I went to jail in order to expose the fact that Alex Salmond was being framed on false charges, orchestrated within the Scottish First Minister Nicola Sturgeon’s office and testified to by perjury committed by individuals very close to Sturgeon, who made fake claims of molestation. They were seen right through by a largely female jury. But the details of the defence case were reported by nobody but me, (I was jailed for it). The mainstream media, led by the BBC, conducted in unison a campaign to portray Salmond as guilty and the verdict as perverse, by presenting to the public only the prosecution case.
My reports of the actual evidence were removed from the internet by the courts.
Alex Salmond is a remarkable man. Since 1707 nobody has managed to bring Scotland closer to Independence than he. Those who tried to jail him live large on his political legacy, while cooperating with the British state to kill off the Independence movement.
Alex is now a much diminished figure. The effect of the current cultural climate is that any man accused of sexual offence, even if cleared by a jury, even if the accuser was as plainly lying as the truly evil Woman H, can never recover their reputation. There is, extraordinarily, a very serious strain of currently accepted dogma, that a woman must always be believed in such circumstances, whether she is lying or not. This is an abjuration of logic and return to medievalism.
A further strain of thought I have encountered is that nine separate accusers could not possibly have been lying. Well, it is certainly highly unlikely unless they were orchestrated and acting in concert. The evidence they were orchestrated and acting in concert is overwhelming. Much of it remains locked by the court, having been kept even from the rigged Holyrood parliamentary inquiry (and it was excluded from the Salmond trial itself by Lady Dorrian as “collateral”). I hope that my appeal to the European Court of Human Rights will cause this material finally to be produced – and enable me eventually to explain to you, in full, what actually happened in the Sturgeon conspiracy.
It will certainly be a huge relief to be able to fight the legal case away from this cesspool of corruption.
Well, Alex Salmond still battles away, now leading a fringe party. As it becomes obvious that the SNP has abandoned the Independence cause in favour of careerism (and frankly I am astonished by how many good people in the SNP are still in denial), in a year or two Alba may break through suddenly, in the way Sinn Fein took over from the Redmondites. I have joined Alba, though it is generally known I entirely disagree with its enthusiastic espousal of the anti-trans rights narrative. Please don’t discuss that issue in the comments – the entire internet is full of places you can do that.
Most of my readers are not in Scotland, a great many not in the UK. They are much puzzled as to why I went to jail over Alex Salmond. There are two points. The first is that I like to think I should have done the same for anybody who was being framed on false charges by the state, had the matter come to my attention. The second is that I have always admired Alex as the champion of the suppressed Scottish nation.
As I say, he is a much diminished figure at this moment, and here he is addressing the conference of his small party (though I believe the third in Scotland by membership) yesterday. Much of what he says is, by force of circumstance parochial, particularly in the first ten minutes. But I think there may be enough here to give some idea of why the state felt he has to be destroyed.
And why I felt obliged to try and stop them.
With grateful thanks to those who donated or subscribed to make this reporting possible. This article, as with all the content of my blog, is entirely free to reproduce and publish, including in translation.
————————————————-
Forgive me for pointing out that my ability to provide this coverage is entirely dependent on your kind voluntary subscriptions which keep this blog going. This post is free for anybody to reproduce or republish, including in translation. You are still very welcome to read without subscribing.
Unlike our adversaries including the Integrity Initiative, the 77th Brigade, Bellingcat, the Atlantic Council and hundreds of other warmongering propaganda operations, this blog has no source of state, corporate or institutional finance whatsoever. It runs entirely on voluntary subscriptions from its readers – many of whom do not necessarily agree with the every article, but welcome the alternative voice, insider information and debate.
Subscriptions to keep this blog going are gratefully received.
Choose subscription amount from dropdown box:
Paypal address for one-off donations: [email protected]
Alternatively by bank transfer or standing order:
Account name
MURRAY CJ
Account number 3 2 1 5 0 9 6 2
Sort code 6 0 – 4 0 – 0 5
IBAN GB98NWBK60400532150962
BIC NWBKGB2L
Bank address Natwest, PO Box 414, 38 Strand, London, WC2H 5JB
Bitcoin: bc1q3sdm60rshynxtvfnkhhqjn83vk3e3nyw78cjx9
Ethereum/ERC-20: 0x764a6054783e86C321Cb8208442477d24834861a
Subscriptions are still preferred to donations as I can’t run the blog without some certainty of future income, but I understand why some people prefer not to commit to that.
Dan:
when I was doing PhD fuel cell research 50 years ago, the hydrogen fuel cell was pretty well worked out but discarded as impractical. Attention turned to alternative fuels, principally methanol, ethanol, but the electrocatalytic problems proved insuperable for energy conversion, although the breathalyser fuel cell sensor is now close to its 50th birthday. Decades later the wheel turns full circle and seems to have settled for hydrogen power, with considerably more success than before…what goes around, comes around.
By degrees we seem to have strayed far from the topic!
That was an interesting post and one would endorse it . I recommend the free (online available) book by the late David McKay called ‘sustainable energy without the hot air‘. It is sobering reading.
I am slightly surprised by your ‘no matter how it’s generated’ I would have thought that Nuclear energy could be a partial option but of course the huge problems with dealing with waste make it a very difficult choice.
I agree with your comment about degrowth. We do indeed face some very difficult choices about a future for civilisation. Even very modest lifestyles fall foul of these limitations. Currently much is being made of ground source and air source heating systems but even these have limits and hardly any of the houses in this country are in a position to make the most of this technology. Ideally one requires a low temperature heating system with far better insulation than most houses are capable of tolerating or being installed economically.The cultural implications are huge.
the main problem is that most of our politicians dont even understand the issue and continue to promote Panglossian energy solutions.
simply google ‘sustainable energy without the hot air’
The nuclear “waste” is the reason for the existence of these power stations. Electricity is a byproduct which uses up the immense heat generated.
Yup,
DOE = DOD
We have a Nuclear Waste problem precisely because various governments, for the last 50 or more years, have kicked the problem down the road and not dealt with it.
“According to the UK’s Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA), the estimated cost of cleaning up the waste from 20th-century nuclear power plants currently stands at £131bn – and would take around 100 years… a vast underground storage space for waste … first suggested nearly 50 years ago … has yet to even find a viable location.”
This government wastes billions on HS2, War Mongering and useless PPE and Track and Trace and yet proposes more Nuclear but won’t fund or support waste handling – go figure.
There is no solution to the nuclear waste problem that isn’t simply kicking the can down the road and transferring the headache to future generations, apart from putting it all into rockets and sending it to the Sun.
Bayard, it is not true to claim that nuclear waste is a problem. In fact next generation ‘Fast Breeder’ & ‘Small Modular Reactors’ that can burn such so-call ‘waste’ are already supplying electricity to Russian and Chinese grids.
https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/current-and-future-generation/fast-neutron-reactors.aspx
Conventional uranium fission reactors burn up less than 5% of the energy in their uranium fuel. The so called ‘waste’ is dangerous for c300,000 years. But it can be recycled to yield the remaining 95% energy in ‘actinide’ burning ‘fast breeder’ advanced reactors such as PRISM which could simultaneously reduce the UK’s nuclear waste’ stockpile storage to a few hundred years, and recycle nuclear weapons, whilst supplying ALL the UK electricity demand for HUNDREDS of years !
https://www.theengineer.co.uk/prism-project-a-proposal-for-the-uks-problem-plutonium/
https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/PRISM-selected-for-US-test-reactor-programme
PRISM was offered to the UK government in the early 2000s by GE Hitachi with no upfront research & development or reactor power station(s) infrastructure build out costs, all profits only from wholesale electricity supply to the grid. Had regulatory and fiscal go ahead by been given 20 years ago, the UK would already have PRISM technology up and running and be leading a worldwide commercial roll-out within a decade or two.
Plutonium, a nuclear energy fuel, despite being consumed and created by ‘fast breeders’ is a practically non-existent proliferation risk: eliminating it will never prevent conscience-free non-empathic politicians exploiting other ‘weapons-of-mass-destruction’. Such as the UK and USA ‘gas-lighting’ its own politicians and the international community into tolerating theft of Middle East oil with mass murder and war crimes, whilst blocking worldwide commercial roll-outs of PRISM thereby maintaining access to half the worlds nuclear weapons controlled by the USA – who’ve not ratified the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT).
In contrast, Russia has ratified the CTBT, and its ‘fast breeders’ Beloyarsk-3 & -4 have been supplying grids with electricity at around 75 per cent capacity factors since 1981 and 2014. Its floating mass-produced ‘Small Modular Reactors’ are already powering remote mining projects with plans to build five more.
Governments such as a future potential one led by Alex Salmond’s Alba Party should establish funding programs around advanced reactor designs prototype testing and commercial deployment such as PRISM in the UK according to Interdisciplinary MIT study of the Future of Nuclear plus: Increased focus on using proven project & construction management practices; Shift away from primarily field construction of cumbersome, highly site-dependent plants to more serial manufacturing of standardized plants; Shift toward reactor designs that incorporate inherent and passive safety features; and Decarbonization policies should create a level playing field so all low-carbon generation technologies can compete on their merits.
https://energy.mit.edu/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/The-Future-of-Nuclear-Energy-in-a-Carbon-Constrained-World-Executive-Summary.pdf
The problem waste is not spent fuel, which, as you say, can be used again, but ordinary materials that become irradiated in the process of producing nuclear power.
Natasha, nuclear waste generates a massive problem for all countries that produce it. Aside from the energy released, burning nuclear waste in fast breeder reactors just gives you a lot more high-level nuclear waste, in the form of highly radioactive fission products like strontium-90 & caesium-137 etc.
“Ideally one requires a low temperature heating system with far better insulation than most houses are capable of tolerating or being installed economically.”
Or, much simpler, just live at a lower temperature.
Millions of people already do, soon to be joined by millions more.
Nuclear waste can be eliminated by burning it as fuel in 5th generation reactors, currently suppressed by ecoloons. Look it up.
What can possibly go wrong?
Thorium reactors, as being developed by China, will be the future of nuclear/electric power generation. Which is why the West is frantically rushing into a new wave of old style nuclear reactors – of course.
Craig – good on you and hope we get the truth out there. It’s good to see someone has outstanding integrity, which seems to be in short supply these days. What you have done is much appreciated, I’m sure by many other than myself. More power to you.
But for others there is an attempt to silence.
Labour staff ‘gagged’ over sexual harassment claims (BBC News, 2 Apr 2022)
“Laura Murray and Georgie Robertson refused to sign the legal agreements and chose to resign without payouts”
– people with integrity.
Sturgeon the betrayers indy carrot now being dangled just that little bit closer, expect it to get even closer as the council elections get closer.
Don’t buy into this shite yet again: vote Alba, and help remove some of the careerist SNP troughing councillors in Scotland.
“The bill laying the path for a second Scottish independence referendum will not be put before Holyrood ahead of the local elections, according to a new report.”
https://12ft.io/proxy?q=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thenational.scot%2Fnews%2F20040430.scottish-independence-referendum-no-holyrood-bill-local-elections%2F
I can’t help but think that Sturgeon is hopelessly compromised by her performance on Scottish independence. Even if she waived the independence carrot at this stage, would anyone wishing for independence trust her with their vote? I doubt it.
Given the timescale and what we all know (or at least suspect) about Nicola Sturgeon and the SNP, then any independence referendum in the near future is designed to fail and remove the independence question from the table for at least a generation and this time, it’ll be a real generation. An independence referendum in 2023 is a trap into which the gullible will fall.
I think the best thing for Scotland right now is NOT to have an independence referendum, at least whilst the current leadership and MSP are in place.
I believe you are correct for Surgeon to do such a thing is now and not five or six years ago is lunacy ,, Her raison d’être was never independence , to have one now buts independence back another ten years in addition to the the damage time she has already created.
If Sturgeon SNP had done the SF thing of not entering Westminster . Scotland would have been in a better position to-day.
Sturgeon is not a clever person, She might have gone to university,But then look at the SNP minister Thick as …….Well you know
Until a Sturgeon loyalist says something……….That lot are going to sit on the leather benches and collect a serious lot of money
I did look a while ago at what SF did money wise………They took a cut . . . . .Can anyone see the SNP doing that ?
I don’t agree with everything you write Craig but you are a brave and principled man and we all owe you a huge debt for what you did and sacrificed. Thank you. As bad as things are in Scotland they would have been considerably worse without your actions. You made a huge difference.
Back tae topic, Sunday Mail front-page headline, the Crown Office has instructed a QC to investigate claims initiated by Alex’s lawyers of perjury by a witness (presumably H). Why a QC and not Polis Scotland?
A widnea haud yer breath. H may be expendable but Dorrian must be protected at all costs.
A widnae go asking why (under Dorrian’s supervision) Polis Scotland were able to provide a pre-recorded witness statement from the mystery actor by Skype, but weren’y able to provide a live Skype feed that would’ve allowed cross examination.
Cross examination would have exposed H as an unquestionable perjurer. Dorrian made sure that didnae happen.
It appears that events in Scotland may overtake Craig’s appeal to the European Court of Justice. I am not going to lie. I would ‘relish’ seeing these perjurers being sent down for a long time. Justice MUST be served. Real justice and not the Lady Dorrian variety. Craig Murray MUST be vindicated (and compensated).
the article contains a link to
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2020/03/the-alex-salmond-trial-your-man-excluded-from-the-gallery/
which gives me
Ooops, page not found
—
[ Mod: That’s because the article was removed from publication under orders of the court. ]
Mod: thanks for the info. Are the said orders of the court available for people such as me to peruse? Does it (purport to) have effect outside Scotland? Does it prohibit me from publicising where the article can today be found on the internet? Does it prohibit me from reposting the article on my own website? (Etc, etc)
You can read the Scotsman article concerning the Spectator’s legal challenge to the wording of the order here.
There were discussions about publishing outside Scotland earlier in this thread here and here.
If you post a deleted article on the internet, the article would be regarded as published worldwide and Craig would be still be the author. Moreover, you would be publishing his work without his consent. Before venturing into an area beset with legal technicalities, you’d be well advised to appoint your own lawyer.
Please note that it isn’t the job of moderators to answer readers’ legal queries, though we do have an onus to keep the discussion within legally prudent limits. Accordingly, any further questions of a similar nature will be removed without notification or response.
In my post, the part directed to the moderator was the thanks for previous information.
(I would normally, but in this case won’t, say anything similar about your latest post.)
The question about what the court actually ordered is directed to anyone interested in replying.
Re lack of consent, the article in question invites republication.
And in any event, the facilities that save articles like this one don’t ask permission, as I’m pretty sure they are automated.
In any case, please don’t treat any further post of mine as asking you a legal query.
“Re lack of consent, the article in question invites republication.”
That statement is incorrect in the present tense. Under the legal circumstances, it should be obvious that consent to republish was withdrawn along with the articles.
this is a reply to mods-cm-org whose latest post doesn’t show a Reply button:
Richard Stallman (Free Software Foundation) thinks that such permission, once granted, can’t be revoked.
Or at least he did, about 20-25 years ago. I thought (without real certainty) he was wrong. He didn’t give me any legal reasoning other than an assertion that makes no sense in relation to Australian copyright law (I’ve no idea about any other country).
But when copies of the article are available on the internet, with a statement granting permission to republish,
withdrawing such permission is pretty much closing the stable door after the horse has bolted.
The clause “Under the legal circumstances” is significant here. This is not simply a matter of copyright, but of contempt of court. You would be well advised to seek proper legal advice.
Well, some of what I said is just as relevant to contempt of
court as it is to withdrawing consent. Like that the websites,
like archive.ph or the wayback machine, which archive web pages,
don’t ask about contempt of court or consent before they archive
stuff. And that talking about contempt of court or consent is
shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted.
I won’t be getting legal advice, but thanks for the suggestion.
Reason (1) – if the advice is consistent with the judgment in Craig’s
case, then it’s silly (I’ll elaborate on this in my own article)
Reason (2) – people can look at stuff as it originally appeared on
Craig’s website easily enough, they just need to figure out roughly
what the URL would look like, they don’t need me to repost it or
to tell them where it is.
This is a fascinating story, as others have discovered one or two
years ago. I find I have an awful lot to say about the judgment
convicting Craig, some of it too derogatory to ask a Scot to allow
it onto his website. Also, it looks like being far too long to go
as a comment on someone else’s website. So when it’s written I’ll
post it on my own.
I just mention here one interesting thing which I will write about.
That is, that I first identified one complainant as a result of
reading the judgment. Several obvious comments follow from that!
And, amazingly, the most significant relevant bit of the judgment
was something which, in the view of the judges, was NOT identifying.
That is, the judges got it wrong, too.
My own article – after a rather long gestation period, made longer by the appearance of the nobile officium appeal judgment while I was writing it – is now online at
http://users.cecs.anu.edu.au/~jeremy/legal/cm-contempt.html
comments – from anyone game to wade through it! – welcome
My own article – slightly updated – now has a new home at
https://jeremydaw.github.io/pages/legal/cm-contempt.html
Can you link to the entire internet pages where the trans issue is being discussed with as much sense as (other) things are discussed within these pages! Confining my remark to this, so as not to go against request that not be discussed here, but there must be a space other than Twitter that I haven’t yet found!
Re Polish anti-Semitism, here is my story. In 1994 we were hiking up Longs Peak in Colorado. This is a popular hike, so quite a few people were around. One guy overheard us talking in Russian and started a friendly chat with me. He was from Poland, a former member of the Solidarity movement, and now a refugee in the USA. The 1st question he asked me was if I was Jewish. I told him I was as pure Russian as he could imagine, and he was relieved. He went on a long rant about Jews, how they rule the America, how the Jews from the former USSR get everything for free but he was given nothing but the green card and had to cut lumber for 2 years etc etc. Quite a character.
Also, check the latest stats on the demography of Poland. They are remarkably homogeneous nation: almost 97% of Polish citizens are ethnic Poles! I wonder what happened to everybody else who used to live there? Germans, Jews, Byelorussians, Ukrainians?…