CORRECTION I published in error that 73% of those who know identities of Salmond’s accusers learnt them from mainstream media. The correct figure is 66%. I aggregated broadcast and newspapers but these were not exclusive questions. In fact the percentage of those in the know who cited broadcast, newspapers or both as their source was 66%.
We are looking for potential witnesses who would be willing to give a sworn statement, and if necessary swear on oath in court in my trial for contempt, that they followed my reporting of the Alex Salmond trial and were unable to work out any of the identities of the accusers from my reports. It is particularly helpful if you can say more than this in one of two ways:
Firstly, if you can say you were unable to work out who the accusers were from my accounts, despite yourself possessing some specialist knowledge, that would be helpful. Such specialist knowledge might include having held office in the SNP, having dealings with Alex Salmond and his staff, or having been a relevant civil servant.
And/or secondly, if you can say that you were unable to work out any of the identities from my reporting, but were able to do so from other reporting, and name the source.
I hope it goes without saying that I only want people to come forward who can genuinely do so in truth, and be prepared if necessary to swear to that.
I was very careful in my reporting not to “out” any of the identities, and I am happy to say that I can now prove that I had no significant effect on popular knowledge of the identities of the failed accusers. I took the unusual decision to commission an opinion poll on the subject from Panelbase, one of the UK’s leading pollsters. This was made possible using funds you provided with the defence fund, and I hope you will agree it is money well spent. We will seek to submit the poll as evidence in court.
You should realise this was at risk. I was committed to publishing the poll, whatever its results. If it came out saying that only a few people knew the identities, and they all learnt them from Craig Murray, I would have had to admit to that. But in fact, this is not what the poll shows at all.
It is important to note that my questions were an add-on to a Panelbase poll using their absolutely normal methods for sampling Scottish public opinion. They surveyed 1086 people and applied their standard weightings to the results.
The finding is stunning. 8% of the adult population of Scotland believe they know the identity of one or more of the failed accusers. That means over 350,000 people know, or believe they know, identities.
Of these, 74% learnt the identities from TV and newspapers. 29% learnt from independent websites or blogs. 19% learnt from friends or contacts. (You could of course learn from more than one source so this adds to more than 100).
We then asked an open question, giving people the opportunity to name the specific media from which they learnt the identities. There were a limited number of responses, so I give here the number of people who named each source rather than dress it up as a percentage:
Can you name a specific broadcast, newspaper or website source from which you learnt or deduced the identities? (there were no prompts, an open answer)
Scotland on Sunday 3
Sun 3
Guardian 2
Daily Record 2
BBC 2
Scotsman 2
Times 2
Herald 1
Telegraph 1
John James blog 1
Channel 4 1
ITV 1
Craig Murray blog 1
Press and Journal 1
National 1
Financial Times 1
Daily Mail 1
Can you name the specific journalist or blogger you had learnt or deduced identities from? (There were no prompts, an open answer):
Dani Garavelli 4
Severin Carrell 2
Magnus Linklater 1
Paul Hutcheon 1
Kenny Farquharson 1
Kieran Andrews 1
David Mackay 1
Mure Dickie 1
(Nobody actually replied Craig Murray or John James to this question, but given each had his blog mentioned once as a source it would probably be fair to add both with 1 each).
Dani Garavelli tops both lists, because her article on the case was published in Scotland on Sunday. As that is the Sunday edition of the Scotsman, that unionist rag is well ahead as the prime source of knowledge, with the Murdoch stable of the Times and Sun combined not far behind.
Plainly, it is unsatisfactory from the point of view of the law that 350,000 people know identities. Something which 350,000 people know in Scotland is not a secret, and has achieved the critical mass required for anybody who actually wants to know to be able to find out just by asking around. I strongly suspect that the large majority of those who do not know, do not wish to anyway.
But equally plainly, it is not my fault that 350,000 people know. It is overwhelmingly down to the mainstream media, as the poll shows. The simple truth is that, in a trial where a number of very politically powerful figures conspired together to bring false charges against one of the most famous people in Scotland, anonymity was always going to be extremely hard to protect. You can’t expect it to work as it rightly would in protecting the identity of a worker in Dundee attacked by a stranger. The poll shows that it did not work; and it proves that is not my fault.
I assume the single individual who mentioned me as the source was acting in good faith – though it is worth noting that the polling was carried out after every newspaper in Scotland had run the story that I am being prosecuted for contempt of court for revealing identities. In that circumstance, that I am not more prominent is remarkable and must reflect a truth.
The charge of “jigsaw identification” is very difficult to refute. As soon as you publish anything at all about the evidence in a case, there is of course the chance that is the last piece of information that an individual with particular knowledge needed to work out an identity. Let me put if this way. If the jigsaw is a face in 1,000 pieces, if your information contributes 12 pieces out of 1,000 you may think you revealed nothing. But you cannot guard against the person sitting at home who already has 800 pieces and can make a guess now your 12 filled in an area.
My lawyers advise that for me to say others were guilty of jigsaw identification is not a defence, any more than if I were to rob a bank it would be a defence to say somebody else did it too. But what this poll shows conclusively is that in practice anyone who reported on the trial could be accused of jigsaw identification.
Nobody can look at the above data and say that the obvious course of justice is to prosecute Craig Murray and nobody else. Is there a single person who honestly believes that it is a coincidence that they are prosecuting the only journalist who fairly reported the defence case against this government led fit-up? That they have chosen to prosecute the political dissident and whistleblower and not the mainstream media who were collectively responsible for far more identification? The selectivity of this prosecution represents an Article 6 abuse of the European Convention on Human Rights.
There are of course two strands to the indictment against me, insofar as anything can be deduced from that incoherent document. One is jigsaw identification. The other is reporting likely to influence the trial. I have just demolished the first strand; you cannot possibly prosecute me and not the mainstream media. I refuse to take the second strand seriously. If they genuinely believed my reporting could influence the trial, they had a public duty to take action before or during the trial, not months afterwards. This is very plainly a political persecution.
A final note. With over 5,000 people having contributed to my defence fund, I do hope you will forgive the lack of personal replies to thank you. I am really quite overwhelmed and humbled by your kindness.
You should also know that, as it was never my intention to identify anyone, I have pending the outcome of my trial temporarily censored those sentences in my articles complained of by the prosecution as causing jigsaw identification, even though I strongly deny that they do. Prior to receiving the indictment, I had no idea precisely what the complaint referred to. I have also censored the indictment of its references to the same material. I do not believe there was any problem with the originals; but it is a very few sentences and my lawyers rather insisted. I hope you will not feel I am too cowardly in this.
I have refused to censor those larger passages the Crown complain of where I state that the charges were a fit-up and a state sponsored conspiracy. I believe here there is a vital argument of freedom of speech, and I will not bend.
With grateful thanks to those who donated or subscribed to make this reporting possible.
This article is entirely free to reproduce and publish, including in translation, and I very much hope people will do so actively. Truth shall set us free.
——————————————
Unlike our adversaries including the Integrity Initiative, the 77th Brigade, Bellingcat, the Atlantic Council and hundreds of other warmongering propaganda operations, this blog has no source of state, corporate or institutional finance whatsoever. It runs entirely on voluntary subscriptions from its readers – many of whom do not necessarily agree with the every article, but welcome the alternative voice, insider information and debate.
Subscriptions to keep this blog going are gratefully received.
Choose subscription amount from dropdown box:
Paypal address for one-off donations: [email protected]
Alternatively:
Account name
MURRAY CJ
Account number 3 2 1 5 0 9 6 2
Sort code 6 0 – 4 0 – 0 5
IBAN GB98NWBK60400532150962
BIC NWBKGB2L
Bank address Natwest, PO Box 414, 38 Strand, London, WC2H 5JB
Subscriptions are still preferred to donations as I can’t run the blog without some certainty of future income, but I understand why some people prefer not to commit to that.
My view is that the case is a fit up, as others have already expressed, in which case you will eventually be released after they have finished harassing you because they will ‘discover’ that the law has been misused. Will it go to the high court? Maybe. You will have suffered as Alex Salmond has suffered, the main aim of all this is to discourage you and the Scottish independence movement.
Meanwhile the alphabet sisters will feel vindicated and will still have their comfy positions and salaries. But after this is over they will need to be fantastically cautious, they will have made many enemies by their actions, their future does not look rosy, vindictiveness is a double edged sword.
If the case drags on you make need to make another appeal for funds, I will be glad to contribute and am happy for you to use the funds for whatever purpose you feel is needed, I wish you the best of luck with the outcome.
That’s a terrible comment, as it may drag Craig into trouble. You are implying incitement. Good evidence for the prosection,
Incitement to what? Double edge sword is a metaphor, I wasn’t suggesting actual swordplay. All I meant was that the careers of the alphabet women might be blighted if their identities have passed into the public domain. As far as I can gather that has not happened. Correct me if I am wrong.
Rather than judging other peoples thoughts you might consider donating some of your computer time to: https://foldingathome.org who are carrying out research into various genetic disorders.
Bait and switch.
I followed your reporting on the trial both before you were allowed admittance and after you were barred.
Despite reading your trial reports several times I had no idea of the identity any of these women.
I think I was able to work the identity of one them but I am not 100% confident. I worked this out from D Garavelli’s article after reading a readers post from another blogg.
If you think this would help then feel free to use.
If I actually bothered to work out some of the identities of accusers…it would be that appalling piece of “journalism”…ie fact free hatchet job…that that soul selling Grovelli I would use as it gave so many clues. I would gladly stand up in court and state this. I stated on an earlier blog I had no clue from your writings,which were merely a report of what we weren’t hearing reported from court,of who the accusers were. But as i don’t know i would be no use to you. But for you Craig to be fitted up with contempt,while the alphabet sisters could make demonstrably false claims and face no action,shows the farce that ensues when those that write the law apply the law.
Nicola Sturgeon seems to be swaying on her pins.
She needs the government of Boris to help her retain power in Scotland.
Independence is on hold for quite a time.
What we are seeing here is a war. Not a physical fighting war, but a war nevertheless where the power of the state apparatus is deployed to destroy political opposition.
Alex Salmond’s trial was a stitch up. Part of a decapitation strategy to stop people like Alex reinvigorating a stalled independence party at a time when independence could be won. And that is exactly why the war is now out in the open.
Year after year the hostile MSM played its part changing hearts and minds against independence. But it has not worked. The demand for independence is now higher than it was in the 2014 vote whilst the SNP have secured mandate after mandate. And so, with the Union weaker than it has ever been it is not difficult to see how the secret war has broken cover to start using the apparatus of state against those who would push for independence.
The gargantuan police investigation into forty years of Salmonds life and the interview of over four hundred people, the preparation by the crown office of thirteen flimsy charges is but one thing. But now they go after Craig Murray. And the police harrying of bloggers and the raid on the house of another journalist to seize computers and phones. More of the same.
Or what of those who would organise the huge independence marches.Charged and or cautioned by Police for alleged civic infringements, more of the same again.
But these tactics are straight out of the Brigadier General Sir Frank Kitson manual on how to combat political opponents. That we are now seeing the more overt tactics of what hitherto had been a secret war, I think we can now take it that independence could be nearer, much nearer than we think, and that the establishment is worried.
And that too is why the internet is being interfered with, or where people Stuart Campbell, CraigMurray and others are having their Twitter accounts suspended.
But this is a war we can win. Even the most repressive regimes fall in the end. But a least now more of us understand that it is a war, always has been, but that now it’s coming out in the open.
But the attack on Alex Salmond is not
Thank you
Thank you… I was thinking that too…
Oh, jigsaw identification! I believe that Hubakabra person is Mr. Prentice.
I also believe that the purpose of the case against Mr. Murray is to destroy comments section on this site, because the state can’t allow people to freely exchange their opinions. Without comments section it would look like Mr. Murray is alone in his views.
I also believe that this site must be backup-ed and get ready to be deployed on another hosting.
I didn’t identify any woman, no source was of any help to me, I’m as clueless as a baby. I would honestly give a sworn statement, if the court would listen to a russian citizen.
I am not sure what is Hubakabra, but I found this possible clue
every Indian tribe in the Amazon, including those that have had no contact with one another, have a word for the mapinguary (pronounced ma-ping-wahr-EE). The name is usually translated as “the roaring animal” or “the fetid beast.”
However, A Prentice could be someone fired by Mr. Trump when the latter was running a TV show.
@Tatyana, May 9 at 14:45-I think you’re absolutely correct in surmising the purpose of the trial. We should be prepared for the blog to be hosted elsewhere, though being technically ignorant of these things, how this done is a mystery to me.
I, too, am completely ignorant about the identities of the women despite reading all Mr Murray’s posts and those of others but am unsuitable as a witness as I have no connection with the SNP.
I liked your willingness to prepare a witness statement and the recognition that this would be unhelpful as you’re a Russian citizen. If you did so, Russia (not you) would be blamed for interfering in the trial, the U.K. Election, the US election, the slowness of the Corovid curve in the UK to decline, the casualty rate of Crimean War, etc etc?. So, like my willingness to prepare a witness statment, Mr Murray’s defence is probably better off without it. Have a nice weekend.
By the way, Russia’s small role in defeating Nazism in WW2, was barely given any mention here in the UK where we’ve been saturated by televised shite of happy, wartime Brits, doing the hokey-cokey, on VE Day.
Your government is racist, they hate russians and support everything anti-russian. Some people on here accused me of dreadful sins and ascribed to me disgusting behaviour, due to my nationality, and I believe they were state employees, agents. Normal people don’t do so.
This policy towards russians from UK goes together with US, Ukraine and Poland, the latter I belive to be the motherland of Hubakabra.
Can you see the picture, Ingwe? Do you know what it is?
https://cs9.pikabu.ru/post_img/big/2020/05/08/10/1588953946176550342.jpg
People on russian social network complained yesterday that Facebook forbids this image, banning it from publication, with notice “dangerous people, terrorism, violence, murder, crime”, that’s why
Dear Tatyana, a British historian wrote this about Russia and WWII in 1965:
“Soviet Russia did most of the fighting against Germany, sustained nine-tenths of the casualties, and suffered catastrophic economic losses. The British suffered considerable economic loss and sustained comparatively few casualties. The Americans made great economic gains and had a trifling number of casualties fighting against Germany – their main losses were in the war against Japan.
In short, the British and Americans sat back, though not of malice aforethought, while the Russians defeated Germany for them.
Of the three great men at the top, Roosevelt was the only one who knew what he was doing; he made the United States the greatest power in the world at virtually no cost.”
From English History 1914-1945 by A.J.P. Taylor (1965/1975)
Dear np, I know many people remember the true facts from the history and they don’t allow things like this go
https://mobile.twitter.com/WhiteHouse/status/1258842411524132865
A J P Taylor – from the time when real historians had a voice on the msm and seats at prestigious universities – not any more!
Saying that however I think all three knew what they were up to.
Uncle Joe had his plans interrupted for a time by unexpected events in 1941, only achieving half of what had been aimed at.
As for Winnie at least he had the decency to take to drink!
Well people will see that image as the culmination of a western expansionist policy that has its origins in the days of Lenin and Trotsky, with a first failed attempt made back in 1920. Only achieving it in the end with the weakening of the target and the connivance of Roosevelt and stupidity and vanity of Churchill. For many it was, remains a tragedy.
Socialism in one country was a reaction to the failure to give the new Polish state a due measure of justice for its war of aggression against the USSR. The clue is in the title; the USSR got back lost former lost Tsarist territories in the late 30s early 40s after the failure of the united front against German revanchism when the British and French states decided to renege on their commitments to Czechoslovakia in 1938, partly to frustrate Hitler by pretending to believe that he wanted Sudetenland when they knew he wanted to use the Sudeten question to start a war against all of Czechoslovakia and partly to keep the USSR out of central Europe once the Soviet Air Force began to fly aircraft to Czech airfields.
Tatyana, did you pick up that, when I referred to Russia’s small role in defeating Nazism, I was being sarcastic? I can see that the photo is of Russian soldiers placing the Soviet flag on a Nazi building probably in Berlin.
It’s appalling that people on this site have accused you of anything because you’re Russian. Facebook’s shitty hypocrisy in banning that picture on the grounds asserted whilst undoubtedly permitting photos of say, the nuclear bomb blasts on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, in the name of freedom and democracy, is one of the many reasons I won’t use Facebook, Whatsapp, Google, Twitter etc etc. I wish everyone would boycott Facebook etc. They’d have fuckall to sell then.
Yes, I caught sarcasm, Ingwe, but it’s not even a matter of rewriting history, I have highlighted another aspect – racism. look, anyone is able to identify racism in the phrase “you lie because you are a Jew”, but not everyone is able to detect racism in the phrase “you lie because you are Russian.” This is exactly what your government is promoting.
I believe that the underlying idea of the allied us/uk government policy is that some people are “untermenschen” and therefore they are bad. This idea itself is very fascist in its essence, its varieties are everywhere. For example, American exceptionalism very clearly divides the population of the whole world into the “best” and the “worst”. Or, for example, monarchism is very clearly divides people by the “worthy” and the “rest.” Similar separation is “chosen by God” and the ” inferior” is in religions. It is in elitism. And it exists in Nazism.
I clearly see WHAT unites the United States, Britain, Israel and the neo-Nazis of Ukraine. This is a special set of mind. I think that the moral alliance of “better” people should also find hearty support in other countries with wide religious and monarchist movements.
—
And that’s why Mr. Murray honestly writing about the facts of reality, is a threat. That’s why everyone here talking about the facts are the threat. Like Assange, like Snowden.
Because in reality it turns out that their “exclusivity” is the result of lies and crimes.
Tatyana – “Some people on here accused me of dreadful sins and ascribed to me disgusting behaviour, due to my nationality”
I’m so sorry. You are one of the most humane commenters at this site.
– “Your government is racist, they hate russians and support everything anti-russian.”
Our Queen is a Reptile! –
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S00QHjIhDfk
Clark, I am sure those were paid state agents, because I’ve never met that special behaviour among ordinary people. I communicate a lot everywhere on the web and I dare say I can distinguish normal human reactions and special behaviour. Don’t want to give more detail on this, because I don’t want them to learn their ‘mistakes’.
We are all lucky to be here, it really is a special place to talk free. And dear brave Moderators Team safeguard us from most disgusting attacks.
Tatyana
Any Brit who has actually interacted with Russians knows that Russians are like every other nationality on earth. There are a few crooks, a large number of decent people and a few salt-of-the-earth saints.
I stopped using the BBC at all after they spent 12 months trashing Russia before the World Cup, basically trying to stop any Brits going. Then they sent a ridiculously large number of employees on a taxpayer-funded jolly with big expense accounts, and they started broadcasting what a wonderfully friendly and welcoming nation the Russian people were.
I wanted each and every one of them sacked for not resigning on principle when the BBC goons started the anti-Russian invective, then going on a jolly to a place they said was unsafe for any humans to visit.
Thank you, Rhys. I hate lies, both blackening and flattering. I prefer the natural course of things, undistorted reality, truth.
Indeed! The volume of comments speaks volumes. Something that Mr Prentice appears to have a bee in his bonnet about.
Hmm. Evidence, yes, very good. But there’s a very large assumption being made here, and that is the prospect of Craig Murray’s case receiving a fair and unbiased hearing.
Given the general state of jurisprudence throughout the UK, let alone in Scotland, I have to wonder whether this assumption is justified.
The UK is the most corrupt “country” in the world.
https://www.euronews.com/2017/04/03/the-uk-is-the-most-corrupt-country-in-the-world-anti-mafia-journalists-saviano
Its press is the least trusted in Europe as well.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EXVT6QVUwAAYmRK?format=jpg&name=900×900
I don’t think your Mr Saviano has travelled much.
If you watch the film “ The Spider’s Web: An investigation into the world of Britain’s secrecy jurisdictions and the City of London” http://www.spidersweb.com You will see that everything he states and more reveals how pernicious and destructive the U.K. financial empire is.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=np_ylvc8Zj8 Sorry I think this is the correct link.
I don’t doubt it but the worst in the world? Even the Tax Justice Network that made the film ranks the UK as 23 in its secrecy index.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_Secrecy_Index
If you watch the documentary, you will see that it’s not only the City of London per se but the myriad of centres connected not only by it but also set up by it. For example, the Cayman Islands or the Island of man. Therefore, the index you quoted only cited the United Kingdom not all the other octopus arms connected to it. Watch the film it’s very revealing!
“No! No, I won’t have that! There’s a place in Eastbourne…”
Ort – whether it’s lowering the tone or raising the spirits, thanks for the chuckle. One of the best moments…imo.
I guess it depends whether they push forward with the trial before they restore trial by jury.
If I were Mr Murray’s counsel, I would be researching every way they can stall any judicial proceedings in the absence of a jury.
I am very, very confident that a representative Jury of Scottish people would find Mr Murray Not Guilty by a very, very large majority, even if it were not unanimous (which i think would be the most likely outcome).
Mr Murray should also be lining up someone to report impartially on trial proceedings through a blog that all who read here would be guided toward.
I would be asking the police in court to rigorously justify the expenditure allocated to pursuing Mr Murray and compare it to far worse incidents where the Government went down the ‘hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil’ route of non-prosecution. There must be plenty of fodder for that kind of embarrassing comparison.
I would be demanding that the Procurator Fiscal be called as a witness to explain why all the MSM is not being prosecuted too and if they cannot answer that to defence counsel’s satisfaction (and I doubt greatly that they can), openly suggest in court that they need to consider their position as they are incapable of pursuing justice in a non-partisan, even-handed and judicial manner.
I would be asking leading black rights activists from other parts of the world to testify on what their opinion is of British/Scottish Justice currently, comparing it with the racist jurisdictions that they have been subjected to. Foreigners looking in are much more able to be blunt and brutal, after all. They are not looking to live here any time soon, are they?
Perish the thought that any of the anonymous women (whose names I do not know) have been engaging in any hanky panky outside the prim and proper constraints of marriage? Prof Ferguson has recently been relieved of some of his duties for shagging his mistress during lockdown after all. The only question is how to introduce such evidence in a trial where lack of knowledge of who they are is so obviously imperative. It would be a great shame if some other fearless journalists let slip something unfortunate….no doubt, the wiles of legal eagles will find a way to do it…if of course there is anything to reveal, and not knowing any of the names, i cannot comment at all on whether there would be….
I thought that Craig wrote that contempt of court is just tried by a judge…
I have been unable to discover the name of any of the alphabet women and I have re read your articles , still I havent a clue.
Stay strong
A final note. With over 5,000 people having contributed to my defence fund, I do hope you will forgive the lack of personal replies to thank you. I am really quite overwhelmed and humbled by your kindness.
——-
I am one of 5,000 (we make a Roman legion, although lacking in obedience to the Empire), and my motivation is not to lose your voice. I still worry that the prosecution will distract you from publishing on many topics with insight and originality.
I may disagree with Mr Murray on various political matters, but I am 100% behind him in this case and so I too am one of the Roman legion.
Justice is more important than narrow political opinions, after all.
The Court has seen fit to declare that publishing these peoples names is not in the Public Interest.
It flows therefore that this prosecution is not in the Public Interest because it makes it more likely than not that more members of the public will now learn those names
The prosecution must be discontinued on the ground of Public Interest or am I missing something?
Have the prosecutors done the Public Interest balancing test and decided that women’s anonymity is now of less importance?
My bet is they’ll drop this case. The ‘lesson’ being that they can still lay charges and force you to run up huge legal bills simply because they don’t like someone publishing information that cuts against their political aims.
Or they will go for a conviction with a suspended prison sentence with a condition not to publish anything relating to court proceedings on this or any other case.
Not quite sure how another court case can help keep the anonymity of the alphabet women.
Raising the issue afresh in the media, attracting more comment, having to lead evidence, having a defence led, how is than going to serve keeping the alphabet women identity secret – unless the trial is in secret.
I for one am desperate to learn the identity of these women, who they are, what they said, how they are connected, and like many the case against a Craig only serves to keep interest high. The case also serves to reinforce to me, and to others, how rotten and corrupt our police and prosecution services are. And in that the establishment seed their own demise.
>>I for one am desperate to learn the identity of these women, who they are, what they said, how they are connected,
Me too. Probably everyone who visits this blog. Once Alex S. is ready to go to court, to sue them, I think we will find out all the nitty, gritty details.
Me too. Can’t wait for series two, episode 1. It’s a real cliffhanger shaping up. On a serious note. Who will report on Craig’s trial, should it take place?
Grousebeater? He’s trustworthy and writes well.
Dani Garavelli. She’s trustworthy and writes well 😀
Currently, an unstated and real facet of our legal systems is that “there must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect., (From Frank Wilhout).
«That they have chosen to prosecute the political dissident and whistleblower and not the mainstream media who were collectively responsible for far more identification?»
The prosecution I guess is not aimed at you except incidentally; it seems to me to have the value of teaching an objective lesson to all those who would step out-of-line, like the prosecution against Assage.
The objective lesson is that if you step out-of-line your life will be ruined. An interesting side is that the more publicity is given to Assange’s case and yours the more effective is the objective lesson, because it reaches a much wider audience.
The selectivity of this prosecution
«The selectivity of this prosecution»
Is an established principle of “common law” countries, where prosecution by government prosecutors is discretional, and as a rule overtly political, to the point that in the USA local prosecutors (and judges) are elected, not appointed, so that whom they did not prosecute be part of the record on which they see re-election.
In other legal systems prosecution is often mandatory, in that prosecutors have a legal obligation to prosecute if they are credibly informed of potential crime, and are accountable in law for deciding to drop a case. In those legal systems the trick used by the government is to create delays in prosecution so “important” cases run out of statutes of limitations, by either grossly under-funding courts and prosecution offices, or by ensuring that critical posts are filled by “go-slow” prosecutors.
I did not identify any of the accusers from your blog, Craig, and would be happy to state so in Court. I don’t know if that helps.
I have heard suggestions of names from people in the SNP but have no way of knowing if the information is accurate and have not sought to further my knowledge.
Can anyone link to the documents published by official sources – eg Courts – relevant to this and the AS case? I’m assuming that the inditement is in the public domain, for instance.
I’m looking for sources that I’m confident are in the public domain – not ones published by Craig Murray
«give a sworn statement, and if necessary swear on oath in court in my trial for contempt, that they followed my reporting of the Alex Salmond trial and were unable to work out any of the identities of the accusers from my reports.»
In other words, our blogger is trying to show some evidence of his being innocent, or at least some supporting corroboration. It is usually like that in cases involving crimes against women: “better safe than sorry”, “better to convict 10 innocent potential abusers than to let 1 abuser get away with it” seem to be popular principles.
Imagine if somewhere, say in Edinburgh say outside a prominent building, a large group of people holding placards, randomly assigned to each person by allowing them to choose a letter, each placard showing just one large letter of the alphabet, became fortuitously arranged to spell out things, forbidden truths …
We know that this conspiracy is both deep and wide, that it goes right to the heart of the British establishment, the interests of justice are that it is unearthed, and followed wherever that leads, to Cameron’s court at Downing St, to the security services, to foreign parties fair-weather friends of the suborned elite, the 0.01% or less and a far greater number hanging on their coat-tails satiated by the paltry few crumbs and baubles given them, forming a clique who are no friends to the peoples of Scotland or the other countries of these islands, no friends of freedom or democracy, nor of women, for harm done to one is harm done to all, we’re all poorer and sorrier for it. My own life has been unremitting hell this last few months, as the state has unleashed persecution after persecution, but I say to those responsible, “You’re laughing this time, next time you might be the one to tell the Story of the Blues.”
No-one actually cares who these women are they’re non-entities, they’re irrelevant, nothing changes if their names become known, the only people who know their names or found them, already knew them in some sense already. No self-respecting person would ever want to know them now, knowing what they set out to do with malice aforethought. It’s how this case has been used politically, it ought never to have gone anywhere, the making of a complaint alone is almost the whole, the bias is such in the system that a pre-supposition of guilt is made on that basis alone, the courts no longer decide anything, the police and fiscal alone wield that power, Salmond’s acquittal was absolutely and utterly exceptional, so untypical that many have been hoowinked and will go back to sleep thinking all is mostly well. It very much isn’t for non-celebrity (sorry, Alex) defendants. The court almost always instead is there to give a forged imprimatur of fairness and justice done. A great many of prosecutions brought are the result of utterly false and malicious allegations of which the courts are wilfully blind. The defendant in the dock, must be guilty, of something at least or he/she wouldn’t be stood there.
In my 19:59 comment, “nor of women, for harm done to one is harm done to all, we’re all poorer and sorrier for it.” should to convey the meaning I intended read “nor of women, for harm done to one, man or woman is harm done to all, we’re all poorer and sorrier for it.”
I know better way. Imagine someone comes to TV and claims that he was praying in the church, and suddenly the voice of God told him to go and tell people an extremely important message.
In your country there should be a law protecting the free exercise of religious needs, so it would be enormously difficult for Mr. Prentice to charge that person with any accusations, wouldn’t it?
Reverse jigsaw:
Publish a list of female names — as large as possible (list 0)
Wait until someone else publishes a list based on list 0, with one or more names missing.
Gambling jigsaw:
Accept up-front bets on each name in the list 0, bj 🙂
Here’s another comment Mr Prentice. Put this in your pipe and smoke it 😀
Ha ha, while smoking, Mr. Prentice might think about the “female names totalizator”, maybe it’s good idea to make more money for Mr. Murray’s Defence Fund.
That’s a bit like Dr Kelly.
I’d recognise that tactic anywhere.
It’s one of Alistairs finest and it worked.
I typed person met person on date as mentioned in danielli gravellio’s article and up popped a slew of articles naming the alphabet woman.
Said alphabet woman who is very certainly behind the hana rodgering smear attack on Joanna C Cherry QC MP. This woman will stop at nothing to achieve power and will do anything to destroy anyone who stands up to her. A truly evil woman. Does husband know? And if he does then why is he protecting her? Fear of ending up boiled alive in a pressure cooker?
I have only just read this article and non of the comments. However I can state that I had made a comment on a previous article (from memory the artcle where the threatening letter re potential contempt of court was published) and in which I stated that I was actually attempting to identify who the witnesses were [from the info in the article as well as contributions from commenters] but had been unable to do so.
Mr Murray,
A thought to consider relating to your contempt case.
When I read your articles which stated there was an attempt to “fit up” Salmond I thought you were echoing the comments of the Court of Session. These articles are now being used against you to imply they impacted on a future case. As far as I am aware the Court of Session did not restrict reporting or comment on its conclusions.
The judge in prosecution of Salmond restricted publication of two bodies of evidence during the trial. It was the judge’s responsibility to do that. It appears that other parts of evidence not restricted for publication by the judge are now being raised in the charge of contempt. If these parts of evidence carried the risk of identifying the complainers then it was again the judge’s responsibility to act on that.
But would the sitting QC see it that way, I really am quite disgusted that a two year custodial sentence can be handed down for contempt of court, 2 weeks or a fine? Sure I suppose, but two years at her Maj’s?
Shatnersrug
The court has been leant on. ‘ If genuine independence was established in Scotland , the new executive could sweep away all the old establishment appointees, their massive salaries and privileges, and clubs, local status or cultural connections and ranches, for want of a better word.
I am reading the chapter of the qur’an about Moses, wherein are described the annihilation of all the upper classes of the Egyptians, including one member of the lower, Muslim class from Moses’ people, Qarun, who persecuted the Children of Israel and whose entire castle and family, ,loch, stock and barrel, disappeared into the Nile Delta sands.
Panic stations. If the pharaoh, ie the Windsors, and the entire class of English stooges, and their rich pickings from Westminster, their tweed and their local rags, globally owned, were to be subsumed into the North Sea! Man the bilges, cut the main sail, launch the lifeboats and fire the flares.
This is panic stations because their stupid plan to lock up Alex Salmond, failed.
I doubt that the Snats want to abolish, merely to replace….
But by its standards,Shutnersru think what happened to Gareth Williams just doing his job, hard workinng Dr, David Kelly, and the security people surpringly killed at the Mull of Kintyre.
Trow,
Yes of course, once we get into the skullduggery of the security forces. I did worry about Craig, he’s right in the firing line, and this blog is read the world over, taking him down must be on the list of some high powered cronies
John Manning
The sloppy way random accusations have been cobbled together by ? the court ? or somebody else? is further evidence of the ” more of ” principle described in Yes Minister. As you rightly point out, some of the more of is completely irrelevant to contempt of court.
Insinuations and innuendo, assembled by amateurs, or by scriptwriters from Bollywood trying to introduce an element of total farce?
I worked it out from Stu’s reporting, highlighting the date and who went to dinner
Stu’s reporting?
How would Stu know the date and who went to dinner?
he could only have got this information from another source, ie something that was already in the public domain, so definitely not him reporting it.
What would happen if Craig refused to plead, on the basis that there was no offence committed?
Surely we have to be certain that a crime has been committed, and how would that be confirmed in this case?
I believe the judge would be obliged to enter a plea of not guilty which could then be defended.
I’m sure Craig’s legal team have got this ‘sussed’, or as ‘sussed’ as is possible with such an unfair, illogical, High Court petition. The best outcome would be to get Sturgeon’s SNP Administration to withdraw this petition, on the grounds it is patently unfair and looks suspiciously like revenge for Alex Salmond’s judicial review win, (where the administration was held to have handled the women’s complaints ‘unlawfully’), and his subsequent acquittal. It is significant only Salmond supporting reports have been targetted.
Nicola Sturgeon is relying on the Covid-19 lockdown to attempt to get this quickly through the Courts, with the proceedings held in private, and with a nice ‘compliant’ judge virtually instructed to deliver a guilty verdict. The increasingly hackneyed excuse of protecting the women’s identities, will be used to prevent members of the public or even the press from attending the hearing. There will be a short press release instead. Craig is doing the right thing, keeping this whole thing as public as possible, with minimum redacting. Secrecy is the SNP Adminisration’s best weapon. We the public, have a right to know exactly what is going on here, including ‘behind the scenes’.
Nicola Sturgeon has benefited from the Covid-19 crises, which has given her the chance to preach at us on multiple TV channels daily, without proper questioning. Coronavirus has also delayed the coming ‘reckoning’ over the Alex Salmond debacle. It is significant Sturgeon is apparently resisting in Scotland, Boris’s slow easing of lockdown restrictions in England. Wales is also easing up on lockdowns. By July, I anticipate most of the lockdown restrictions will have been lifted in England and Wales, with some sensible remaining precautions.
Watch this space to see what happens in Scotland. I cannot imagine Scottish Citizens putting up with prolonged lockdown restrictions, whilst these are eased or lifted elsewhere in the UK.
Not forgetting that Nicola Sturgeon has put the price of drink up in Scotland, so it costs more for lower priced alcohol in Scotland than in other parts of the U.K.
She has also increased income tax in Scotland.
She must by now be less popular than she imagines.
A top politician can only carry on buggering up peoples lives for a while, eventually the populace will not put up with being twatted about.
Michael Norton
As distinct from the morons in 10 Downing st killing people through their handling of the pandemic.
As distinct from the UK stealing Scotlands resources and keeping Scotland artificially poorer for centuries and thus killing people in Scotland for centuries through Britnat enforced poverty.
Classic disgraceful Britnat priorities on display by Norton.
Higher taxes mean better public services. More expensive alcohol means better health. That’s putting people first. Possibly the people of Scotland are not as corrupt as the people of England.
Unnecessary Tory austerity caused 130,000 preventable deaths before they presided over the world’s 2nd highest Covid death toll.
But, Nicola Sturgeon…
michael norton
That is an almost unbelievable comment.
You are right about the price of alcohol. Several Scandanavian governments appear to have survived despite increasing it.
The increase in ‘income tax’ has been minimal, your attempt to make it your ‘big issue’ is contemptible. And, kinda obviously wrong.
And let us not forget that this article, and comments, are actually about justice.
Which you appear to have a totally distant relationship with.
Was it Sturgeon’s legal team that raised this petition?
Technically the petition was raised by Scotland’s HM Advocate. Recently Kenny MacAskill publicised the peculiar and very untypical dual role of HM Advocate. It looks like a case of ‘the tail wagging the dog’.
From The Scotsman:-
“Alex Salmond’s court cases show need to separate political and prosecution roles of Lord Advocate – Kenny MacAskill”
https://www.scotsman.com/news/opinion/columnists/alex-salmonds-court-cases-show-need-separate-political-and-prosecution-roles-lord-advocate-kenny-macaskill-2561933?amp
Jenifer Allan
“Without proper questioning” – what exactly do you think proper questioning should be – I see the MSM Britnat scumbag journalist attack dogs do what they are paid to do – attack Sturgeon – every day. So what is missing?
Your comment on lockdown is just wrong. Sturgeons job is to safeguard lives in Scotland. Your comment is out of order. Aye let’s just follow the moron Johnstons aporoach – get a grip.
It is no coincidence that the two biggest moronic leaders Trump and Johnson have the two highest death rates in the world. Scotland is chained to a bloody idiot and you want to tighten the the links.
Nicola Sturgeon attempted to remove jurys from trials in Scotland, using coronavirus as an excuse. Thankfully public outrage, echoed by many involved with the justice systems, prevented this legislation. However, the same bill also proposed other measures during the crisis, including legislation to remove dementia patients blocking hospital beds. Where would these patients go? – into care homes of course, and this is exactly what has happened in all parts of the UK.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/apr/01/scotland-drops-plans-to-suspend-jury-trials-during-coronavirus-crisis
EXTRACT:-
“The bill, which is due to be passed in a single sitting, also includes temporary measures to allow the early release of prisoners to relieve pressure on prisons; allowing councils to evict dementia patients from hospital beds without their consent; and a ban on landlords evicting tenants who cannot afford their rent.”
Failure to properly test elderly patients with dementia and other debilitating conditions for Covid-19 before discharging them, meant many infected patients were sent to care homes. The resulting horrific death toll in care homes, which should have been foreseen by politicians and their so called ‘expert’ advisers, is a shameful scandal in all parts of the UK. It only needs ONE infected patient to infect all the other residents. Scandalously poorly protected hospital and care home staff are not immune and many of them have also died. It is estimated in Scotland between a third to a half of all Covid-19 deaths have occurred in care homes. The vast majority of deaths (80-90%) have been elderly persons with co-morbidities. The Scottish coronavirus fatality rate is slighty higher than England’s.
The only time Nicola Sturgeon’s normally rather stoic composure slipped was when she was closely questioned about the care home infections and deaths. Our First Minister was said to shed a tear. That will be a ‘first’. Saving lives? NOT.
Jennifer Allan
You didnt address the points I made. I agree that it was wrong to try and suspend jury trials but it has no relevance to my points.
I do not need you to tell me about the problems in care homes.
” The Scottish coronavirus fatality rate is slightly higher than Englands” – rubbish. Where did you get that from the Daily Mail. That comment shows where you are coming from.
Sturgeon has not done a perfect job re the virus but of course Scotland is not an independent country and has to go along with the clown in no. 10 for the most part. I will repeat for you since it has trouble sinking in – SCOTLAND IS NOT AN INDEPENDENT COUNTRY.
I repeat Scotland is chained to an idiot and you want to tighten the links. Johnson couldn’t care less about death tolls. Nothing but lies and incompetence from Downing st from a PM who couldn’t even be described as part time.
@ Cubby” The Scottish coronavirus fatality rate is slightly higher than Englands-rubbish.”
I could give some links, but Nicola Sturgeon has just admitted this in her latest ‘address to the nation’, (not the rubbish part). Apparently this is her excuse for keeping the lockdown in place in Scotland for another three weeks. Oh we are now getting longer to exercise-big deal!
It’s no good blaming Boris for everything, although my post made it clear the care home fiasco is a UK wide problem. The NHS in Scotland has been devolved for more than a decade.
I don’t usually respond to abusive posts, but you asked about ‘proper questioning’ and I gave you an example. As for claiming my comment on lockdown was ‘ just wrong’ ? How do you know this? From where I am sitting, Nicola Sturgeon is acting to prolong the lockdown in Scotland for as long as possible.
I will leave the readers to decide for themselves whether this is saving lives or saving faces.
Jennifer Allan
Nothing abusive about my posts. Methinks you are happy for Sturgeon to get questioned but you ain’t so keen on it yourself.
No you never gave any example of a question or questions that should have been asked of Sturgeon at all. Just a rant which included the possibility of no jury cases in Scotland which has no relevance to the pandemic.
Well I watched today’s briefing and did not hear Sturgeon or anyone say that the Scottish coronavirus fatality rate is slightly higher than Englands. Care to say who said it and when in the briefing and their exact words. I have it recorded. Once again I believe what you are saying is wrong. Prove me wrong tell me when someone said it in the briefing never mind Sturgeon saying it. You are the only person I am aware of saying this but in mitigation I don’t read the Daily Mail or Daily Express.
” It’s no good blaming Boris for everything” I refer you to my previous post where I said “Sturgeon has not done a perfect job re the virus” so I do not blame Johnson for everything. So once again you are wrong.
I am well aware health is devolved. But plenty of other areas that are important in this pandemic are not eg Scotland does not control its own resources – its money. Scotland does not control its borders – only tonight has Johnson decided to close the UK borders. Australia closed its borders Feb 1st. Talk about shutting the stable doors after the horse has bolted. So I will remind you once again Scotland is not independent unlike Slovakia which has 25 deaths in total. Scotland is chained to the criminally incompetent UK. Only Trump has been worse.
I have no idea what you are talking about “saving faces” – meaningless comment.
Coronavirus (Scotland) Bill No. 2 is being published today. Wonder what will be sneaked into that 😉
@ Cubby, Sturgeon DID say that Scotland’s coronavirus infection rate is slightly higher than Englands. She also stated that “the Scottish R number was between 0.7 and 1 but could quite possibly be hovering around the 1 mark”.
Maggie
Yes I did watch the briefing and Sturgeon did make comments about the R figures but the point at hand is nothing to do with the R figure. Jennifer Allan said Scotland had a higher fatality rate than England. She said more people are dying in Scotland when compared to England.
A higher R figure is NOT a higher fatality rate – I thought that was pretty obvious to everyone but obviously not.
Perhaps Jennifer Allan made the same mistake as you.
@Cubby “A higher R figure is NOT a higher fatality rate – I thought that was pretty obvious to everyone but obviously not.
Perhaps Jennifer Allan made the same mistake as you.”
No mistake – The R number is just a theoretical projection based on probabilities. It bears no relation to actual coronavirus deaths. Scotland has a higher proportion of elderly persons, known to be more vulnerable to the virus. Around 75% of Covid-19 deaths are in the 75+ age group. The latest stats now put deaths in care homes at more than 50% of the total.
“Deaths involving coronavirus (COVID-19) in Scotland”
https://www.nrscotland.gov.uk/covid19stats
Extract:-
“The proportion of COVID-19 deaths which took place in care homes has risen each week and represented 59% of all COVID-19 deaths in week 18.
These deaths demonstrate the way patients in care homes have been betrayed by all UK Governments. These patients will not have been affected by any lockdown changes, actual or proposed.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2020/05/10/snp-health-minister-makes-astonishing-admission-has-not-seen/
Extract:-
“SNP Health Minister admits new coronavirus advice for Scottish care homes published by mistake
Jeane Freeman told the BBC she had “not seen absolutely yet” guidance wrongly published on Friday on the Scottish Government’s website.The SNP’s Health Minister has been accused of “confusion and incompetence” after new coronavirus guidance for care homes was published by mistake.Jeane Freeman said a document detailing the rules for admitting residents from hospital during the pandemic was only a draft.”
She said the guidance should not have been published on Friday and it had been removed from the Scottish Government’s website. However, she only became aware of the gaffe when she was asked about its contents on TV and admitted she had not read it, unlike the journalist interviewing her.
Here’s what the document referred to says:-
“Scottish Government
National clinical and practice guidance for adult care homes in Scotland during the Covid-19 Pandemic
Updated 8th May 2020
Admission of non-covid-19 patients from hospital
Testing should be done within 48 hours prior to discharge from hospital. A single test is sufficient. The patient may be discharged to the care home prior to the test result being available. The patient should be isolated for 14 days from the date of discharge from hospital. Risk assessment prior to discharge from hospital, should be undertaken in conjunction with the care home.”
Someone should tell the ignorant SNP Health Minister, her boss saw fit to enact legislation to chuck elderly demented patients out of their hospital beds. Infected patients discharged to care homes have spread the virus to patients and staff.
PS -Good to see you ‘logged’ my DM comment. From todays Scottish edition our First Minister is considering my suggestions – not so different from Boris after all.
Jennifer Allan
It would appear that you have made an error in posting that “the Scottish corona virus fatality rate is slightly higher than Englands.”
It would appear that you have then compounded your error by stating that “Nicola Sturgeon has just admitted this in her latest address to the nation”
It would be nice if you could be more careful in future. Best wishes – stay alert as Bonking Boris would say.
Cubby
Can you give an example of the MSM attacking Sturgeon?
Johny Conspiranoid
Try watching the Daily briefings.
It doesn’t matter if this whole sorry matter comes to nothing which it may very well do as far as Prentice and Co. are concerned. Having criminal proceedings hanging over your head is no laughing matter. As far Mr Murray’s persecutors are concerned Mr Murray will have been well and truly ‘punished’ because ‘criminal procedure’, the whole drawn out legal procedure IS a punishment. Just like with Alex Salmond, Julian Assange and everyone else who has been tortured at the hands of the so-called criminal justice system.
@ Judge Judy
You are right. In a supposed democratic society, this represents an abuse of power.
It doesn’t matter if this whole sorry comes to nothing which it may very well do as far as Alex Prentice and Co. are concerned. Having criminal proceedings hanging over your head is no laughing matter. As far Mr Murray’s persecutors are concerned Mr Murray will have been well and truly ‘punished’ because ‘criminal procedure’, the whole drawn out legal procedure IS a punishment. Just like with Alex Salmond, Julian Assange and everyone else who has been tortured at the hands of the so-called criminal justice system.
I’ve always just come straight here as well. In fact, I don’t recall another source anywhere directing me to Mr Murray’s blog. I don’t really use Twitter of Facebook, because I regard their practices as highly unethical, and I do have a choice in the matter of using them or not, so I opt not to.
I’ve long suspected the same things of course, but I suppose the question is what can be done about this? People will continue to use these services, just as they continue to drive cars, eat meat, own land, and so on.
Robin Ramsay updates The view from the bridge to include “Craig Murray under attack”.
https://www.lobster-magazine.co.uk/free/lobster79/lob79-view-from-the-bridge.pdf
Can’t help thinking TPTB are making a tactical blunder in persecuting Craig. Still, the Woko Haram cult that occupies Bute House are so divorced from reality I doubt they can see the populist tsunami bearing down on them.
For ‘populist’ to be valid, readers of the ‘popular’ press in Scotland would have to be participant(s) in the groundswell – I’m not convinced that the footballheads and others are significantly exercised. The ‘popular’ press will continue to push the (London) establishment line and Mrs Bloggs’ wee boy Joe and his pals will buy into their misrepresentation.
As far as I am aware, there exists no poll on the internal machinations of the SNP.- Nicola versus Boris (Nippy v Dippy) seems to have more of a franchise.
Or it could be that I’ve been in lockdown for too long!
Woko Haram ;O) I may have to pinch that one. ;O)
That is genius!
What damage is this doing to Prentices reputation? It doesn’t look good to me. Does he care and if not why not?
It’s entirely possible that the person who claimed to have learned the identities from this blog did so from the comments section rather than anything Craig himself said, which perhaps is why Craig was not named but the blog was.
The UK needs their own Liberty Tree. It’s the most repressive society in the West. But I certainly hope any genuine revolution can contain the most selfish of your special interest groups.
There will never be a revolution in the Anglo-American world if they cannot contain their special interests – i.e. – the rich, the military–industrial complex, the doctors, et al.
In order for there to be a revolution in the UK, the comfy middle class would need to rise up with the lower classes, as it did in the 1793 French Revolution, of course the middle class believes in liberte, but not so much egalite, thats why they so often fail.
England had a civil war in the 1640’s, people did not want to be told how to behave by a Roman Catholic King.
If he had kept his opinions to himself, he could have kept his head.
Catholic king, Protestant king, there’s no difference in my opinion, all royalty is an affront to society.
… says a person whose passport says “citizen of the Kingdom”, while commenting on an article in which the main topic is “ her majesty’s lawyer, appointed by her majesty, wants to bring a her royal majesty’s kingdom citizen to the Crown court”
Something surreal here, er? Republicofscotland?
Charles I was not Roman Catholic.
Charles the first was Protestant but his wife was Catholic. IMO the civil war was more of a power struggle between the monarchy and the English parliament.
Feelings of your people about your monarchy, seen with the eyes of a russian person – this should be similar to the feelings of a woman in the last month of her pregnancy who is waiting for the wedding, but for some reason her lover can’t take her to the magistrate and register a marriage (circumstances are always extremely important, but never revealed).
No, he is not married, and his parents are not objecting, and the priest is ready at their service, but there is still no wedding date for one simple reason – he does not want to, and he would say that the marriage certificate is just a convention, and she should not be upset on that minor trouble.
@Tatyana – A similar point could be made about the House of Lords which still has a large hereditary component, even though a government stated its intention to abolish the hereditary principle in the upper chamber as long ago as 1911. That said, as far as I’m aware no government has ever tried to whack the Corporation of the City of London, and one wouldn’t last five minutes if it ever did. A third interesting thing to look at is the role of Lord Lieutenants of the County in the tax system, which may surprise many.
Never let it be forgotten that both the monarchy and the House of Lords *WERE* abolished in the 17th century. Unfortunately the b*stards came back. One of the first things the Stuart family did when their guy “Charles II” stole back the throne was to set up the Royal African Society and ramp up the slave trade. (Don’t expect to hear much about that on the BBC from the likes of David Starkey and other royal favourites who receive a lot of publicity in Britain as “historians”.)
“Feelings of your people about your monarchy, seen with the eyes of a russian person – this should be similar to the feelings of a woman in the last month of her pregnancy who is waiting for the wedding, but for some reason her lover can’t take her to the magistrate and register a marriage”
That soon-to-be dad is a textbook case of passive aggression 🙂
Trowbridge,
” There will never be a revolution in the Anglo-American world if they cannot contain their special interests”
Or –
Is it “There will be a revolution in the Anglo-American world because they cannot contain their special interests”.
Seriously – with the jobless numbers rising to the ceiling; the military budget uncontainable; the deficit continually climbing; the bailout monies – as in the 2008 crash – going mainly to the financial/banking sector – then how much longer can a system like this last?
We shall see.
Well that is a good question Courtenay+Barnett.
As it exists?
Not long.
IMHO.
Link to a good site about resistance: The Plague and the Fire.
The most likely scenario for a revolution in the UK is the election of a left-of-centre government followed by events as portrayed in “A Very British Coup” and then a Spanish-style civil war, probably with the same result.
Mrs Thatcher called her reversal to Victorian poverty a revolution and every subsequent government has consolidated that reversal.
After this evenings Churchillian panto, we know now who the expendable are in Tory dogma. Construction workers. They are using site workers as Guinea pigs for covid 19 experimental lifting of lockdown.
I don’t think any other group in society would comply with Johnsons orders. In fact construction workers should NOT go to work until safe practices for all workers are agreed across the board.
An unclear law is impossible to comply with.
I dont accept at all the idea that there is one rule for one group of workers and a different rule for others. Johnson should not have said anything without establishing the ground rules for social mixing at work.
That was her big lie, it was Callaghan who began the re-colonisation of the working class.
Giyane, construction is continuing at Hinkley Point C, on modernising the M4 motorway, on building Cross-Rail ( two years behind), houses still being built in my street.
“Bayard
More or less a replay of ‘The War of the Three Kingdoms’ then.
“More or less a replay of ‘The War of the Three Kingdoms’ then.”
Except the other way around, the Parliamentarians being to the left of The Royalists.
Are BoJo’s TV rants binding?
Constipating? yes
So everybody (incl. those constipated) who can’t be working from home, should return to work tomorrow.
Bj
Put it like this. If they do, they wont stay constipated for very long .
The PM’s problem is the right wing of his party and his boss in Washington’s party want the economy to restart , but the evidence of new spikes in other countries makes that impossible.
Who is going to be the guinea pig?
Not the skilled workforce whose lifetime experience is just managing to keep our Ancient infrastructure going.
Site workers are heavily regulated by Health And Safety, and they will not be conned into being the Guinea pig for the Tories just because the Tories waive these concerns away.
I took another brief look at the indictment. In my inexpert opinion, a non-lawyer who has never accomplished anything remotely comparable to earning the title Excellency in his life, sections 30-31, 34, 36, 38, 41-2, 45, 51, 53, and 63-64 could cook your goose, no matter what journalists in general might have written.
Maybe you’d better apologise to the courts and make a deal with them, while there’s time.
You keep repeating yourself.
An indication of insecurity.
M.J.
The court should apologise to Craig for wasting his time
Nobody knows or cares about who these perverters of the course of justice are. Having worked as a volunteer with probation , I was never told by the probation management what the client’s crime or charge was.
It’s frustrating that anyone could come into contact with these liars without knowing how dangerous they can be.
Did you know that the probation service has been privatised Giyane? There are such entities as Community Rehabilitation Companies. Happened under Failing Grayling.
Probation services: Part-privatised system ‘flawed
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-47728948
Even worse was this –
The future of the chief of the probation watchdog has been put into question as a fresh conflict of interest row hit Whitehall.
Paul McDowell, the chief inspector of probation, is at the centre of a row following the disclosure that his wife is the deputy managing director of a private justice company that this week won the largest number of contracts to run probation services in England and Wales.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/oct/31/paul-mcdowell-janine-probation-alleged-conflict-of-interest
Absolutely shocking that this state of affairs exists and that the Tories, whose policies these are, keep being re-elected.