On 29 and 30 April 2016 Jake Wallis Simons, Associate Editor of Daily Mail Online, wrote a series of tweets about me which have since been deleted. These feature in my libel defence and it would be extremely useful to be able to recover them. His twitter stream on those days also included several of his followers falsely calling me an anti-Semite and other awful stuff, and it would be most useful to recover those too.
More generally there was much evidence in Mr Wallis Simons’ twitter stream in the months and years prior to 29 April 2016 of he or his followers making allegations of anti-Semitism widely. Any of that which could be recovered would also be extremely helpful.
The date when material was deleted is extremely important – perhaps even more important to me than the recovery of the material itself. Mr Wallis Simons now has an app which deletes all his tweets at a 2 month cut-off date. I need to discover when that app came into operation on his account and material started to vanish.
For the record, I have directly asked his lawyer these questions, twice, in writing, and have received the reply that these questions are irrelevant to the case against me.
Nothing in the above or the rest of this article imputes any wrongdoing, ill motive or illegal activity to Dr Wallis Simons or to his lawyer, Mr Mark Lewis. His lawyer, Mr Lewis, has bad luck because in another recent high profile libel case, Monroe vs Hopkins, he also found that his client, Ms Monroe, gained an unwanted advantage from installing a twitter deleting app that was at least similar in operation. Interestingly she installed this after Mr Lewis had started advising her. This led to para 84 of the judgement:
84. The second point is that there have been difficulties over disclosure especially on the claimant’s side, of which others should take note. The deletion of the First Tweet, at Ms Monroe’s request, meant the Twitter Analytics were unavailable. And Ms Monroe’s Twitter records were extensively deleted. I am not able to attribute responsibility for that on the basis of the evidence, and I do not. What I can say is that this highlights in the Twitter context the responsibility of a litigant to retain and preserve material that may become disclosable, and the responsibility of a solicitor to take reasonable steps to ensure that the client appreciates this responsibility and performs it.
I can never think of libel without thinking of poor martyred Oscar Wilde. As Oscar might have said:
To lose one client’s tweets may be regarded as a misfortune; to lose both looks like carelessness.
Any evidence you can find me of the content of the deleted tweets and when they vanished, as outlined above, would be very helpful. I am often struck by the astonishing variety of skills possessed by readers of this blog, and I am sure we will find that internet forensics are among them. It is also interesting how often people happen to screenshot things which interest them.
More than 4,000 people have to date contributed to my defence fund and I cannot tell you how overwhelmed I am by gratitude.
Feel free to post your discoveries in comments below but please avoid possibly libellous assertions. It would be helpful if you could in addition send me potentially useful material through the contact box top right of the blog.
————————————————–
I continue urgently to need contributions to my defence in the libel action against me by Jake Wallis Simons, Associate Editor of Daily Mail online. You can see the court documents outlining the case here. I am threatened with bankruptcy and the end of this blog (not to mention a terrible effect on my young family). Support is greatly appreciated. An astonishing 4,000 people have now contributed a total of over £75,000. But that is still only halfway towards the £140,000 target. I realise it is astonishing that so much money can be needed, but that is the pernicious effect of England’s draconian libel laws, as explained here.
On a practical point, a number of people have said they are not members of Paypal so could not donate. After clicking on “Donate”, just below and left of the “Log In” button is a small “continue” link which enables you to donate by card without logging in.
For those who prefer not to pay online, you can send a cheque made out to me to Craig Murray, 89/14 Holyrood Road, Edinburgh, EH8 8BA. As regular readers know, it is a matter of pride to me that I never hide my address.
possibly:
https://archive.org/details/twitterstream?sort=-publicdate
big files, though …
Ask the Minister?
The Reverend Stu on Wings Over Scotland mentioned archived tweets yesterday. If you’re on good terms, he might be the person to ask for ideas.
“Some months ago, quite coincidentally, I happened to avail myself of Twitter’s archive function, which allows users to download their entire tweet history. For various reasons I’ve been looking at it recently, and until I did I’d been unaware that it records not just a user’s own tweets, but also the tweets from other people that they’ve retweeted.”
“I’ve collected some of Wings’ tweets and retweets – in reverse chronological order – below. (Famously, of course, RTs aren’t necessarily endorsements, but you can decide on the underlying tone for yourself. Each of them links to the original tweet so you can see the whole conversation, or click on the links being referenced.)”
“Friends and allies”, Posted on September 15, 2017 by Rev. Stuart Campbell – Wings Over Scotland –
– https://wingsoverscotland.com/friends-and-allies/
Nil carborundum illegitimi etc. ; )
Well Craig the most ovious one is Politiwoops.eu for recording deleted tweets of politicians
https://www.politwoops.eu/search?utf8=✓&group=7&q=Jakewsimons
Sadly he is not among the “politicians” recorded. It does preserve a few tweets to him or about him by politicians which have been deleted, and casts light on his very right wing politics and friends, but nothing really relevant.
You can also buy fake Twitter followers….there is clear evidence that luvvies such as Aaronovich have more fake than real followers…a kind of ‘meat in the room’ affect….
If a person has been shown to be deleting their own tweets and otherwise manipulating the history of what they, and associated others, have said, then on what basis can they argue that their integrity has been impugned, or that they are being honest in relation the claims they are making in a case where those deletions are highly relevant?
Have you tried contacting Twitter? If you were the litigant I doubt they would help, but as you are the defendant perhaps there is a chance?
Nothing from this year on the Wayback Machine but there are a few tweets between 2010 and 2016. Might be worth reviewing them? https://web.archive.org/web/20160801000000*/https://twitter.com/JakeWSimons
This Twitter search URL brings up any incidences of “zion OR zionism OR zionist OR semite OR israel OR antisemite AND @jakewsimons” –
https://twitter.com/search?q=zion%20OR%20zionism%20OR%20zionist%20OR%20semite%20OR%20israel%20OR%20antisemite%20AND%20%40jakewsimons%20&src=typd
If there are some threads you recognise, where his tweets were deleted, perhaps you could contact the authors of various responses and perhaps they could even testify in court regarding the content of the deleted tweets?
I think he would need a court order to get that much information. I have heard of people arguing that deleting tweets is spoliation of evidence, though.
https://support.twitter.com/articles/20175009
Specification for recovery of documents in Scotland.
Perhaps Dr Wallis Simons should be asked to sign an affidavit relating to these tweets?
I checked the waybackmachine for you
https://web.archive.org/web/20160401000000*/https://twitter.com/JakeWSimons
but only has 6 April and 10 October from 2016 archived
;-(
Yes – and I can’t see any way to extract evidence from those wayback captures of whether tweets were on two month deletion back then.
It seems that RT is missing from You Tube this morning. I wonder why???? After yesterday’s programme about propaganda.
Craig,
See https://web.archive.org/web/*/https://twitter.com/JakeWSimons/status/* and as per Alice’s comment below, if you follow the links from any that say “application/json” and search for “statuses_count” you’ll get the number of undeleted tweets on that date.
What’s the point of a Way Back Machine that doesn’t record what was appeared way back?
More to the point, does Twitter not have a record of what it has published? If not, why not?
Should Internet publishers be required to provide a record of everything they publish to some national database, just as book publishers must provide a copy of everything they publish (two copies actually) to the National Library.
Oh Hell! Why is there no edit function on this blog?
Anyway, anyone with an IQ of 140 plus should be able to figure out what I meant to say had I said it in a more or less grammatical way.
Evidential solutions ltd in Edinburgh may offer some guidance?
Tweet posted April 27, 2017 and referenced in a blog archived on April 28:
https://web.archive.org/web/20170428095028/www.israellycool.com/2017/04/28/watch-jews-were-murdered-in-hitlers-gas-chambers-because-were-cowards
April 27, 2017 (“Protests against the Israeli ambassador speaking at @soas right now”): https://web.archive.org/web/20170428141330/https:/twitter.com/JakeWSimons/status/857650445849853952/video/1
Retweet from April 29, 2017: https://web.archive.org/web/20170429152310/https://twitter.com/JakeWSimons/status/858340892628967426
Retweeted May 30 (“RT @stephenpollard: They don’t even have the courage of their bigoted convictions. How about just being honest and writing ‘Jew’? https://t\u2026″, quoted tweet: https://t.co/jwg0a4KKCD): https://web.archive.org/web/20170530134303/https://twitter.com/JakeWSimons/status/869549721270054917
It seems the majority of his statuses were deleted between July 19 and August 3 (search for “statuses_count” on page).
Number of tweets July 19: 1688 (https://web.archive.org/web/20170719171412/https://twitter.com/JakeWSimons/status/887722252212600834)
Number August 3: 421 (https://web.archive.org/web/20170803100410/https://twitter.com/JakeWSimons/status/893049848748015616)
More were deleted by September 5 to bring the total down to 112: https://web.archive.org/web/20170905161741/https://twitter.com/JakeWSimons/status/905102646851272706
October 7, 2013: “@lindasgrant @hugorifkind @rachshabi @Dannythefink anti-Semitism isn’t just anti-Semitism any more. It’s a hook for Israel bashers” (https://web.archive.org/web/20131007164003/https://twitter.com/JakeWSimons/status/312852903511613440)
July 18, 2013: Responding to a tweet about Israel: https://web.archive.org/web/20131015181810/https://twitter.com/JakeWSimons/status/357852770319085568
September 8, 2015: https://web.archive.org/web/20150908085613/https://twitter.com/JakeWSimons
October 16, 2015: https://web.archive.org/web/20151019202626/https://twitter.com/jakewsimons
The follower count doesn’t appear to have been altered.
Best of luck. I can give you more if you need it. There are posts on his Facebook as well.
This a possibility? https://www.tweetbinder.com/blog/historical-reports-twitter/
This may be of interest. It seems the Library of Congress has the data in some form or another. Getting at it may be another matter entirely.
https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2016/08/can-twitter-fit-inside-the-library-of-congress/494339/
See also:
1) https://gwu-libraries.github.io/sfm-ui/resources/annotated-bibliography
Annotated bibliography on social media archives
2) http://lj.libraryjournal.com/2016/02/academic-libraries/ncsu-offers-social-media-archives-toolkit-for-libraries/
Press coverage of open source social media archives toolkit (may be useful to track down users thereof)
3) https://www.lib.ncsu.edu/social-media-archives-toolkit/bibliography
Annotated bibliography accompanying said toolkit
4) https://www.lib.ncsu.edu/social-media-archives-toolkit/environment
“Environmental scan” of extant archival programs as of early 2016.
And this might be of some use.
https://inteltechniques.com/osint/twitter.html
Frankly, Bazzell is someone you will want to read, or contact.
https://inteltechniques.com/wp/category/twitter/
“I have directly asked his lawyer these questions, twice, in writing, and have received the reply that these questions are irrelevant to the case against me”
Well yes, they probably are irrelevant to the case against you but thet are relevant to your defence and the case as a whole.
You really do need a legal team working for you now Craig. You need a solicitor to do donkey work like this and an experienced barrister to represent you in court. You’ve already raised enough money to secure these services and trust you have spent the money wisely.
I agree, there’s no way a bloke with a history degree will survive against these people. He needs an expert, someone who is great and hates what being done to this country
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/11271237/Secret-video-Is-anti-Semitism-alive-on-the-streets-of-London.html
Jake Wallis Simons takes to the streets of London wearing a kippah
Agent provocateur?
No
https://groups.google.com/forum/m/#!topic/uk-911-truth/p-HnABJALWg
This is useful
Unfortunately I can’t help, but good luck, Craig!
http://api.socialreport.com/twitter-social-report/jakewsimons
may be of interest
http://martani.github.io/Twitter-Archive-Eraser/ this free software deletes tweet archives
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/nov/19/new-twitter-search-makes-every-public-tweet-since-2006-findable
hope it helps. Craig…
A telling insight can be gained by trawling through Simons’s Facebook comments:
https://www.facebook.com/pg/JakeWSimons/posts/?ref=page_internal
and here:
https://twitter.com/search?l=&q=%40JakeWSimons%20%E2%80%8F%20since%3A2016-03-31%20until%3A2016-05-01&src=typd
Such anti-Corbyn venom.
I believe this may be the URL of one of Jake’s now deleted tweets – although I haven’t had any luck in tracking down an archive of the content. Perhaps it may be useful for your legal team though, if they were to request Twitter recover the content: https://twitter.com/jakewsimons/status/726016520896159744
I found the following Twitter searches useful in tracking this down – it might be more useful for you to go through these results and see if there’s anything relevant in them?
https://twitter.com/search?f=tweets&vertical=default&q=to%3Ajakewsimons%20OR%20to%3Acraigmurrayorg%20since%3A2016-04-29%20until%3A2016-04-30&src=typd
https://twitter.com/search?f=tweets&q=%40craigmurrayorg%20since%3A2016-04-29%20until%3A2016-05-05&src=typd
http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/letter-from-london-in-the-uk-anti-semitism-is-just-hiding-in-plain-sight/
https://muckrack.com/jake-wallis-simons/articles
http://semiticcontroversies.blogspot.ie/2017/08/
Jake Wallis Simons v Craig Murray I have been given legal advice that I ..the article has gone!!!!
https://scotfella-directimpact.blogspot.ie/2014/02/jake-wallis-simons-darker-side-of-oxfam.html?
http://www.eveyo.com/corbyn-is-caught-on-camera-calling-islamic-fanatic-a-very-good-friend-whom-he-knows-extremely-well-as-he-shares-stage-with-uk-s-most-notorious-extremists/ then the video has vanished
Looks like a lot has stuff has disappeared?
I wondered what the doctorate was –
‘I have lectured at Oxford and elsewhere – I hold a First in English from St Peter’s College, Oxford and a PhD in Creative Writing from UEA – and I’m proud to be a Visiting Fellow in journalism at Bournemouth University.’
Q. Who is funding the doctor? Mr Dacre? The 4th Viscount?
‘In 2013, Private Eye reported that Viscount Rothermere falsely claims non-dom status, in order to avoid paying tax on his stately home, Ferne House. This move saves him several millions of pounds in tax annually.[4]
He was a supporter of the former Conservative Party leader David Cameron.[5]
He ranked fourth in the Publishing, Advertising, and PR section of the Sunday Times Rich List 2013 with an estimated wealth of £720 million.[6] In April 2015, the Sunday Times estimated his net worth at £1 billion[7] He has non-domicile tax status and owns his media businesses through a complex structure of offshore holdings and trusts.[8]’
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Harmsworth,_4th_Viscount_Rothermere
Nice. See Dineley
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/1999/jun/13/theobserver.uknews2
The new pad
http://tdclassicist.blogspot.co.uk/2014/06/viscountess-rothermere-at-ferne-park.html
I was pleased to see the handle changed back to ‘Mr’.. ‘Creative writing’ indeed!
I searched on the main page of Bournemouth University, on their staff pages and visiting fellows pages for JWS. Zero. Zilch.
http://staffprofiles.bournemouth.ac.uk/index/people
https://www1.bournemouth.ac.uk/search/jake%2Bwallis%2Bsimons
http://staffprofiles.bournemouth.ac.uk/search?q=visiting+fellows&people=yes&outputs=yes
Visiting Fellow is pretty well a courtesy title. It would be of more use to Bournemouth (ffs!) if intending students had actually heard of him, which I rather doubt.
Blair’s biographer, Rent a Tool, would not be very happy to read your version on the status of a ‘visiting fellow’.
John Rentoul is chief political commentator for The Independent on Sunday, and visiting fellow at Queen Mary, University of London, where he teaches contemporary history. Previously he was chief leader writer for The Independent. He has written a biography of Tony Blair, whom he admired more at the end of his time in office than he did at the beginning.
https://www.orwellfoundation.com/shortlists/john-rentoul/
Not sure I’d use Rentoul and ‘courtesy’ in the same sentence, other than this one. OTOH, Rentoul and Rentokil are a natural pairing.
Anybody who regularly feels compelled to delete things they have said has to be considered a person of dubious character and low intelligence. The ludicrous, transparently political action this dissembler is taking against you simply confirms his nature.
Please God you’ll be blessed with a judge who will see at a glance the stark difference in character between plaintiff and defendant, and make the appropriate ruling. A small child could see it.
Are there any lawyers who can help with this suggestion?
It strikes me that it is not for the opposing side’s lawyer to decide what is or is not relevant. I know that in Australia, for example, if one side is being difficult about disclosure, application can be made to the court to require answers to questions. Can that be done here?
Thanks, John
Craig should have already hired lawyers. He is being wreckless in the extreme if he has not.
Reckless haha
MJ,
Maybe he has, but this extremely simple case over a live interview, that lasted less than 5 minutes, could end up being a battle over a few words (which Craig almost immediately apologised for (which should have nullified the possibility of any legal case) into a mega legal battle (which almost certainly won’t be reported) where numerous people in the legal profession are enriched to the tune of several hundred thousand pounds for doing absolutely nothing useful whatsoever.
The only person who was libelled and defamed here, was Craig Murray.
If the judge can’t see that, and rule accordingly, then we may as well accept that the concept of Law in England, has been so completely corrupted, that the likely next phase will be total anarchy.
The Law is supposed to be there for the protection of the Innocent, and the prosecution of the Criminals.
Tony
Tony, thatvreally isn’t how it works. Craig must get a solicitor and a deformation barrister
At first sight the idea of anarchy seems quite appealing. Maybe that’s where we are now, but shouldn’t we be trialling it somewhere else first and compare (objectively) their island to ours, and try and work out if anarchy is better than fascism? (or are they both much the same?)
Dictionary
anarchy
absence of government and absolute freedom of the individual, regarded as a political ideal.
[fash-iz-uh m]
noun
1. a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism.
I think the anarchist is in the lead here, whilst most of the rest of us who are not currently being bombed, are asleep or watching a rerun of Opportunity Knocks and Take Your Pick on their mobile phones in portrait mode.
And Craig Murray’s court case is hardly going to change anything is it?
If anyone manages to change my mind, then I might turn up.
Is it O.K. if I bring my mate who is very good at doing sketching and colouring in? I assume photography is not allowed, nor live HD broadcast webstreams?
get Julian Assange down there as well, and it might be interesting – otherwise no one could give a shit
Tony
Has he gone to the moon?
Jake Wallis SimonsVerified account
@JakeWSimons
I’m shortly reporting from an area with very little in the way of electricity etc, so Twitter silence for a while folks.
4:34 AM – 14 Sep 2017
And who are these folks? Surely noons is hanging on his word
Maybe Gaza ?
Can’t offer any skills on social media, I’m afraid, but you may find this encouraging, Craig:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b071h2x6
Or maybe not, since it shows the depths to which a threatened elite will go (in this case unsuccessfully) to avoid ridicule.
You might mention that barrister Henry Brougham and Times editor Thomas Barnes got William Hone off for alleged seditious libel during an even worse time in the UK, and it was no easy laughing matter. Too bad a lawyer like Brougham isn’t around now for the defense.
The judge is even more important as Brougham proved by getting Hone’s to act like former Master of the Rolls Grant.
Really? Here’s Hone on Brougham:
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=hNdbAAAAQAAJ&pg=PT82&lpg=PT82&dq=william+hone+brougham&source=bl&ots=B-AYMVZJu7&sig=zW7I9LqQ01bRPkPGtGOyCd0yruM&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj_-N6Ao6rWAhUJCcAKHTu9CsEQ6AEIFDAA
And the general opinion is that Hone got himself off, during three consecutive sittings during each of which he spoke for seven hours. And they were jury trials.
General opinion as usual about the barrister, be damned, read what I wrote about Brougham in the first volume of my biography about the trial before a special jury was an ex-officio one and Lord Chief Justice Ellenbrough was hardly in evidence during its hearing ,pp. 272-3.
Brougham may have performed the miracle of the loaves and fishes, in your estimation, but he was no friend at all to Hone.
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=72a7AAAAIAAJ&pg=PA85&lpg=PA85&dq=william+hone+brougham&source=bl&ots=CQATjka9tX&sig=c-6V0futoMkuZ6D3dRp9Ww-T4mI&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj_-N6Ao6rWAhUJCcAKHTu9CsEQ6AEIHDAD
Your irrelevant sarcasm about Brougham and Peterloo requires an apology. i have just looked at the record, and wrote fairly about it, unlike you with your closed mind about Brougham.
Hone’s thoughts on Peterloo:
http://www.rc.umd.edu/editions/hone/jacktext.htm
Then as now, freedom of speech was rather dependent on saying the right things…
My article in The Anglo-American Law Review about law reform during and after the Napoleonic Wars, concentrating on Peterloo and its consequences, ( vol. 7, No. 3, pp. 243-70) makes much more sense than this drivel about Hone.
I love people who cite themselves (and no-one else) to support their own hypotheses. Particularly when they are deflecting attention from their error of recorded and accepted fact. Brougham and Hone disliked each other. Hone defended himself. As to liking or disliking Brougham myself, I have no particular feelings about the man. I wish I could say the same about someone who, whenever mention is made or anticipated of the early c19, lugs Henry kicking and screaming into the comments here.
Your treatment of my posts is so outrageous that I will post one more since you even deleted it.
You brought up Hone and laughing about it. I was just stressing the points of having a good judge and barrister.
And I had an article published In the Bulletiin of Historical Researchin May 1986 about Brougham and Times editor Thomas Branes getting together when Hone’s stacked trials occurred.
All new ideas don’t represent merely self promotion or there never would be any.
Anyway I’m gone as I will not stand a self promoter like you picking over my posts.
I haven’t deleted anything, and wouldn’t if I could. I can’t.
Your assertion was that HB got Hone off. He didn’t. I cited sources. You didn’t, other than a reference to Branes and HB meeting, And, as you didn’t know any of them personally, it would be good academic practice to share the secret of your source/s for this with the rest of us.
I don’t advertise my work on here. You do. I gratefully relinquish my title of ‘self-promoter’ and most happily award it to you.
This, I hope, is too obvious to merit your attention, but I’ll state it anyway.
1. Tell the opposition NOTHING you are not legally required to
2. Believe NOTHING the opposition tells you. At the very least check it out with an independent, legally trained opinion. Saving money on that is IMO a false economy.
3. I would suggest that commentators with useful information should contact Craig directly, rather than here, where it may inform the opposition.
It is quite amusing to realise that Simon and his lawyer will be slavishly following this blog now, and desperately noting anything they think they can use. Hello, Jake, what happened to your twitter feed? Something embarrassing there? lol
All this strikes me as very dubious.
Anything on a computer can be deleted enhanced altered etc., to make it support one party or another.
This is made worse if twitter/facebook/google remarks are to be used as grounds – or in evidence in court cases – that these companies are choosing to arbitrate over that which is acceptable and that which is not; and delete whatever /they/ deem unacceptable. They could delete crucial evidence and completely undermine someone’s case at a later date leading to terrible miss-carriages. Even if there was a legal obligation upon these companies not to delete, or to allow deletion, no-one can be sure that a hacker has not interefered; or even that an entire account is created to give a false impression of someone of which the person concerned may have no knowledge.
Bert
Glad to see that you got my cheque for a fiver, and I am only sorry that it could not be more. Alas, I live on a disability pension, so a fiver was my limit.
O/T. About Julian FYI
Julian Assange Offers U.S. Government Proof Russia Wasn’t Source of Democratic Party Leaks, Says WSJ
By Eric Zuesse
Global Research, September 16, 2017
According to the Wall Street Journal, Republican Congressman Dana Rohrabacher of California spoke by phone on September 13th with U.S. President Donald Trump’s Chief of Staff, General John Kelly, aiming to transmit to President Trump, from Wikileaks founder Julian Assange, a trade of ‘proof’ of Russian non-involvement in the transmission to the public of internal Democratic Party information during the 2016 Presidential contest with Hillary Clinton, in return for the U.S. Government’s stopping its efforts to prosecute Mr. Assange. Assange wanted finally to become freed from his years-long virtual house-arrest inside Ecuador’s London Embassy, by the United States Government efforts to force him to be tried in U.S. courts. So, he wants to offer this trade in which Assange would provide to the White House physical ‘proof’ that Russia had nothing to do with the Democratic Party leaks from (or what Russia’s enemies call ‘hacks’ into) Democratic Party computers, which produced the revelations which Hillary Clinton says cost her the 2016 election.
According to the WSJ report, General Kelly refused to inform President Trump of the offer.
/…
https://www.globalresearch.ca/julian-assange-offers-u-s-government-proof-russia-wasnt-source-of-democratic-party-leaks-says-wsj/5609273
He’s penned this defence of genocide here, while getting in a few smears for good measure.
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2017/09/the-left-has-turned-on-the-lady-of-burma/
https://shadowproof.com/2016/09/06/whistleblowers-condemn-us-denying-entry-former-british-ambassador/
I mean FFS – what more proof do you need?
Craig Murray is innocent, and he has more courage than either you or me.
He is a Good Man
Tony
Great Point Tony
I was talking to Craig’s son..And Clark On Thursday
Craig Murray is innocent, and he has more courage than either you or me.
The Oldest Son….
Targeted Tony probably over this: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/47824.htm