I have managed to get hold of a copy, which you can see here, of my lengthy interview with Sky News about the Skripals yesterday, which Sky refused to put online because they allege I was boring. With the warning you might therefore be very bored, you may watch it if you wish.
Kay Burley then appeared to suggest in reply to persistent questioning from Teymoor Nabili that Sky News could not put the interview online as they did not record it and do not hold a copy, which is plainly untrue (and would be illegal under their broadcast license).
My perspective on the interview itself was that the interviewer became aggressive and sarcastic, increasingly shrill as the apparent effort to discredit me was not going well, and resorting eventually to asking about any old extraneous matter but the Skripals. I strongly suspect it was not me being boring, but the strange performance by Kay Burley, which motivated Sky to bury the interview.
But you must judge for yourself.
It is my policy when invited by journalists, to give considered and courteous answers to the particular questions which they ask. This is as opposed to what politicians do, which is to spout pre-prepared soundbites irrespective of what they are asked.
I appreciate that mine is a very old-fashioned approach, and may lead you to be frustrated about areas I did not cover. I also make no attempt to look slick or sound glib. I realise in this modern age that may not be good PR, but my belief remains that in the long term people will see me as a polite and thoughtful old gentleman, and feel less disposed to share the obvious contempt towards me of the media and politician classes.
I was most impressed by the product placement! Well played sir!
On interviews and pieces. Maybe the masterful BBC is carefully preparing their coup de grâce
The state controlled BBC Radio 4 flagship news program “TOADY” just transmitted a reasonable article 07:20 am 7th April 2018, from some safe lady, who covered much of the Skripal false-flag. She mentioned the reaction in Russia where the majority of people are convinced that it is British provocation. She played a short extract from the ‘alleged’ Yulia phone call to her unsuitable cousin. She broached ‘the many conspiracy theories that have been invented in Russia’ She ran VT from the Russian EU ambassador who swatted away the developing line ‘Putin is doing this to destabilise Europe’ with his quality observation that “Britain itself is doing a far better job at de-stabilising Europe via the exit process than anything we could have come up with”
but the almost fair piece to mic, was concluded with (to an aspie such as me with my hyperfocus) whether the Russian claims were actually accurate with her finishing blow “this will all become clear when we hear from the Skripals themselves”
did I discern or just imagine the background cue music choral crescendo (Mysterioso Pizzicato) just after her piece, it really rang in my mind as – “Beeb support the wonderful Kay”, and they are going to show us that ‘they have won’ – I personally don’t care who wins or not, and I have no interest in sport/World-Cup starting on 14th June, or not, I just point out the errors! or in this case a triumphant streak emerging from those inside the plot, apparently.
Don’t hold your breath. I am sure that the Skripal’s testament will be classified for 70 years because of ‘security’ reasons.
Thank you for this,Mr Murray. It seems that Sky knows how incorrect they were in their treatment of you and should be suitably embarrassed not only by the interviewers questioning technique (let alone ghe questions put) but also how this highlights their agenda to push you into a corner of their own construction and try to put words into your mouth that are quite clearly in their script. Well done ,sir. You are a credit to clear thinking and free speech in a world of “journalistic” madness and propaganda.
You’re spot on.
Given the importance of this story, and of the interview with the Porton Down spokesperson, have Sky News put online the full interview with all 35 q&a’s? And if not, why not? Making the full and unedited interview available would be very much in the public interest, which is surely the primary objective of all mainstream news organisations. Otherwise, suspicious people might suggest that the news agenda is yet again being edited and manipulated by the mainstream media, in a failing attempt to prop up an implausible fairy story, in the interests of the ruling elite.
Yes, the full interview should be seen.
As Porton Down is a government organisation, can the full interview transcripts be demanded under a Freedom of Information request.
It was publicly broadcast, not therefore covered by state secrets (OSA) legislation, and a copy will be held by Porton Down. So we wouldn’t need Sky to hand over a copy…_
Thank you for posting this interview. The contents you were able to convey reflect the issues required. Following Iraq there can now only be belief when evidence is provided.
Kate Hurley is aggressive and inept in her interview style. Despite this you ensured a calm and interesting interview. The time she used yo try and undermine was probably a deliberate and fairly successful attempt to.prevent your consideration of other plausible suspects .
My my, Ms Burley so desperate for it to be ‘the Russians’ & continually metioning past deaths from Novichok poisioning even though that hasn’t been the case here.
Your interview was interesting & informative but sadly for Ms Burley it proved why the government was completely wrong in accusing Russia before having any real evidence she even tried to alter what the CE of Porton Down had said in his interview. I never could understand why Ms Burley was hired by , well anyone. She’s such an ignorant woman, using ‘thingy’ to describe equipment & clearly getting ruder the more rattled she got at not being able to twist your words. Well done Craig
Well done Craig, Kay is a rocket! Loved your last comment, agreed the whole country would welcome that ??
Kay Burley should be ashamed of herself, Sky has a long interview which is then cut to 3 minutes 37 seconds and then claims to know every piece of editing.
This is not journalism, this is propaganda by Sky to promote the existing British Governement and is typical of Russia itself.
More and more the UK is becoming a banana republic and soon it will be treated like a 3rd world state with a dictatorial management unless something drastic happens soon .
To try to make a former British Diplomat look unreliable is no way to get to the truth but I doubt that was the reason behind the interview. The reason was to discredited any opposition to the Government line
Keep going Mr Murray this is just another indicator that the establishment is becoming rattled
Like all biased interviewers this one had a preconceived idea about the way this interviewer wanted it to go and was getting more and more annoyed that she was failing miserably in achieving her objective.
In other words she was trying to put words into the interviewee’s mouth and it didn’t work, and that’s why Sky didn’t broadcast it, it failed to fit into their agenda. Well done that man?
Burley was suggesting that unless Porton had some actual compound known to be manufactured by/in Russia for comparison purposes, then Porton could never say that the substance found in Salisbury was of the same origin.
In that case, nor could Boris et al unless they too had a sample of the dreaded military grade agent……
Imagine how big a fool any serious journalist must have felt for unquestioningly accepting the establishment /security services line on Saddam’s WMD back in 2003. You can imagine how sceptical such journalists would be of any subsequent preemptive, sabre-rattling conclusions from the same sources.
Ummmm, where are they?
The facts of the case are:
1. 2 people are locked up in the hospital being treated for godknowswhat. They are denied consular assistance.
2. British authorities killed two guinea pigs and the cat.
3. They managed to twist the arms of the “allies” to expel the Russian diplomats by lying to them the had proof of a major chemical warfare conducted by RF on British soil.
A fine example of how the British solve such difficult cases:
“There ’s more evidence to come yet, please
your Majesty,” said the White Rabbit, jumping
up in a great hurry ;
“this paper has just been
picked up.”
“What ’s in it ?” said the Queen.
“I haven’t opened it yet,” said the White
Rabbit,
“but it seems to be a letter, written by
the prisoner to—to somebody.”
“It must have been that,” said the King,
“unless it was written to nobody, which isn’t
usual, you know.”
“Who is it directed to ?” said one of the
jurymen.
“It isn’t directed at all,” said the White
Rabbit ;
“in fact, there ’s nothing written on the
outside.”
He unfolded the paper as he spoke,
and added,
“It isn’t a letter, after all : it ’s a
set of verses.”
“Are they in the prisoner’s handwriting ?”
asked another of the jurymen.
“No, they ’re not,” said the White Rabbit,
“and that ’s the queerest thing about it.” (The
jury all looked puzzled.)
“He must have imitated somebody else’s
hand,” said the King. (The jury all brightened
up again.)
“Please your Majesty,” said the Knave,
“I didn’t write it, and they can’t prove I did :
there ’s no name signed at the end.”
“If you didn’t sign it,” said the King,
“that only makes the matter worse. You must have
meant some mischief, or else you ’d have signed
your name like an honest man.”
There was a general clapping of hands at
this : it was the first really clever thing the
King had said that day.
“That proves his guilt,” said the Queen.
We live in an age of vanity and where any expertise is loathed by those with power and feared by much of their supporters. You answered and she seemed more interested in defending Sky News than the actual story itself.
I don’t know if you will see this but I take a great interest in foreign policy and write about it often, especially when it comes to the Middle-East, if you do happen to see this is particular comment, I would love for you read my work and give me your opinion, Link below.
https://uk.blastingnews.com/editorial-staff/mp-clifton/archive/
Where’s the bit tacked on at the end of the interview in answer to no question, Craig?
The part where you state that although the ‘distressed’ cat had to be taken to Porton Down to be destroyed, the Official Narrative on the guinea-pigs is not to be believed as these were clearly novichoked by small-animal Novichok taken down from the shelf at PD by mistake, which accounts for the Skripals’ survival, together with everyone else in Salisbury that afternoon?
The interview version now available on the sky website seems to be truncated and is only aprox 1min 40sec long.
https://news.sky.com/video/porton-down-chief-we-dont-know-source-of-nerve-agent-11315445
It does not show the statement made at the end without a proceeding question. Sky also insist on showing an annoying add for crisps before getting to the interview. They do look tasty but also fattening!
However there is a longer version of the interview on youtube
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R23AQAFvZ-4
This seems to be the original edit Craig was referring to. There is a dramatic change in how Gary Aitkenhead is framed in shot at 3min37sec. The edit has a remarkably “tacked on as an afterthought” look to it.
Kay Burley is one of the most patronising people in the media today.
Don’t you need at least some intellect to be able to patronize effectively?
Many thanks for posting this Craig. And please continue to be a polite old gentleman! It is not only refreshing, but your patient responses and scrupulous regard for the truth are something we need to see more of in this age of soundbites and fake news.
Oh Craig your so boring because you didn’t get, or act on, the memo to keep at least one hand in screen shot at all times, like what talking heads are supposed too these days.
Kay on the other hand clearly did: Pirouetting and posing while gesticulating to an increasingly desperate tempo, in an entertainingly animated performance. Managing to convey the dysphasia of her questioning through mime with an amazing eloquence.
Do keep up the good work !
There was no eloquence.
I would agree with your perspective on how the interview went. I wonder if the interview wasn’t broadcast mostly because of personal embarrassment from your interviewer. Option B is that it was because you raised quite a mild point about editing of the 3.5-minute interview with the man from Porton Down, and it was TERRIBLY handled by Kay. Tbh I think it ended up seeming much worse than you even intended it just by how incoherent and personal the response was.
Thank you for posting. Very interesting indeed
Wife came in when I was listening to that interview and couldn’t believe the tone of it.
Quite incredible.
Wish they could have chosen sane tone when interviewing boris
Oooh! Interesting stuff! Clear as day the reasons why it was pulled. That last statement too gets a HEAR HEAR! from the whole country!!!
The polonium lies are used to enforce the newest lies. “Consider the Source: The West Has a Sordid History of WMD Lies “. Google: Oritekia. Plenty of links debunking the “Novichock” lie among many,many other lies by the empire.
So, the CEO from Porton Down, who is constantly given an upgrade to ‘leading scientist’ was maybe “too boring” to allow his full interview broadcast?
Would be interesting to know what the rest of the interview contained…_
P. S., why has my email address had j7 added to the end, if I delete them my comments don’t post…..Deep State?
I think it is clear that Sky is trying to save its own reputation, rather than trash yours, Craig! The interviewer puts this beyond any amount of editing to save it! It is almost unwatchable, but not because of you! Awful! It’s very revealing, though, so I’m glad you’ve put it out.
It is refreshing to see real substantial content in responses to journalust questions. We learn so much more as a result.
Dear Sir,
Thanks for this posting. I spread it throught my blog
https://nowarnonato.blogspot.pt/2018/04/craig-murray-extremely-boring-video-do.html
Respectfully,
luisa
Nasty bully tactics of the right wing media,,,,, ‘say what we want or we’ll dump you!’ So defensive about their tactics!!
No wonder Sky did not show interview completely shown up for their lies and inability to deliver a balanced and fair assessment of the situation. I applaud Craig Murray for his honesty and bravery to tell the truth as he sees it .
I thought Kate Burley was particularly incompetent and unprofessional, who lost it to an embarrassing degree, and that’s why the video was not put on the web site. She must have blackballed it, because it made her look bad, though my guess, not being a regular watcher of Sky, is that she is not up to the level of BBC anchors, for example, in any case.
By the way, people here are still saying that the interview wasn’t broadcast. It was. I remember people commenting at the time that Craig was on Sky. And the transition to the next segment is shown at the end. It was the permanent access video that was suppressed.