course fueled by current fashionable political dogma which is that the victim must always be believed. That claim has morphed from an initial meaning that police and first responders must take accusations seriously, to a dogma that accusation is proof and it is wrong to even question the evidence, which is of course to deny the very possibility of false accusation.

That is precisely the position which Nicola Sturgeon has taken over the Alex Salmond trial; to be accused is to be guilty, irrespective of the defence evidence. That people are oblivious to the dangers of the dogma that there should be no defence against sexual assault allegations, is to me deeply worrying. Sexual allegation is the most common method that states have used to attack dissidents for centuries, worldwide and again especially in authoritarian regimes. Closer to home, think of history stretching from Roger Casement to Assange and Salmond.

Why would we remove the only barrier – a jury of ordinary citizens – that can stop abuse of state power?

I am worried that this abolition of juries will have been enacted by the Scottish Parliament, even before I am out of jail. I am worried Labour and the Lib Dems will support it out of fashionable political correctness. I am worried an important liberty will disappear.

I want to touch on one other aspect of liberty in my own imprisonment that appears not understood, or perhaps simply neglected, because somehow the very notion of liberty is slipping from our political culture. One point that features plainly in the troll talking points to be used against me, recurring continually on social media, is that I was ordered to take down material from my blog and refused.

There is an extremely important point here. I have always instantly complied with any order of a court to remove material. What I have not done is comply with instructions from the Crown or Procurator Fiscal to remove material. Because it is over 330 years since the Crown had the right of censorship in Scotland without the intervention of a judge.

It sickens me that so many Scottish Government backed trolls are tweeting out that I should have obeyed the instructions of the Crown. That Scotland has a governing party which actively supports the right of the Crown to exercise unrestrained censorship is extremely worrying, and I think a sign both of the lack of respect in modern political culture for liberties which were won by people being tortured to death, and of the sheer intellectual paucity of the current governing class.

But then we now learn that Scotland has a government which was prepared not only to be complicit in exempting the Crown from climate change legislation, but also complicit in hushing up the secret arrangement, so I am not surprised.

What is even more terrifying in my case is that the Court explicitly states that I should have followed the directions of the Crown Office in what I did and did not publish, and my failure to not publish as the Crown ordered is an aggravating factor in my sentencing.

If the Crown thinks something I write is in contempt and I think it is not, the Crown and I should stand as equals in court and argue our cases. There should be no presumption I ought to have obeyed the Crown in the first place. That Scottish “justice” has lost sight of this is disastrous, though perhaps as much from stupidity as malice.

My next thought on my trial is to emphasise again the dreadful doctrine Lady Dorrian has now enshrined in law, that bloggers should be held to a different (by implication higher) standard in law than the mainstream media (the judgement uses exactly those terms), because the mainstream media is self-regulated.

This doctrine is used to justify jailing me when mainstream media journalists have not been jailed for media contempt for over half a century, and also to explain why I have been prosecuted where the mainstream media, who were provably responsible for far more jigsaw identification, were not prosecuted.

This is dreadful law, and my entire legal team are frankly astonished that the Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal on this point. This excellent article by Jonathan Cook explains further the chilling implications.

Those articles which the Court ordered me to take down, have been taken down. But I was not ordered to take down this one, which was found not to be in contempt of court. I was also not ordered to take down my affidavits, which though slightly redacted are still extremely valuable. I swore to the truth of every word and I stick by that. At the time I published these, far less was known about the Salmond affair than is known now, and I believe you will find it well worth reading them again in the light of your current state of wider knowledge – absolutely nothing to do with learning identities, but to do with what really happened on the whole plot to destroy Alex Salmond (something the judgement states I am allowed to say).

Finally I urge you to consider this truly remarkable speech from Kenny MacAskill MP. Scotland’s former Justice Secretary, and consider its quite staggering implications. It tells you everything you want to know about the British Establishment’s capture of the Scottish government, that the mainstream media felt no need to report the main points he was making, which constitute a simply astonishing outline of corrupt abuse of power.

An explanation: this blog is going dark because I cannot by law publish from prison or conduct a business from prison. Access to this blog has always been free and open and subscriptions have always been a voluntary contribution and not a purchase. It is understood that all new and continuing subscriptions from today, until we go live again, are voluntary contributions to the welfare of my family and not in exchange for anything.

I am afraid one off contributions to the defence fund are also still urgently needed. Legal costs so far paid amount to over £200,000 and continue to rise as we head towards the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, which has to be via another Scottish Court called the nobile officium. Astonishingly, over 13,000 individuals from over 120 countries have contributed to the legal defence fund. People all over the world value freedom and realise the terrible precedents established by this case must be overturned.

We are equally grateful for all donations and all really do help – donations of £5 or less total over £30,000. But I must mention the special generosity of Roger Waters and Vivienne Westwood, and the anonymous individual who gave one bitcoin. 80% of the fund is reserved for legal fees, but up to 20% may be used to fund campaigning to raise public and political awareness of the human rights issues involved.

Click HERE TO DONATE if you do not see the Donate button above


Account name
Account number 3 2 1 5 0 9 6 2
Sort code 6 0 – 4 0 – 0 5
IBAN GB98NWBK60400532150962
Bank address Natwest, PO Box 414, 38 Strand, London, WC2H 5JB

Bitcoin: bc1q3sdm60rshynxtvfnkhhqjn83vk3e3nyw78cjx9
Ethereum/ERC-20: 0x764a6054783e86C321Cb8208442477d24834861a


Subscription to this blog has always been voluntary and anyone is free to read and reproduce without subscribing. These subscriptions have become the major source of income to myself and my family, and I am especially grateful to those who have maintained their subscriptions when it has not been really functioning. I shall be immensely happy if you can continue until I am back. The struggle continues after this holiday.

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:

Recurring Donations


Paypal address for one-off donations: [email protected]

Alternatively by bank transfer or standing order:

Account name
Account number 3 2 1 5 0 9 6 2
Sort code 6 0 – 4 0 – 0 5
IBAN GB98NWBK60400532150962
Bank address Natwest, PO Box 414, 38 Strand, London, WC2H 5JB

Bitcoin: bc1q3sdm60rshynxtvfnkhhqjn83vk3e3nyw78cjx9
Ethereum/ERC-20: 0x764a6054783e86C321Cb8208442477d24834861a

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Comments will be closed on October 24, 2021.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

1,184 thoughts on “Keeping Freedom Alive

1 6 7 8 9
  • Republicofscotland

    Momentum building a wee bit over Craig Murray’s unjust incarceration. In my opinion the imprisoning of Murray has brought global shame on Scotland.

    “A BRANCH of the National Union of Journalists (NUJ) has urged its executive and the International Federation of Journalists to express their concern about the eight-month sentence handed down to former diplomat and pro-independence campaigner Craig Murray.”

    “The motion points out that Reporters Without Borders claimed Murray is the first person in the world to be jailed over jigsaw identification, and his sentence the longest imposed on any journalist in the UK in living memory.”

    • iain

      Will be interesting to see what response they get, if any. On the preceding page a former NUJ branch secretary and “father of chapel” is insisting CM is not even a journalist. I’d fear that is probably the prevailing attitude in NUJ circles given the types who dominate journalism in the UK.

      • Deepgreenpuddock

        Trying to get my head around journalism and ‘ journalism’. I suppose the argument revolves around training and the way rewards are gained for the work. A conventional journalist is submitting work for consideration. A blog is self-edited and usually a one-person affair. Most bloggers are also confined to a single or a few issues. One might also suppose that a blog has a lower cost than a publication with multiple personnel with dedicated functions. The relationship to the union (NUJ) is also a bone of contention as membership implies peer approval. A blog, no matter how sparkling, will be seen as undercutting the conventional press outfits.

        ‘Control’ is also an issue. Most journalists are willingly beholden to superiors and proprietors, a potentially toxic arrangement not always conducive to truth telling and independent comment. Another factor is technology which has enabled blogging. The relationship of journalism to entertainment has also become blurred with the advent of infotainment coupled with the insights of established ‘celebrity’ participants in political fora. Their insight/experience is often widely valued. Payment must, in most cases, skew the comment and information. I realise I am stating the obvious here for all the seasoned readers here.

        Lady Dorrian’s view/sympathy obviously veers towards the established press and institutions. Another complication is the geographical base of the blog which is obviously important for legal jurisdiction. Would CM be liable if he had published in (say German) with a translated version available on the press of a button?

        It seems obvious to me that the technology has overtaken the established procedures for comment. Is there any reason for a German blogger to refrain from comment on Scottish matters or collaborate with a silent partner? Would the putative German blogger be subject to Scots court proceedings? Seems to me that the fox has escaped the pack of press hounds, bolted, and is running free. Will we see a process of evolution or natural selection that will inevitably end up with a completely free (and potentially worthless) press?

        At any rate this issue seems to me to be a big one which probably requires a very comprehensive review and open debate, and not the attempt by a judge to constrain freedom of speech according to her caprices.

        • nevermind

          Well argued Deepgreenpuddock, leaves to add the infamous, always present, presence of the security services in journalism across the spectrum of media, especially the broadsheets and tv, not to speak of their attempts to recruit at a very young age.
          Imho they are already starting to fish at sixth forms and approaching those with ‘international abilities’, who speak foreign languages such as Russian or Mandarin, the more the better the diversities of capabilities.
          These young people are signing their lives away to protect the status quo and are vulnerable. Approaching young people who have issues with being bipolar or are on a spectrum of sorts is reprehensible to say the least.

          • Giyane


            To use a metaphor from electricity, where one side of a floating voltage is tied to earth and this side becomes the Neutral, the presence of the security services references floating, free comment to the status quo.

            Quite apart from her own particular axe to grind, rape, Lady Dorrian has utilised an extremely right wing concept in her jailing of Craig, that all journalism shall always be referenced to the status quo, not free nor floating.

            This is the product of her own particular bonkers coinciding with the bonkers of tge current Tory government. In other words a double-bind: Though shalt not free-think and thou definitely shalt not apply your free thought to matters that touch on government.

            You know , our Puritans only lasted a few tears, followed by an era of liberalism and pleasure. Small comfort to Craig who is caught in this double hate politics. This is so un-British. Maybe you took refuge here thinking this fascist mindset was impossible here.

            Anyway, it won’t last long.

        • DiggerUK

          The changes in the world often mean we find ourselves facing a bouncer, googly, or a body line delivery.
          Your comments on what criteria makes a journalist a journalist have made me pause for thought.
          I have to confess that I have some sympathy with your comments…_

          • Courtenay Barnett

            Interesting and thought-provoking commentary.
            Tweaked my curiosity as to what/who is journalism/a journalist and so I visited Wikipedia to find:-

            “A journalist is an individual trained to collect/gather information in form of text, audio or pictures, processes them to a news-worthy form and disseminates it to the public. The act or process mainly done by the journalist is called journalism.”

            But Wikipedia goes further and then states:-

            “ Journalism can be in form of Broadcast, print, advertisers and public relations personnel, and, depending with the form of journalism the term journalist may include various categories of individuals as per the roles they play in the process. This includes, Reporters, Correspondents, Citizen Journalist, editors, editorial-writers, columnists, and visual journalists, such as photojournalists (journalists who use the medium of photography).”

            One of the opposing arguments to Craig Murray not being a journalist relates to and draws on the ideas of both absence of an organisational structure and membership of such organisation as so approved accompanied by a want of remuneration. I have noted the name of one Maurice Ali who had founded in 2003 an early international citizen journalist association, the International Association of Independent Journalists Inc. (IAIJ). The association has published studies and articles on citizen journalism. It has also attended United Nations events and spoken at UNESCO being advocates of citizen journalism worldwide. Thus, it seems to me that what Murray does – and being sometimes remunerated through contributions from the public – does not comport with Lady Dorrian’s constricted definition.

            So, at the very least, considering what the Wikipedia definition and commentary has to say, it seems evident that Craig Murray, based on the established definition(s) and accepted and acknowledged contemporary practices, could accurately be termed both a ‘citizen journalist’ and an ‘activist (as in defence of human rights) journalist’.
            Your thoughtful reflection has led me not just much closer – but all the way – to being clear in my mind that Craig Murray is a ‘journalist’ notwithstanding the spurious distinction which Lady Dorrian had to draw on to secure a conviction.

          • Johny Conspiranoid

            ““ Journalism can be in form of Broadcast, print, advertisers and public relations personnel,”

            I see Wikkipedia has included public relations with journalism.

        • iain

          Not sure of the value of casting doubt on CM being a real journalist. The rationale for jailing him and none of the tame, house journalists who committed the same offence was that the tame ones are responsible, regulated “real” journalistss, even if they were more blatant in their identification of the “victims” and were the sources of any identification that did occur. Every argument that cedes validity to Dorrian’s perspective is just grist to her mill and those of her press and political allies. They would be especially tickled to see their argument being repeated even by Craig’s own readers. I concur with the perceptions of Pilger, Cook, Kennard, Blumenthal and Co, fellow independent journalists who rock the boat by telling the truth. Craig Murray is a journalist, end of. So too Julian Assange.

          • Robert

            I agree. The idea of one law for “journalists”, however defined, and a stricter law for others is a nonsense.

            Many (including me) would argue for a heavier sentence for a journalist as they should know better – they know the law but flout it intentionally.

          • Stevie Boy

            I think that maybe the definition of a journalist should be updated to cover their current role in society:

            “A journalist is an individual trained to copy information supplied by Governments, Organisations and Security Services in the form of text, audio or pictures and disseminate it to the public via main stream media sources. The act or process mainly done by the journalist is called propaganda (see stenography).”

            Craig is more of a speaker of truths.

          • Squeeth

            Craig Murray is not a journalist, he’s a reporter. Reporters describe events, journalists masturbate over them.

        • Rhys Jaggar

          This issue occurred when Peter Wright wanted to publish ‘Spycatcher’ in the 1980s. The Government tried using blocking tactics like OSII, so Wright just went over to Australia and published it there. The laws in Australia weren’t made by HMG, after all.

          • Fat Jon

            Oh God. The security services and their official wing (the BBC) are off again.

            There is too much bad news about shortages of everything, including power and food for Christmas, that the government can’t cope – so why not dredge up the lies of non-Novichock and non-poisonings.

            How convenient for the corrupt establishment that Craig is in prison and cannot ridicule the silly spy stories which seem to have been forced into the media headlines – by order.

        • Geoffrey

          I suppose it depends on whether you can self certify your profession or not. It would seem reasonable that there there should be objective tests that you would need to satisfy to call yourself a journalist. Eg. A house designer can not call himself an architect etc.

          • Eta

            Why on earth should different laws apply to journalists from those that apply to other people? “Professional certification” by a cartel is about insurance (to keep costs down) and public relations (to keep prices up). See the Hell’s Angels for a comparison. Anyone who doesn’t belong to that gang who wants to display its insignia should beware.

          • Johny Conspiranoid

            “Why on earth should different laws apply to journalists from those that apply to other people?”

            The idea that it should is a novel invention of the judge as far as I can tell. A bad idea too.

        • Piotr+Berman

          “‘Control’ is also an issue. Most journalists are willingly beholden to superiors and proprietors…”

          I guess that to the likes of Lady Dorrian this is precisely what is admirable in “established journalism”. Even if they deviate from the letter of a judicial edict, they do not do it on a whim but by following their superiors and proprietors, and the latter have the presumption of knowing good from bad. Unlike Craig who does it on his own in spite of somewhat precarious finances.

          At least I hope that Craig and his family will survive on the recurring payments for the likes of me, but can he be compare to say, William Henry Smith who could be trusted with selling proper newspapers on railroad stations but also with the responsibilities of the First Lord of Admiralty?

          In short, probity and financial status are one and the same thing. At least, to judges.

  • Jimmy Riddle

    A question for the good people who post here.

    Is it possible to get hold of / buy a face mask with `justice for Craig Murray’ written on the front?
    If so, how?
    This would be very useful for me.

  • nevermind

    I agree with Robert, its impossible to split free speech and journalism to control and perpetuate the status quo, via control of the narrative, massive compliance with a system, and compliance from your best pals, the NUJ.

    Craig tells it as it is and whatever handful of sand is to thrown into our eyes regards the Fairytales of Porton Down, the death of the Skripals or our hatred of Russia, of course with the help of some rich Oligarchskis settled in London and their Tory donor frontmen.

    Dinosaurs have to die out and the systems active opposition to what we need to stay alive on this beautiful planet is a declaration of war. Free speech must persist.

    • Clark

      “Death of the Skripals”? Well they have disappeared so thoroughly it’s as if they were dead, and maybe that is intentional. But the only fatality was Dawn Sturgess, though I think there has still been no inquest. An inquest would be too public, it seems.

        • Gordon Gallacher

          Quite so. From John Helmer’s Blog I see that instead of an inquest there is now to be a Public Enquiry. If I remember correctly, this is the way it went with the Dr David Kelly case too. A great way to keep secrets and evidence hidden from view.

      • Stevie Boy

        What do you do if you want to ensure the official narrative is not questioned ?
        You imprison those who may ask embarrassing questions: Craig Murray, Julian Assange and yes the Skripals – all political prisoners of the UK regime.

      • michael norton

        Clark we were told the Skripals were recovered from poisoning, maybe it is time they returned to normal life.
        Perhaps somebody could drop a line to the Home Secretary?

        • Fat Jon

          It would be nice if a few of our alleged investigative MSM journos could simply ask that question of the Home Secretary in a public interview, and see what the answer might be.

          Or maybe ask Cressida Dick if she knows where they are? I’m sure an honest policewoman such as herself would only be too pleased to do her public duty and let us all know .

          Of course, the Skripals would not be allowed to appear live in the UK themselves, because they know the truth – which is something to be kept secret in modern day Britain, or dismissed as fake news.

          • Cedders

            Look up “witness protection program”. The Skripals are somewhere safe and secure, almost certainly somewhere remote because their faces are known. Neither the Home Secretary nor the Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police know where.

        • Cedders

          It is highly unlikely that the Home Secretary knows where the Skripals are, and it might prove extremely difficult for her to find out. The whereabouts of protected people are known only to those who genuinely need to know and finding out who those people are is non-trivial.
          It may well be that the Skripals have started a new life and will never return to Salisbury, even though their specific circumstances would make it very difficult to create new identities for them.

          • Tom Welsh

            “The whereabouts of protected people are known only to those who genuinely need to know…”

            This is the first time I have heard the grave described as “protected”.

  • Parky

    Having followed Craig’s blog for many years, it is clear he will have upset many senior people in government and the establishment with key background information they would prefer to have kept hidden. The website had to be relocated offshore some years ago, to avoid closure in the UK. I feel his trial and subsequent incarceration are a cynical revenge for his previous misdeeds. In a wider context he is of course a journalist and performs many of the same functions those employed in the main-stream do but without proprietors to keep happy under the watchful eyes of their establishment minders.

    • BrianFujisan

      Cheers for that RoS

      And Dave From the Craig Murray Justice Campaign Spoke Well at the annual Hope Over Fear Rally in Freedom ( George ) Square

  • michael norton

    News that two female civil servants complained about Mr. Salmond’s behaviour first appeared in the Daily Record in August 2018.

    Investigations by the Scottish Government and the information commissioner failed to establish how the paper got hold of the details?
    This story has legs.
    However what ever is turned up by Police Scotland will be far too late for Craig.

      • Vivian O'Blivion

        “All the jolly boys and girls” is perhaps Campbell’s most important piece of journalism.
        What’s happened since it was published?
        Well, SNP, MSP Jenny Gilruth is now Kezia Dugdale’s partner. Dugdale runs the John Smith Centre for Public Service. The JSCfPS has every appearance of being a front for the US State Department. The Board of the JSCfPS is a veritable phone book of ex- spooks. Think of the JSCfPS as being a Scottish version of the British American Project and you won’t be far wrong. The Sturgeon faction is in tight with the JSCfPS (John Nicholson, Stewart McDonald, Alyn Smith, … ).
        Get this, school teacher Gilruth was identified by the State Department as being a “future leader” and was in Washington as part of the International Visitors Leadership Program, 45 working days after being sworn in as a rookie MSP. Pretty nifty eh. Shades of Humza Yousaf being identified as a “future leader” in his second year as a humble parliamentary aide.
        Meanwhile, Angela Crawley (also in Washington at the same time as Gilruth and Dugdale but no explanation offered in her HoC register of interests) is now the SNP’s Westminster Shadow Attorney General. Get this, Politics graduate Crawley got her Law degree after she became an MP. A Shadow Attorney General that’s never practiced law, quite a thing to behold.
        Sturgeon’s “New SNP” is being run like a marionette from the conference rooms of Foggy Bottom. The State Department will be acting on a quid pro quo basis. “You spy on our lot, we’ll spy on yours.”
        Just like little Simon Bracey Lane of the Institute for Statecraft volunteering to “help out” with Bernie Sanders’ primary campaign against Hillary Clinton.

    • Stevie Boy

      If I recall, Craig covered this story in a previous blog, many moons ago.
      Getting the Scottish Government to investigate this leak is very analogous to getting the Tory anti-corruption tsar, John Penrose, to investigate corruption and cronyism within the Test and Trace prgramme under Dido Harding, the NHS Test and Trace boss

      • michael norton

        An internal government investigation was set up in 2018 after two female civil servants made formal complaints about Mr Salmond’s behaviour, dating back to when he was first minister.

        “Some of the complaints were upheld in a decision report written by Permanent Secretary Leslie Evans, the Scottish government’s most senior civil servant, who said they were “well founded”.

        However these findings were set aside when Mr Salmond successfully challenged the newly-devised complaints handling procedure in court.

        The government conceded that the probe had broken rules and been “tainted by apparent bias” because the investigating officer had had some prior contact with the complainers.”

        I wonder what they mean “tainted by apparent bias”? As Mr. Salmond was taken to court on multiple charges, yet was found innocent, I think this bias obviously existed.
        That conclusion, to me, would go towards the view, that colluders have broken laws to get Mr. Salmond. Yet none of these colluders have been charged.
        Confirmation bias.

        • John Cleary

          I wonder what they mean “tainted by apparent bias”?


          It means “clear bias”. It was “tainted by clear bias”.

          I agree it is confusing. As to why they could not simply use my formulation (above) I do not know.

          Maybe an understanding by the subjects is not rated very high by whoever writes these things.

  • Republicofscotland

    President Carles Puigdemont, the head of the Catalan Independence movement has been arrested in Italy , with Spanish Police present.

    Meanwhile, members are now asked to gather at the Commonwealth Pool Grounds early before the 12.30pm kick-off for the rally. The AUOB march tomorrow in Edinburgh has been attacked by the SNP/Labour council in Edinburgh and Police Scotland, every attempt to diminish and reroute it by both, has saw the march moved.

    Sturgeon the Betrayer of Scots loathes the AUOB because she can’t control them, and for an FM who supposedly supports Scottish independence she never attends the indy marches.

    No such problems for the Orange Order who marched in Glasgow last Saturday without any hinderance from the council or Police Scotland, the O/O was even allowed to march past chapels whilst banging their drums and singing their songs of hate that put fear and alarm into the community.

    • arby

      This is a measure of how realistic the prospect of independence is now seen to be by the ptb.
      The semblance of democracy and fairness has been abandoned in favour of open lawfare.

      On another good note, Puigdemont has been released!

    • Jimmy Riddle

      Why on earth are there Orange Order marches in Scotland anyway? I thought the Orange Order was an Irish thing. Pity that the West of Scotland seems to be importing Irish problems ……

      • michael norton

        The Orange people are Protestants and want to stay part of the U.K. They also do not want to be part of the E.U.
        The Green people are Roman Catholics and no longer want to remain in the U.K. but they wanted to remain part of the E.U.

        That is obviously simplistic but has some truth

        • Jimmy Riddle

          Michael – they may be `Protestant’, but it isn’t clear to me that they are Scottish. I’m from the east of Scotland and I was basically never aware that they existed in Scotland, until I once made a journey west to Glasgow. I once visited Northern Ireland – and discovered that there seemed to be Orange Order and Freemason establishments in most towns – so existence of O.O. marches really is an imported problem – which simply shouldn’t be seen in Scotland.

          People expressing `Protestant’ religious affiliations, or expressing the view that they want to remain in the UK by joining the O.O. or attending their marches is an Irish thing – and not a Scottish thing.

      • Republicofscotland


        This should shed some light on to it.

        “Orangeism was imported into Scotland as a handy instrument of colonial rule. Its function, by 1821 – the year of the first Orange march in Scotland, was as much to replace among Scots Protestants their sense of Scottishness with that of Britishness as it was to remove the possibility of rebellious collaboration between Protestants and Catholics – an alliance which almost cost the British state Ireland in 1798.”

          • U Watt

            Except the flag behind him isn’t being flown as a Producers-style spoof.

            It remains a benign, respectable organisation in the eyes of Sturgeon and the British establishment, while Corbyn is a hate-filled bigot.

          • Jimmy Riddle

            UWatt – You are indeed correct. I was trying to think of how to write a reply that the mods would let through, which correctly described the mind-set of Nicola Sturgeon but I can’t (same goes for Lady Dorrian – who may well also be one of them).

        • Jimmy Riddle

          RoS – I’ll pick up one sentence from the article you linked to (which is a good and informative article and well worth reading).

          `The Orange Order is concerned with Catholics and Catholicism, but not as people of a different religious tradition and another type of Christianity. Its preoccupation is with what they represent politically.’

          My question: if the Catholic Church does represent something politically, then why don’t I hear it shouting from the rooftops condemning the imprisonment of Craig Murray?

          The same goes for all the other organisations in Scotland that call themselves `Christian’ – why don’t we hear them shouting very loudly condemning the imprisonment of Craig Murray?

          I naively thought that Christianity was supposed to be on the side of good, but clearly I was wrong about this. Silly me.

          • Stevie Boy

            You only have to look at the role of ‘the church’ in: the troubles; WW2; Spanish War; the inquisition; missionaries; etc. to realise Christianity/religion is just another self serving, corrupt, set up. And, that’s not mentioning the lunatic, evangelical types that pervade politics and the establishment.
            Creations of men, and all that implies …

          • U Watt

            He is not saying Orangemen hate Catholics because of the (arch conservative) politics of Catholic Church.

            He is saying it is because Orangemen view nationalist Irish Catholics as a political threat to British colonial rule in Ireland.

          • michael norton

            The Orange Order has long been opposed to Scotland becoming independent from the United Kingdom.
            In a July 2001 interview with the Sunday Herald, Jack Ramsay, the General Secretary of the Grand Orange Lodge of Scotland, warned that if Scotland became an independent country, the Orange Order might oppose it by becoming “a paramilitary force”.


            So it sounds like they are these days more against Scotland becoming Independent than being against the Pope.

          • Jimmy Riddle

            Michael – well, I suppose just very surprised to see that they are indeed Scottish. I never encountered it and I only ever heard of it in an Irish context.

            But I’m prepared to stand corrected – and accept that Scotland does have this problem.

            I don’t understand why they don’t simply ban them.

          • Jimmy Riddle

            U Watt – I did get that point. I wanted to broaden things a little – and in a direction I consider important.

            The incarceration of Craig Murray is thoroughly immoral. Isn’t Christianity supposed to be connected with the fight of good against evil?

            To those out there – I don’t particularly care what variety of Christian you claim to be – why don’t you say something loudly and clearly about this? Why does the `Christian’ voice seem to be completely absent?

          • Giyane

            michael norton

            I think it would be fair to say that the Taliban are more against non-political Islam than they are against crusaders from USUKIS. I am sure the Taliban will play a role in the new obsession of USUKIS against China and Myanmar. All politicos of all colours are one party who are deadly opposed to all the rest of humankind who like peace.

            Is power that is built on the corpses of your fellow human beings , power? The Saudis who funded the rebels in Syria only tasted a few years if power before Mosul was flattened by Iranian forces and USUKIS bombs.

            There is something disgusting about power that is not gained through the agreement of the intellect.

          • Johny Conspiranoid

            “Why on earth should different laws apply to journalists from those that apply to other people?”

            The idea that it should is a novel invention of the judge as far as I can tell. A bad idea too.

        • Vivian O'Blivion

          It was a Yorkshire associate congregation of the Wee Frees that got Lord Mackay of Clashfern booted out for attending funeral masses for deceased colleagues. Nutters everywhere.

          • Squeeth

            Superstitious mumbo-jumbo is a minority fetish but state subsidies are quite good at reminding people that they’ve always been in the God Squad. Has-beens like Howard Jacobson and never-weres like David Baddiel can always earn a few quid by becoming born-again zionist antisemites. I haven’t seen them in Scarborough but I’ve seen Will Self in Beverley and Hull. I rather regret not shouting “What are the 39 Steps?” when he invited questions.

            PS how old’s Mae West?

          • Cynicud

            “It was a Yorkshire associate congregation of the Wee Frees that got Lord Mackay of Clashfern booted out ..”

            No it wasn’t. Where to start?

            First “Wee Frees” is a patronising term used by Lowland Scots applied t the Free Church of Scotland. Lord Mackay is a former member of another church- the Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland.

            He was not “booted out.” He left after being censured by the FP Church for attending requiem masses of Catholic judges when he was Lord Chancellor.

      • Jeff

        My tuppenceworth;

        “…the West of Scotland seems to be importing Irish problems ……”

        imho these are not “Irish” problems at all. They are all “British” problems, from start to finish.

  • ET

    The Orange Order has been around since 1795, the link posted by RepublicofScotland explains its origins. The wikipedia pages about the Orange Order and the plantations in N.Ireland are also both informative.

    There is a long history of connection between Scotland and N.Ireland not least because of the then shared gaelic culture and language between the gaelic highlands and gaelic Ulster but also because

    “The Plantation of Ulster was presented to James I as a joint “British”, or English and Scottish, venture to ‘pacify’ and ‘civilise’ Ulster, with half the settlers to be from each country. James had been King of Scotland before he also became King of England and needed to reward his Scottish subjects with land in Ulster to assure them they were not being neglected now that he had moved his court to London.”

    You might be interested to see a breakdown of how N.Ireland voted in the brexit referendum:

    • Kerchee Kerchee Coup

      Slugger O Toole had an insiders perspective on the Orange Order a couple of years ago,which might be of interest.. The Orange Order was also actively propagated in Lancashire from the early 1800s to counter the misery and unrest that led to Peterloo. and has a minor presence in the anti Papist Lewes and Bridgewater Bonfire Societies.

    • michael norton

      ET, are we suggesting that the Orange Order was created by the U.K. state or its forerunner?
      Are we suggesting that the Orange Order is helping the U.K. state to continue in existence?
      Are we suggesting that the U.K. state is actively funding and using the Orange Order to stop Scotland becoming a separate country?

        • Jimmy Riddle

          U Watt – let me guess – perhaps because they are Nazis and while they may appreciate her majesty, they prefer old Adolf? Or maybe that is too easy.

          Beats me why they are tolerated – they make whoever they are supposed to represent look ridiculous.

          Perhaps Nicola Sturgeon tolerates them because she thinks she can smear the pro-union parties with their presence.

          Or it could be that Nicola Sturgeon and Lady Dorrian are both Orange men (which would actually make an awful lot of sense).

      • ET

        I am not really suggesting any of the above MN though I guess all are possible and for sure over the centuries successive British governments have at the very least turned a blind eye. I was pointing out the orange order has a long history pre-dating the EU and Brexit by centuries and also that Northern Ireland and Northern Irish politics has a long association with Scotland historically before and after the plantations. The history is long and complex. I am surprised that people are surprised they have lodges in Scotland.
        I do think the orange order is somewhat ananchronistic and I also think if you were to form an organisation and partake in marches through towns shouting anti-jewish slogans you’d soon find your organisation subject to a ban.
        Did you read any of the links relating to the orange order’s history MN? Ehglish, Scottish, Welsh and Irish politics and history are tightly bound together, unsurprising given the geographical proximity.

      • Fishnishandchips

        Portsmouth, i seem to remember, used to have the largest Orange order group in England. I might be wrong. But I know for certain that Ian Paisley Snr holidayed regularly in Southsea and was oft seen in the Christian Bookshop opposite Waitrose. A book shop that i witnessed selling Mein Kampf in a glass display on the counter and staffed by pretty horrible men. I used to rearrange the books sometimes leaving them a jolly message from the titles on the spine. Until I was followed home one day. That was in the mid 90’s. I believe that the NF were particularly bold in Southsea. Fun times.

    • mark

      No surprise there.

      Despite all the waffle Hilary Clinton has not denied that anything Wikleaks published was not untrue.

      All that has followed is purely and simply revenge.

      Assange and Craig – nothing to do with justice – just revenge for their revelations.

      The things that the unwashed masses should never hear or know.

  • Jon Cofy

    In the name of Christ the redeemer

    All Christians must shout out very loudly condemning the imprisonment of Craig Murray

    Her Majesty the Queen as head of the Church of England must pardon Craig Murray

    • Tatyana

      It seems to me that, if Mr. Murray could see your comment, he would be offended by the idea that the queen should pardon him. As if he is guilty and needs forgiveness. When he is not.
      And it also seems to me that he would not be happy with the appeal to religion. He would be comfortable if you were simply addressing all good conscientious people. Regardless of their way of believing in higher powers.

      • Stevie Boy

        Well said.
        Let’s not forget that the overwhelming majority of those persecuting Craig and Julian would identify themselves as Christians. And, let’s also not forget that the royal family are best of friends with the head chopping fraternity.
        And, who in the name of heck thought it was a good idea to install the corrupt, right wing, war monger Hillary Clinton as Northern Ireland’s Queen’s University Chancellor ?

        • squeeth

          Christian is as Christian does, not what a person says. England hasn’t been a nominally Christian country since the Reformation. It hasn’t even been nominally protestant since the 1850s.

      • Jon Cofy

        A Royal pardon that unites Craig with his family can only be obtained from the Monarch
        Politics keeps Craig in prison at Her Majesty’s pleasure

      • Tom Welsh

        I see your point, Tatyana, but I think there is another aspect to it. If the Queen were to pardon Mr Murray it would demonstrate, as clearly as could be, that there is a huge split in the UK government’s beliefs, values and policies. Such an act would gain the Queen a lot of admiration and credibility, as well as sparing Mr Murray more months of confinement which may harm his health.

        A pardon (in this case) should not be seen as an imperial act of clemency, but as a righting of systematic wrongdoing in the justice system. The Queen – as Frederick the Great was wont to do – would be reaching out over her minions and correcting an obvious technical mistake they have made.

  • nevermind

    why would one want the queen to pardon Craig? or appeal to some religious false morals, when history has shown us that politics should not mix with personal religious beliefs, which have cruelly failed those who entrusted god’s so-called messengers?
    Craig will come out with his head held high, no need for charity from any mind benders. And I very much hope that he will think twice before he spends ever more money to fetter lawyers’ pockets.
    Whatever he decides, and there has been a lot happening whilst he is kept away from here, to write about in future. The western alliance to trash the NNPT by fueling an arms race in south east Asia, the crumbling orifice that is the Labour party, back on track to give gravy-trainers such as Mandelson and Blair breathing space for more ugly self aggrandizement.
    Lastly the Rev. Stu over at Wings is morphing his blog into a polling organisation using up funds accrued to counter Westminster’s colonial narrative to fight and oust the Independent idea.

    • Jimmy Riddle

      nevermind – yes, spending money to fetter lawyers’ pockets has proved a mug’s game so far. The judiciary is corrupt and in trial-without-a-jury, the judge simply couldn’t care less about the defence arguments, no matter how convincing and conclusive.

      Craig will certainly come out of this with head held high, but the same cannot be said about Lady Dorrian and Nicola Sturgeon, who have shown themselves to be utterly despicable.

      • Giyane

        JImmy Riddle

        “The judge simply couldn’t care less about the defence arguments”

        ” Not every problem is a problem for Government . ”

        Yes, where Government has specifically manufactured a specific major problem, it is vital for Government to point blank deny responsibility for that specific problem.
        ” Special place in hell ” comes to mind.

        Also, since defence arguments and running the country are not part of a very modern model of a PTB, WTF do they need to spy on us 24/7 ?

        ‘oh, we are monitoring the situation very carefully to make sure the disintegration of the Justice system and the country’s infrastructure are going according to our plans.’

        BoJo Liberalism : micro -managed demolition of the institutions of civilised governance. Don’t panic Madam. I am a survivor of the Thatcher years. Planned disintegration of civil society is well within the compass of our community knowledge and experience.

        ‘ BTW, We have left the EU and it’s Court of Human Rights… Now we know why …

      • michael norton

        JR you have a good point.
        The judge is less likely to give reasoned thought to the defence points, if there are no ordinary people listening.
        So cut out public participation, then you can railroad the dissident straight to jail.

        • Giyane

          michael norton

          The problem is not the existence or non existence of an audience. The problem is the presence of a teenage Empire, sitting in the back of the Court, which has reached roughly the stage in its history where we were when we had finished enslaving black Africans, and felt a twinge of remorse, before proceeding to rape , steal and pillage the Asian continent , or the Pacific Region as USUKIS now like to call it.

          Not a perfect comparison because Russia , China and North Korea have equipped rhemselves to fight back against the US while under the British Empire neither India nor China were able successfully to do that.

          The bully has been told off by teacher but is determined to continue bullying somewhere else.

          • Giyane

            michael norton

            Exactly. 🇺🇸 🇬🇧 + Israel are quite a long way from China so why not just leave China alone instead of threatening it all the time?

            Unfortunately it is these three rogue states that lead the world in the fields of spying, lying and banking, which are tools most needed to take any colonial benefit from weaponry in the modern world..

            Since Thatcher we have abandoned manufacturing and pursued a career in soft power, hoping the manufacturing nations will continue to drone for us because of our obvious born right to be world Kings.

            We have un-hitched ourselves from Europe in order to print QE, and leave the rule of International Law as drawn up by our former selves after WW2. We will now follow the US into all its folly in the Pacific , just as we followed them into the destruction of Iraq, Libya, Syria etc.

            The only man who could have stopped this happening was Jeremy Corbyn, who is being trashed even for existing by bbc and Guardian. USUKIS are rhe main threat to humanity. Australia is still in lockdown so far as I can see.

          • Tom Welsh

            “Exactly. 🇺🇸 🇬🇧 + Israel are quite a long way from China so why not just leave China alone instead of threatening it all the time?”

            Giyane, Chomsky pointed out some time ago that the main reason Washington and its catamites try so hard to suppress freedom and democracy is that they can’t afford to have any country demonstrate that those attributes are compatible with prosperity. Venzuela is socialist – therefore Venezuela must be crushed, so that callow American youths can gloat about how “socialism always leads to bread lines”.

            That is why China is driving them stark staring mad. It is a superb example of practical socialism – with elements of capitalism, which are rather like the USA in the 19th century – and it’s far too strong to crush. Also it has an understanding with Russia that anyone who attacks either will be at war with both. Soon, at this rate, the whole of Asia will have crystallised around them and it will be a continent – the largest continent – forging ahead.

  • Republicofscotland

    If I were Craig, after I’d served my time, I’d pack up and along with my family and leave Scotland, for somewhere a little bit safer. Scotland is run and controlled by corruption on just about every level.

  • Jon Cofy

    CORRECTION: “Books”

    Craig has been negotiating.

    Craig was initially denied the books that many readers sent him.
    Happily the situation was resolved via a compromise by which Craig has donated all the books to the prison library and the library is then allowed to lend them to him

    Craig wrote:

    “Some books are reaching me, but only those bought through Blackwell’s I think. I don’t think any which are supposed to come via donation to the library have actually got here yet”

    Surprise surprise!!
    Saughton’s not honoring the deal here.
    Good news from prison turns out to be bad 🙁

  • Jon Cofy

    “why would one want the queen to pardon Craig?” Murray

    Well: 🙂
    Craig deserves a Royal Pardon from the Monarch Queen Elizabeth
    Craig could go back to living with his family with access to medical services and heating 🙂
    Craig could turn up at meetings & court hearings and write some excellent reports 🙂
    Craig could publish on this Blog 🙂
    Craig could walk down the street and go to the shops etc
    Craig could testify in court cases such as the one in Spain dealing with important issues like “Free Speech” 🙂
    Craig could hold his head up high and cheerily wave to Judge Dorian from the public gallery lol

    and I guess
    At least some people might like Craig Murray to continue campaigning for independence.
    I personally would like Craig to leave that grubby little cell in Saughton Prison and see the sun 🙂
    (If it ever shines in Edinburg these days)

    Now –
    Why don’t you want Craig Murray pardoned?
    Um—— ?
    You’re a great supporter of injustice and censorship? 🙁
    You are one of the cabal persecuting writers and journalists in the UK 🙁
    You feel innocent prisoners should never be pardoned to correct a miscarriage of justice 🙁

    Please feel free to give more reasons why Craig Murray should stay in jail or help Craig get a Royal Pardon

    • James Riddle

      Jon – I don’t think anyone has any problem with Craig being released from prison. Those who object to him being `pardoned’ think that the word implies that he has done something untoward, but nevertheless her gracious majesty has decided to let him off with it. (e.g. Richard Milhous Nixon was pardoned – so the word does have bad connotations).

      Craig Murray is innocent of any wrong-doing, unless excellent journalism is now considered to be morally reprehensible these days ….. so he should be released, but the idea of `pardon’ shouldn’t come into it.

        • Jimmy Riddle

          Very good question. I don’t really think we can blame the English or British colonialism for this – it is an entirely home grown disaster. Of course, the likes of Nicola Sturgeon and Lady Dorrian don’t see it as a disaster – it is just the way they like it – and it is (of course) very convenient for the CIA.

          It’s no worse than England – where Julian Assange has been banged up in Belmarsh at her majesty’s pleasure for some considerable time.

          • Jules Orr

            The English Supreme Court also endorsed Dorrian’s glaring double standard in imprisoning Craig Murray.

          • michael norton

            “In Scotland, unlike England, no automatic right of anonymity in sexual assault cases exists. It has to be specifically ordered by the judge in each case, something that didn’t happen until the first day of the Alex Salmond trial after James Doleman of Byline Times directly named one of the complainers in a tweet, for which major breach he was merely admonished and excluded from the court on subsequent days.”


            Like the Poll Tax, this looks like Scotland is trying this new crime out.
            If there is too little outcry, this will also be taken into English Law.

      • Jon Cofy

        Royal Pardon is the only way out of Saughton for Craig Murray
        He can prove his innocence later
        Pardon Craig Murray

      • Cedders

        Nixon was never even charged with any wrong-doing, let alone convicted. His pardon was a pre-emptive measure to prevent him being investigated once he left office

    • nevermind

      Craig will do all those activities listed by you, Jon, out of his own free will, not for the graciousness of a monarch that has colonialism in Scotland, Ireland and England at heart.
      Please do not mention democracy, it is something nobody has experienced, not even with a proportional voting system in Scotland.

      Craig should never have been jailed and to assume that I would have reasons for him to stay there is malicious twaddle, I want him out, yesterday, pardons are for scoundrels, he is not one of them.

        • nevermind

          Thanks for the little reminder of happier days, Brian.
          Please can I encourage everyone to lift morale by writing letters and postcards.

          Why should a monarch who is clearly not interested to see a fair trial for Andrew, jump at it to pardon Craig, when she relies on her judges and appoints as well as annoints them to keep this colonialism on the boil?
          When he comes out I like to encourage him to call the first Independence gathering in the rooms and or grounds of one of Scotland’s oldest castles, such as Stirling Castle, or a picnic in the grounds of Roxburgh castle remains, to galvanise hearts and minds into action.

          • Jon Cofy

            “Why should a monarch who is clearly not interested to see a fair trial for Andrew, jump at it to pardon Craig” Murray ?

            Well; Queen Elizabeth should pardon Craig Murray because she has a duty of care to look after her subjects and maintain an impartial legal system.

            Will you ask Queen Elizabeth II to pardon Craig Murray?

    • pete

      I read Jon Cofy’s piece and thought ‘Wouldn’t it be awful if crowds were to turn up in the Gallery for the summing up portion of Dorian’s cases and, after listening to her judgements, held up score cards showing what we thought of her performance, as in the talent shows.’ (points nuls) But of course that would be crazy and probably contemptuous. Would it be against the law to do that outside the court? Or damaging to her career? If it’s OK for newspapers to show contempt for judges’ views why should it be any different for the rest of us.

      Lacking imagination I have not been able to construct a letter for Craig that would be much in the way of consolation, I am still too angry to express anything other than rage, I can’t help but feel that would not be helpful. Still a day has not passed when I have not thought about his situation.

      • Stevie Boy

        I’m sure Craig doesn’t expect every missive to be in terms of consoling him or lamenting his predicament. Sometimes it’s just nice to receive a card or even a simple letter wishing him all the best and letting him know he is not forgotten.
        My advice, for what its worth, is just do it – write.

      • BrianFujisan


        I was a wee bit the same .. trying to figure out what to write..even though I do have a good way with words.. So I made it short.. and sent one of my ‘ Mountain Poems ‘

        I’m replying to you to say maybe you could just send a card as i’t’s Craig’s Birthday in a little over Two weeks – 17th October.

        Take note Folks.

    • Jules Orr

      I recall Craig saying he has watched the queen’s speech only on one occasion, and then because he was drunk and too full of turkey and Christmas pudding to reach the remote control. This is why we love him and miss him.

  • Jon Cofy

    [ Mod: In reply to michael norton @ 1:25pm. ]

    “Legal action is usually taken against the outlet that publishes or broadcasts second, because they are deemed to have completed the jigsaw.”

    REALLY? I don’t believe you!

    Please cite a case where anyone has been found guilty of “jigsaw identification” other than Craig Murray.

    Any where
    Any time

    • michael norton

      “It has to be specifically ordered by the judge in each case, something that didn’t happen until the first day of the Alex Salmond trial after James Doleman of Byline Times directly named one of the complainers in a tweet, for which major breach he was merely admonished and excluded from the court on subsequent days.”

      I am guessing that whatever Lady Dorrian thought Craig did wrong, was after, whatever James Doleman of Byline Times did?

      • Jon Cofy

        “I am guessing that whatever Lady Dorrian thought Craig did wrong —“

        Clerk Dorrian said:

        “It appears from the posts and articles that he was in fact relishing the task he set himself, which was essentially to allow the identities of complainers to be discerned – which he thought was in the public interest – in a way which did not attract sanction.”

        Craig Murray could have easily outed the complainers via Wikileaks or some other extra jurisdictional means and avoided sanction

        Craig wanted to expose the conspirators who orchestrated the false charges laid against Alex Salmond

        Some of the conspirators may also have been complainers

        • michael norton

          So, after what Doleman did, Lady Dorian, then decided to make an order prohibiting jigsaw identification.
          So before the Salmond case, in Scotland, effectively, jigsaw identification, did not exist, in law?

    • Tom Welsh

      When I was learning about computer security, a guy from Cheltenham spent some time explaining “aggregation” – which I think is the term used by most professionals. The idea is that a dozen or a hundred single facts may not tell you much – but if a skilled analyst puts them all together, she may glean a lot more.

      “Jigsaw” sounds like the dumbed down mass media word.

    • Tom Welsh

      In principle, the idea of “jigsaw identification” is absurd, illogical and unjust.

      If someone wishes to keep a secret, it is up to that person or organisation to control the information that others can acquire.

      It can absolutely NOT be the responsibility of someone who innocently (or even knowingly) publishes a piece of information, if that turns out to be the final “piece in the jigsaw” from the point of view of someone else. Just try to imagine the hopeless task of anyone trying to publish news and comment without, quite inadvertently, revealing such a “final piece”. Logically, no one can know exactly what fact or facts might constitute that final piece without complete knowledge of everything already known by everyone who might read the publication!

      Mind you, the state of mind of someone who deems “jigsaw identification” to be a crime is very similar to that of someone who condemns speech that “may offend” some unspecified person or persons. Only a fool or a villain (or both) would do either.

      Both are extreme examples of “political correctness” that would strike us as ridiculous if not for the harmful consequences to the accused (in this case, Mr Murray).

  • Jon Cofy

    “Anonymity does not apply if the victim is dead – rape and murder, for instance. Or if the alleged victim is prosecuted for wasting police time or perjury. An adult victim can waive their own right to anonymity – but it should be in writing.”

    If the Salmond accusers are squeaky clean why don’t they self identify?
    Pardon Craig Murray

    • Tom Welsh

      Obviously they are not squeaky clean, or the jury would not have found all their accusations unfounded or unreliable.

      I was amazed not to see some of them, at least, prosecuted for perjury. How about the woman who said Salmond tried to do something bad to her in Edinburgh, whereas at the trial independent witnesses placed her in London at the time?

  • Mary

    A Google search for ‘HMP Saughton’ on ‘images’ includes the photo of Craig with his family when he arrived there to begin his sentence.

    Shame on the rotten legal system that sent him there.

    • Jimmy Riddle

      I don’t know much about Wikipedia, but I just tried doing an edit on their HMP Saughton page under `notable inmates’ and I added `Craig Murray – sentenced to 8 months for the crime of doing some very good journalism.’

      • arby

        Yes, I see his name up there along with a motley crew of murderers, naked ramblers, and Italians.
        Good to keep it up-to-date and informative!

        • Jimmy Riddle

          Oh well, I just looked at it again and somebody removed my edit – on the false grounds that the content was `untrue’ (Craig Murray was indeed sentenced to 8 months for the crime of doing some excellent journalism – a crucial point in Lady Dorrian’s judgement was that journalists who present good information can get banged up if they don’t belong to the union and publish in a respectable government approved newspaper).

          Perhaps someone with better wiki-editing skills than I could get his name in there?

          Just one more little piece to show forth just how corrupt the Scottish criminal justice system has become.

          • Jon Cofy

            Good try 🙂
            You’re not the first to put Craig Murray up as a notable prisoner at Saughton

            I suspect the SPS employ some drone to maintain the government line on Wikipedia to make the horrible prison reality more palatable to the voters

            Knowledge that Craig Murray is in prison is being suppressed

          • pete

            I see Philip (very) Cross has edited the prison page also, and recently. Still up to his old antics. I am sure that some form of words could be used to add Craig’s name to the notables, something that would not upset Phil and his ilk. I also see Eduardo Paolozzi was imprisoned there for three months, due to being of Italian heritage. So not the first time an innocent has got into trouble.

          • Squeeth

            “Craig Murray – Sentenced to eight months for contempt of court after he published information held potentially to lead to the identification of some of the perjurers in the Alex Salmond trial”

            Wonder how long this will last

          • Clark

            “I see Philip (very) Cross has edited the prison page also, and recently. Still up to his old antics.”

            Please check his edits to see if they are reasonable (many of them are) and if not, ask advice at the Wikipedia Village Pump or the Tea Room or the like. After Craig and others highlighted the issue before, Philip Cross was banned from editing various sorts of pages.

            You don’t need a Wikipedia account to do any of this, though if you don’t have an account and therefore can’t log in, your posts will be tagged with your IP address. You can make and use an anonymous account in which case your IP address will not be displayed. Observe Wikipedia’s rules and conventions – assume good faith, be polite, maintain a neutral point of view, keep to claims supported by accepted sources.

          • Clark

            To get Craig’s name to stick, show why he and his care are notable by citing accepted sources – eg: Former Scottish Cabinet Secretary for Justice Kenny MacAskill MP raising Craig’s case with the UK Attorney General in the House of Commons, reported in various mass news media.

          • Johny Conspiranoid


            As I recal the account of the trial there was only one perjurer, who was not in the time and place of the alleged incident. The rest told the truth but what they had to say did not amount to criminality in the opinion of the jurors. So they didn’t all have to be in on it.

        • Jimmy Riddle

          Well, Squeeth got something in which still seems to be holding up nicely (so well done Squeeth) ….. I don’t really want to learn Wikipedia’s rules just for one single edit (but if it becomes necessary I will learn something about the internet)

    • Jon Cofy

      “Shame on the rotten legal system that sent him (Craig Murray) there (to HMP Saughton)”

      I think it was really only one rotten woman who convicted Craig Murray

      The “rotten legal system” includes the right to a Royal pardon when an injustice occurs

      Pardon Craig Murray

  • Jon Cofy

    Life in prison
    Scott McMillan
    We are human. Flawed. Dangerous in some cases. But human all the same. And prison is an inherently damaging place for humans. Yet society keeps finding ways to send more and more of us there for longer and longer. Some are sent for punishment. Safety. Rehabilitation. Support. Some are sent to be forgotten. Some because society just doesn’t know what else to do. Whatever the reason, I feel confident to say that prison will not make us better, or society safer, it will simply hurt us all, one way or another

    • nevermind

      thanks for that snippet Jon, how very right Scott is, prisons are exchanges for fearful emotions and criminal experiences best not spread. They knew that determined and single minded prisonets of the same persuasions could firm alliances and plan and make deals with authorities and their allies outside prison when they jailed IRA sympathisers and/or Al Quaeda/isis prisoners.
      It is also an easy and fairly safe place for security services to make contact with whoever they like, with good or bad intentions. Prisons dont work, although I do not know what one would do with celeb repeat offenders in thrall of the media, posing a magnet to lawyers. Prisons are not working, but they are building more of them, no doubt here in Scotland as well, where more people are in jail per capita than in the rest of Europe.

  • michael norton

    “This incarceration, wherein Lady Dorrian delivered the “Opinion of the Court”,has caused some media attention.”,_Lady_Dorrian

    What is astonishing, is that a media person was admonished and told not to come back on the second day.
    Then Craig becomes the first person in Scotland to be imprisoned for jigsaw identification.
    Yet before the court case of Mr. Salmond, this “crime” was not in the law books.

    In layman’s terms, this is “making up on the hoof”

      • John Cleary

        Yes Michael. Craig is the first person in the whole world to be imprisoned for this victimless fantasy crime.

        And just think. If that “media person” had not tweeted a name on The First Day, then Dorrian could not have thrown a blanket of secrecy over proceedings on The First Day and could not have dumped Craig in the porridge thereafter. That “media person” is a highly experienced court reporter. Makes you wonder how it is that he made such a mistake, and how it is that Craig is paying for the “media person’s” mistake.

        And yes, Craig does have good grounds for setting aside this abomination. So where should he ask? The Supreme Court are looking the other way. The Scottish legal trade are looking the other way. The Kirk, which should have intervened, and would have intervened were it Christian, is looking the other way. And Craig has just celebrated his second month in captivity.

        • Jimmy Riddle

          John Cleary – it is Christian to intervene in this matter – but the Kirk has long since ceased to be Christian – and their silence on this issue simply proves the point extremely eloquently. (The same goes for the other denominations operating in Scotland – Roman Catholic, Episcopal, Free Kirk, you name it).

          • John Cleary

            Jimmy – the reason I cited the Kirk is because of its special status under the Treaty of Union and the Act of Union.

            The silence on Craig Murray is prima facie evidence that the Kirk is no longer Christian.

            That being the case, then the Union powers are in breach of the Treaty and of the Act. Because they have in fact altered the nature of the Kirk in the most fundamental way possible. Away from serving Christ, and towards serving…..?

          • Jimmy Riddle

            John – yes, well, I am reminded of the Barmen Declaration
            from Germany of the 1930’s, when the German state church showed alarming sympathies towards Nazi policy – and Karl Barth wanted to establish a German church in opposition to this.

            The situation in Scotland ticks all the boxes – a government that bangs up its political opponents in prison, that seems to control the media – and a church which does not oppose this – in a situation where silence implies a tacit consent.

            For understanding Church and State, I think that the Peace of Westphalia is worth considering
            The main point is

            `All parties would recognise the Peace of Augsburg of 1555, in which each prince would have the right to determine the religion of his own state (the principle of cuius regio, eius religio). The options were Catholicism, Lutheranism, and now Calvinism’

            which basically means that the ruler gets to decide on the religion – so you have loyalty to the state first and serving Christ second, but only to the extent that it doesn’t interfere with the evil machinations of the government.

      • Jimmy Riddle

        …. for the judgement to be set aside and (perhaps) for the judge who made the judgement to be locked up in Saughton?

  • Jimmy Riddle

    I’m wondering if the `Library’ section of the wikipedia page on Saughton needs editing to provide more information. It says



    The prison library was the winner of the 2010 UK Libraries Change Lives Award[4] for its work in promoting literacy among its incarcerated population, who typically have much lower literacy rates than the general population. Kate King, the librarian, was also named UK public library staff of the year in 2014.[5]

    Does anybody here know
    1) How many books did the library have before Craig Murray arrived?
    2) How many books have been added to the library since his incarceration – also, some of the titles / authors have been added to the collection.
    The piece about the Saughton prison library serves to emphasise the sort of inmates the prison has – and therefore just how out-of-place it is to send Craig Murray there – so it might be useful if his name could appear there in some context.

  • Jon Cofy

    Did Craig Murray vote in the Scottish Election?

    Making Headlines
    “Only 38 prisoners voted in the recent election”
    Was Craig Murray one of the 38 voters?
    Craig is locked down for 22.5 hours a day in a 8′ x 12′ dingy cell in Saughton prison
    How could he possibly vote?
    It couldn’t be a postal vote because he can’t get stamps

    Craig is a gem
    Grant Craig Murray a Pardon

    • Margaret Elefrtheriou

      These are the books I sent to Craig Murray, b ought from the Guardian online bookstore. I know that they were delivered because I paid for special delivery and this was duly recorded. I have the details if you would like them I chose the titles very carefully so as not to have any political content of bias , and because I thought that subsequent readers might develop an interest (thoughts of Jimmy Boyle perhaps). I have left my comments in so tht you can see my reasons for the choice.
      Wonderful life By Stephen Jay Gould – all about wonderful fossils found in the Burgess Shale in Canada, gives a sense of perspective to human existence. One of my favourite authors and books
      The women of Troy – new novel by Pat Barker, retelling of myth. Craig is a feminist but I don’t think he would bother unless he had time on his hands.
      The Peasants’ revolting Crimes Terry Dearie. Light-hearted romp through the centuries, Just for a laugh
      The Moneyless Man. By Mark Boyle – Living for a year without Money. Dear Could be useful for a prison library
      A History of Feelings Rob Boddice, on history of emotions. Might be hard going for a prison library. But Craig unlikely to buy this for himself

    • Johny Conspiranoid

      The Kangaroo justice is not only usefull for silencing political oponents but for divide and rule on a number of fronts.

  • nevermind

    Can we now discuss the use of sexual accusations and news about the failings under the Mets commissioner Cressida. D. here?

    • Stevie Boy

      Interesting article from RT on the release of these papers. It highlights who is behind the release and the skewed targets. Apparently, there are no corrupt Americans !
      Maybe, this release is about bashing the west’s enemies and distracting from bigger issues ?
      The real truth will out … Eventually.

      • DunGroanin

        It may well be that the disruptions on social media sites yesterday are related.
        See the link below and comments that n that site.

    • DunGroanin

      Hi Mary, yes it looks like another attempt at limited hangout by pretend WikiLeaks

      The ‘International Consortium of Investigative Journalists’
      Is complete double speak and means exactly the opposite of that mislabel. Their origination and funding is enough to know they are State actors.

      They have nothing on their site about Craig’s imprisonment for being a journalist.

      The whole series of ‘P papers’ releases supposedly by ‘hackers’ is debunked and revealed as the 5+1 Eyes overt and covert operations by Kit Klarenberg, MoonofAlabama and others.

      The only P they are interested in is Putin it seems.
      They are taking the Proverbial Piss it is Pathetic.

    • Keith

      BBC and Guardian will only give you the tip of the iceburg without showing the normal situation of corruption through offshore islands (Empire!!) through Corporation of London etc? right?

  • Keith

    Is anything being done to get this man out of prison based on spurious grounds (clearly showing how the separation of powers has been bypassed in this country and subjugated politically to vested interests)? How can someone like this ‘judge’ make such judgements as to decide what is journalism or not? Is this country so corrupt that she can get away with this? obviously!! but is there any legal mechanisms to get this decent man – political prisoner – out of jail?
    What is being done by Constitutional lawyers and how can we help?

    • Jon Cofy

      “Is anything being done to get this man out of prison —”

      Craig Murray has three legitimate get of prison options

      1). Craig should be granted a Royal Pardon due to the miscarriage of Justice

      2). Craig has serious health issues and should be released under s.3 Prisoners and Criminal Proceedings (Scotland) Act 1993

      3). Craig has an appeal to the Court of Sessions under a special power called the “nobile officium” gathering dust in the court somewhere. If the Court of Sessions deigns to hear Craig’s appeal it may grant Craig bail until his appeal is heard. This would in effect give Craig a half time break until Clerk Dorian strikes Craig’s case down yet again.

      The European Court proceedings appear to be so distant that Craig will have served his sentence and celebrated a birthday at home before that court decides if it will hear Craig’s appeal.

      The first option would require a hell of a stink for it to reach Queen Elizabeth.
      Some thing in the order of 100,000 letters and an ongoing demonstration outside of Buckingham Palace.
      It seems that Craig Murray’s supporters are offended by the idea that Craig needs a Royal Pardon to go home to his wife and children. Curiously many of Craig’s readers actively oppose him receiving a Royal Pardon in the belief that it is somehow disgraceful to receive one.

      The second option is an appeal to the very people who conspired to end Alex Salmond’s career by putting him in jail and consequently jailed the person who reported details of Salmond’s trial. This would require political upheaval on a dramatic scale in the “Scottish Parliament” and/or a big enough scandal to have Westminister intervene.

      The third option appears to be an expensive time wasting legal exercise with no hope of release from jail. I hope I am proved wrong in that assessment.

      So the answer to the question is after 65 day of incarceration;
      Nothing is being done to get Craig Murray out of jail

      Craig Murray RIP (Rotting In Prison)

      • michael norton

        “The second option is an appeal to the very people who conspired to end Alex Salmond’s career by putting him in jail and consequently jailed the person who reported details of Salmond’s trial. This would require political upheaval on a dramatic scale in the “Scottish Parliament” and/or a big enough scandal to have Westminister intervene.”

        And this is what should happen

  • nevermind

    Jon Cofy wrote ‘It seems that Craig Murray’s supporters are offended by the idea that Craig needs a Royal Pardon to go home to his wife and children. Curiously many of Craig’s readers actively oppose him receiving a Royal Pardon in the belief that it is somehow disgraceful to receive one.’

    It is his/her prerogative to generalise, when, as far as I can see, it is only me who has argued that a pardon is the wrong idea, but what do I know how bad he feels in prison, apart from personal visits there is no connect unless somebody actually received a personal letter from him, we do not know about.

    Now, let us see if there is anything planned by Jon to ask for a pardon as a birthday present. I am sure that Jon has talked about his idea on many other social network sites, but as far as I can see there is no campaign to offer ideas and links to achieve it, something for Craig’s readership to ‘actively oppose’.

    I am known to support ideas and campaigns I do not personally agree with or had any much input in, such as XR and insulate Britain, soon to be insulated in prison, according to the PM, so when Jon comes up with something tangible…..
    Shall take this moment of positive gloom to write Craig a birthday card, its gotta one I have at home, as I can’t leave my house for a while due to an infection with the delta virus.

    • Jon Cofy

      It’s not just you who oppose pardoning Craig Murray

      I have conducted a lone social media campaign for over a month and recollect only one positive response and lots of unhelpful responses along the line of don’t pardon Craig Murray because he’s innocent.

      To be fair I presume that the cyber censorship that Craig noticed was affecting his sites is still active.

      On the other hand plenty of people liked the idea of Craig being a martyr.

      Best wishes for a speedy recovery

  • michael norton

    “Judges at the Supreme Court have ruled that provisions in two bills passed by MSPs were beyond Holyrood’s powers.

    MSPs unanimously backed the bills – which enshrine treaties on children’s rights and local government in Scots law – prior to May’s Holyrood election.

    However after a challenge from UK law officers, judges said the legislation could affect Westminster’s ability to make laws for Scotland.

    Deputy First Minister John Swinney said this showed the limits of devolution.”

    Perhaps Craig should try again to request a review by the U.K. Surpreme Court?

    • Republicofscotland


      This is a prime example as to why Scotland’s parliament needs to call its MPs back to Holyrood, hold an vote on leaving this union, if yes wins declare independence there and then.

        • Republicofscotland


          It wasn’t meant to, the unionist media have been quick to equate this ruling with Westminster having sovereignty over another indyref, effectively Sturgeon’s route to independence, asking Westminster for permission a ludicrous idea to begin with, is dead as the Dodo.

          I was merely replying that its best to call our MPs back to Holyrood bypassing Westminster and hold a vote between ourselves, an idea floated by Craig and Alex Salmond.

    • Greg Park

      They refused him permission to appeal, which is ultimately what sent him to prison. Am I surprised you are impressed by them? Nope.

      • michael norton

        The underlying reason Craig is in prison, is because of corruption, illegal collaboration to put Alex Salmond in prison.
        If those collaborations did not happen, Craig wouldn’t have gone to prison. Because Craig was on the side of truth, he got sent to prison. What does that tell you, about what is going on and continues to be going on in Scotland. It tells me there is deep corruption.

        • arby

          It tells me there is deep antipathy to the prospect of Scottish independence which is increasingly seen as a credible option.

  • M.J.

    Good news – Blackwells’s website for ordering books ( ) appears to be running again, Twitter notwithstanding. So anyone wanting to send a book to Craig for his birthday on the 17th October has time to do it (though hardbacks would go to the prison library and only be his on loan, from what I know).

    • M.J.

      Just googled the Donziger case. I wonder what he can do. How does the American system proceed against judges appearing to have conflicts of interest?

1 6 7 8 9