After a two year process, the NUJ Executive have finally rejected the renewal of my NUJ membership based on social media posts I allegedly made which they refuse to show me and of content and subject of which I genuinely have not a clue.
But apparently these social media posts make me not a fit and proper person to be a member of the NUJ.
Murdoch employees are fit and proper persons. The Guardian journalists who produced the front page of lies about Manafort meeting Assange are fit and proper persons. The security service mouthpieces at the BBC are fit and proper persons.
The NUJ even accepts for membership copywriters for corporations working in PR companies. All these people are fine.
But I am not a fit and proper person because of some things I allegedly said on social media, which I am not allowed to see or to explain.
I am also not a fit and proper person because I published the NUJ’s incredibly deceitful handling of my renewal application, when apparently the NUJ believes it should have been secret (why?).
Finally I have failed to produce evidence of my income from journalism. I provided them with a download from Paypal of my monthly subscription totals. Apparently this was not sufficient, but they refuse to say what would be sufficient.
I have appealed against the decision, but given it is plainly politically motivated I do not expect much joy. There appears to be a universal effort across the political establishment to deplatform and isolate anybody who queries official narratives. Given that mainstream media are such a large part of that, it is perhaps not as surprising as it should be to find the National Union of Journalists an enthusiastic part of the process.
I hardly dare to imagine the long-suffering readers of this blog would support yet another legal case, but in the New Year we may need to try.
Craig Murray
Edinburgh
18 December 2022
Thank you for your email of 18 November informing me that my application for renewal of my NUJ membership has been refused, on the grounds that I am not a fit and proper person to be a member, and that I have not provided sufficient evidence of income from journalism.
I wish to appeal this decision.
Point 1 – The Evidence Against Me
The first test of natural justice has been failed by the NUJ. I have no idea at all what are the social media posts and correspondence which you state render me not a fit and proper person to renew my NUJ membership.
I have never seen these. You have never put them to me. I have been given no chance to check if they are genuine nor to explain their context. There are two sides to every story and you have made no attempt at all to hear my side.
I have been very active on social media for 15 years and I have never been suspended nor, to my knowledge, reported for inappropriate content. I genuinely have no idea what you are talking about.
I believe the “fit and proper person test” may here be being used as a tool for an exclusion actually based on difference of political opinion.
I am myself continually subject to unprovoked attacks on social media by mainstream media journalists, many of whom I presume will be members of the NUJ. One that I know is a member is Mr David Leask, because you name him as one of the complainers against me.
Here is a link to just Mr Leask’s latest unprovoked rant against me on twitter, in which he casts aspersions on my linguistic skills for no other reason than to malign me (in fact I passed the FCO’s extremely difficult operational level exams in both Polish and Russian).
https://twitter.com/LeaskyHT/status/1598771344891486209
I am really not certain why Mr Leask remains a fit and proper person if he attacks my output, but it makes me not a fit and proper person if I attack his? I should be grateful for an explanation on this point. To be plain, I see no reason why sharp disagrrement should bar either of us from the NUJ.
I am equally often subject to unprovoked attack by mainstream media journalists in their publications. Here is a link to one one by Mr Paul Hutcheson of the Daily Record, in which he published a photo of my home next to an article inciting against me, and put me in fear for the safety of my wife and infant children.
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/alex-salmond-blogger-trial-high-21789285
It is highly probable that either Mr Hutcheson or some of the editorial chain who approved doing this to me are members of the NUJ. Why does that behaviour not call into question their fit and proper person status, and how is my alleged behaviour – and I still do not know what it is – worse than that?
Again, that is not rhetorical, it is a question to which I should like to see an answer.
Point 2 – Proper Procedure Wilfully Ignored
The NUJ rulebook is perfectly plain that when an application is received, it should be sent to the applicant’s own branch or chapter for comment by members.
This rule was breached in my case. My own branch, Edinburgh Freelance, has still never had sight of my application, plainly contrary to the rulebook. I was a member for three years quite happily, with zero friction or adverse comment.
Instead what happened was that NUJ officials politically hostile to me circulated my application for comment, not to my own branch as the rules dictate, but only to a secret selected cabal of colleagues of similar political persuasion, in order to generate objections.
The chronology is important here – objections were generated before I published the fact of my application.
Point 3 – Publicising My Application
When an organisation is behaving deviously, maliciously and not in accordance with its own rules, it is of the essence of good journalism to publish it – even when that organisation is the NUJ.
I can see no reason at all why a NUJ membership renewal application should be secret if the applicant does not wish it to be. To claim my publicising the NUJ’s extraordinary handling of my application, as in itself evidence I am not a fit and proper person to be an NUJ member, is self-serving nonsense of a particularly devious kind.
Point 4 – Earnings From Journalism
I am really at a loss here. I do get more than 50% of my income from journalism, from subscriptions and donations to my blog. I have provided you with a printout from Paypal showing a year’s monthly subscriptions.
In response your membership department stated that you need to see payment per article, rather than payment by subscription. Is it really the case that journalists in new media who receive their income by subscribers are excluded from NUJ membership? If so, what is the legal basis for excluding this particular method of payment? It is the most common form of new media operation.
My last letter to your membership department specifically asked what further evidence was required, and volunteered to pay my membership fees based on gross subscription income rather than net if that were easier.
I never did receive any reply to my offer to provide whatever proof you need, provided it is also what is asked of others. To simply state I have failed to satisfy, while refusing to advise what would satisfy, is yet further evidence this has been a politically motivated process aimed at justifying refusing renewal.
Point 5 – The Purpose of the NUJ
The NUJ does not exist purely to provide those with comfortable berths in corporate media, the BBC or PR firms with their press cards, It has a particular responsibility to support journalists with views that are disliked by the political establishment, and to uphold their freedom of speech.
The sub-committee agreed that my output of articles does meet the criterion of journalism. I therefore have a right to join the union. The “fit and proper person test” is not meant to exclude people some members dislike or disagree with.
To pretend that I am in any way more aggressive in dialogue with those members objecting than they are with me is a fake made possible only by the outrageous device of the sub-committee never putting the allegations and evidence to me.
Point 6 – Health
It is true that very occasionally I have made social media posts I subsequently regret. I generally apologise very quickly. It is fairly widely known that I have been diagnosed bipolar my whole adult life, and can therefore sometimes be intemperate. That puts me in a class the NUJ should particularly seek to protect. It may well be relevant to the evidence before the committee – I do not know as I was not shown it. Nor was I given the chance to make this, nor any other, point to the sub-committee.
Point 7 – Late Appeal
I hope you will accept this appeal which is just beyond the 28 day cut-off point due entirely to force majeure. My laptop was stolen two weeks ago while on a month long tour of Germany, Austria, Slovenia and France with the Don’t Extradite Assange Campaign – a cause the NUJ supports.
I lost my draft reply to you when my laptop was stolen. Astonishingly, five days later my replacement laptop was also stolen in extraordinary circumstances. At that point I also lost access to my email accounts, including your email and the sub-committee report. I only recovered the material on return home this weekend .
May I conclude by wishing all the best to you and yours in this the festive season.
Yours,
Craig J Murray
Journalist
————————————–
Dear Mr Murray,
Further to you application for membership of the NUJ I wish to advise that the application was considered directly by the National Executive Council in accordance with Rule 3 (b) of the union’s rules.
At a meeting on Friday 11th November the NEC accepted the report of the panel set up to consider your application.
The panel found that you do not meet the membership criteria in relation to proven earnings from journalism.
The committee also considers objections to the application based on published material in the public domain and your conduct towards NUJ members.
The NEC accepted the recommendation that:
you should be considered not a fit and proper person to be a member of the NUJ within the context of Rule 3 of the NUJ Rule Book, specifically the NUJ Code of Conduct and the obligation under Membership Responsibilities.
If you wish to appeal the determination to the Appeals Tribunal you may do so in writing within 28 working days of the decision.
Please address your appeal to the General Secretary by email to [email protected]
For reference I attach a copy of the report to the NEC.
Membership Application: Craig Murray
Background: The NEC appointed a subcommittee to consider the membership application of Craig Murray comprising the Honorary General Treasurer, the Chair of Finance Committee, and the NUJ Vice President. The committee held two meetings and reviewed substantial material relating to the application.
Mr Murray’s previous application, in March 2020 was the subject of a number of objections. It was not processed because the application form was not complete, in accordance with the NUJ Rule Book.
Context: Mr Murray applied for membership on 5th March 2020. In May 2020, the General Secretary appointed the Assistant General Secretary (AGS) to carry out a preliminary investigation into objections to Mr Murray’s application.
Two objectors confirmed that they wished to proceed with their objection in accordance with the provisions of Rule 3 (iii): Chris Diamond and David Leask.
A third applicant had confirmed that they wished to proceed with their objection but
following the decision of the applicant to publish details of private correspondence between himself and the AGS, and the comments made by the applicant in his post and subsequent comments on his social media blog, the third complainant advised the AGS that he wished to request anonymity due to the perceived risk of social media abuse.
Two other members sought to raise objections but requested anonymity.
The objectors raised concerns that their objections and personal details could be posted on social media and that they may be the subject of online abuse or harassment.
An NEC panel was established to review the applications and to consider the complaint.
Since the application did not meet the membership criteria the complaints were moot and not considered at that time.
It was recommended that the complaints be noted and, in the event of a future application by Mr Murray would be considered by the NEC.
New application: A fresh application by Mr Murray was received in February 2022. The application was referred directly to the NEC.
The NEC established a sub committee comprising of the Vice President, Chair of Finance and Hon Gen Treasurer.
The subcommittee considered a significant volume of correspondence between Mr Murray and the Membership Department relating to his application.
The committee also noted correspondence from third parties relating to the application.
It was also obliged to consider previous objections.
The subcommittee was satisfied that, subject to proof of income, Mr Murray would satisfy the requirement for membership in terms of membership criteria.
Mr Murray did not provide sufficient information regarding his earnings from journalism to satisfy the panel as to his entitlement to full membership. On that basis Mr Murray was deemed ineligible for membership.
The subcommittee then reviewed the objections to the original application and the material cited in the complaints, including social media posts and Mr Murray’s blog.
The committee noted with concern Mr Murray’s behaviour towards NUJ members and office holders.
The subcommittee viewed his behaviour towards NUJ members as being inconsistent with the NUJ Membership Responsibilities and the NUJ Code of Conduct.
The committee felt that those who sought anonymity were justified in doing so, given Mr Murray’s published comments and his decision to publish correspondence relating to the investigation while the process was underway.
The committee recommends to the NEC that Mr Murray is not a fit and proper person to be a member of the NUJ within the context of Rule 3 of the NUJ Rule Book.
November 11, 2022
Yours sincerely
Jackie Clark
Head of Finance and Membership
It perhaps goes without saying that this fight to keep alternative media going in face of universal onslaught really does need your financial support, no matter how small your contribution. My work 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.
Go Murray.
Is there a specific fund for this or is it all fungible?
I haven’t decided to do it yet! Need to talk to the lawyers about my rights under the Trade Union Act. If we do go for it there will be a specific legal fund set up, but in addition much of the subscription income to this site ends up in legal costs anyway – it’s the biggest expense.
Craig, May I humbly suggest you put your efforts, skills, excellent reputation, funds and breadth of career and other experience into setting up another Trade Union under the relevant UK legislation, which (I haven’t checked) ought to afford you whatever benefits you are seeking from NUJ membership, from the new union you set up – unless the existing UK enabling legislation only allows for a single union to be set up?
Also, ‘National’ = UK, which somewhat appears to be in conflict with / may be antagonistic to support for Scottish independence campaigning i.e. post independence, would the NUJ remain open to Scottish citizens? Indeed would any newly set up trades union competitor to the NUJ set up pre-independence under existing UK law remain ‘constitutional’ in a post-independence Scotland?
Meanwhile I am sure there are plenty of independent digital / new media journalists / publishers who would want to join – if such a new journalists’ Trade Union was set up appropriately.
Thanks to Natasha, she voices my thoughts on this topic.
Mr. Murray, even though I’m still angry with you as a person, I still have immense respect for what you do.
I want to say, it’s time for you to admit that you are a journalist independent to such an extent that you can hardly fit into any of the existing unions. Especially to the unions with the definition of “National’, because this would involuntarily force you to (as if) to express views of the whole nation.
As far as I’m aware, you mostly doubt “the views of the nation”. And, at the current moment, the “views of your nation” are formed according to principles that are unacceptable to you.
Can’t beat them, lead them.
Natasha, the problem with that is the NUJ can simply be designated the sole accrediting body. If you are not a member of the NUJ, you are not, in the eyes of the law, a journalist and so not entitled to the protections that the law offers journalists.
The NUJ is a British entity, I believe ? That would imply that the majority of journalists worldwide are not members. I assume there are other nations and organisations who might welcome Mr Murray.
Bayard, do you have references to what law(s) specify the NUJ is the sole union that can extend legal and other protection(s) to ‘journalists’ in the UK who are UK citizens?
A few minutes research finds that (at least) one other UK journalists’ trade union already exists – the ‘Society of Editors’ – which appears at first glance to offer accreditation and protections similar to NUJ. “The Society of Editors has nearly 400 members, including editors, managing editors, editorial directors, training editors, editors-in-chief and deputy editors in national, regional and local newspapers, magazines, radio, television and digital media, media lawyers and academics in journalism education.”
https://www.societyofeditors.org/join/
Plus there’s a UK government process underway tasked with protecting journalists that specifically mentions the NUJ and the ‘Society of Editors’ together six times as if they were equal bodies.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-action-plan-for-the-safety-of-journalists/national-action-plan-for-the-safety-of-journalists#introduction
Since Craig works alone it would appear that he is thus axiomatically his own ‘editor’ so perhaps he could apply to join the ‘Society of Editors’ instead of (or in spite of) the NUJ and save a lot of hassle setting up (yet) another trades union or needlessly having to endure huge stress fighting the NUJ – which I am sure is their primary aim in rejecting his application, so he’s distracted from concentrating on his excellent work as a journalist.
Bayard: “the NUJ can simply be designated the sole accrediting body. If you are not a member of the NUJ, you are not, in the eyes of the law, a journalist and so not entitled to the protections that the law offers journalists.”
Is that so? Forgive me for being wary of confident assertions which demonstrate no command of the relevant facts. A quick web search shows that in fact the sole authority for issuing press cards in the UK is called (appropriately enough) the UK Press Card Authority, and the NUJ is one its many “gatekeeper” member organisations who validate applications. There are alternative trade societies for journalists and related professions, as well as the mainstream news media.
The full list of validating organisations is: British Association of Journalists (BAJ); BBC Press Cards; Broadcasting, Entertainment, Communications and Theatre Union (BECTU); British Forces Broadcasting Service (BFBS); British Press Photographers’ Association (BPPA); Channel 4; Chartered Institute of Journalists (CIOJ); Council of Photographic News Agencies (CPNA); Event & Visual Communication Association (EVCOM); Foreign Press Association (FPA); GB News; The Guild of Television Camera Professionals (GTC); ITN Ltd; ITV PLC; Local TV Network; National Association of Press Agencies (NAPA); News Media Association (NMA); National Union of Journalists (NUJ); Professional Publishers Association (PPA); Thomson Reuters; Sky News.
Mr Murray might have a chance of getting validated as a journalist by the BAJ, the CIOJ or one of the more general umbrella groups – although going so public about his rejection by the NUJ may prejudice their consideration of any application he makes from now on. Maybe written testimonials from other established journalists (such as Peter Oborne) could help to grease the wheels a bit.
Natasha, Dawg, when I wrote “the NUJ can simply be designated the sole accrediting body”, I meant just that, that it is possible for the state to designate the NUJ as the sole accrediting body. I did not mean, nor do the words imply, that it already is.
Dawg: thanks for the link to the UK Press Card Authority. 2 things stand out:
One. “Yje rules of the UK Press Card scheme and the criteria for holding the card.”
which is about the standard of many online articles these days – even though a common touch typing yu[p.
Two: “It is wholly owned and collectively controlled by the UK’s major media organisations, industry associations, trades unions, and professional associations. The scheme is managed through 19 gatekeepers.”
Where there’s brass, there’s muck.
Basically speaking, online media needs to set up its own organisation and repeatedly apply to become a “gatekeeper”.
Why does the law offer protection to journalists that it does not offer to all citizens?
Methinks any lawyers you may talk to, Craig, would be only to pleased to have you paying them handsomely to effectively tilt at windmills chasing unaffectionate recognition by a thoroughly discredited trade union that surely one so evidently wronged by them would not want to be a current member of.
As more and more folk realise the papers and media outlets such journalists write and present for are no more than corrupt and criminally bought propaganda channels with adulterated comics introducing and sustaining cartoon characters of limited intellect and similarly defective professional work ethic, the less likelihood it is that they will future bought or read to further deceive and misinform one. Even now they struggle to generate income and profit to survive and prosper as media moguls of old formerly did with very few knowing the honest truth of what they were actually doing.
It is not as if nowadays there is not more vibrant and exciting new news to engage with and export with others to multiple myriad exotic places and venerable and venereal virtual spaces elsewhere, is it?
Such has never ever been made simpler.
There appears to be a need for an alternative union for real journalists like yourself. Forget about the corrupt self serving NUJ and start over with like minded colleagues.
Good luck in the future and Happy Christmas to you and your family
British “journalists” are some of the worst I’ve encountered globally. Journalists in Africa and India are usually more literate and articulate. Even the corporate shills in the US have moments of candour. British journalists are generally not fit for purpose. Anyone watching the deafening silences and coordinated howling from the bleachers on matters of fundamental importance such as the Skripal tales, the Assange saga and, more than anything else, the orchestral smear campaign against Corbyn, cannot avoid reaching the conclusion that the bulk of British journos are “unfit and improper”. They are unswervingly represented by the NUJ, which leads inevitably to certain conclusions, among them that you will never be accepted as a fit and proper member of that club until you yourself are unfit and improper. Besides, even the Masons would be more interesting and better connected.
Effectively, Craig is not a fit and proper person to be a part of a not fit and proper union.
A case of not willing to be part of a club which accepts your membership should be applied.
Personally, I feel that Craig’s journalism is incredibly informative.
You are either a journalist or you are not a journalist.
Same goes for a doctor, a nurse, a solicitor or a joiner. Income is not as far as I am aware not a criteria for any profession.
The whole thing is a stich up. Just like Alex Salmond’s attempted prosecution was a stich up. Like Mark Hirst’s charges that were too an attempted stich up. Like the arrest some years back of Wings Over Scotland’s Stu Campbell on unfounded allegations of intimidation. The malign influence of the state, the deep state that influences police, prosecution, the MSM and the state that tries to take down media it does not like.
The UK is a brutal authoritarian and corrupt state that likes to kid on that it smells of rose petals. It sells of shite. It s the same country that only last year paid millions to innocent Kenyan’s tortured and brutalised by the British military. Completely innocent one particular trick was to cut testicles off with pliers. The millions in compensation paid to over 5,000 Kenyans now very old men is in truth little compensation far too late. But the British had similar tricks in many of their other colonies. Aden, Cyprus and on our doorstep Northern Ireland. They don’t call NI the Dirty War for nothing.
So a little undermining or political assassination or political incarceration is neither here nor their. Ultimately the Brits will kill, gouge your eyes out, cut off testicles, slit your throat, fund death squads. It was what they do. They are evil vicious bastards and the gentle flowers of our community need to know so.
Scotland is a colony. people like Salmond, Hirst, Murray or whoever are the Brit colonists enemy. Control of the people, the undermined nationhood, the false narratives peddled by the MSM, is all in place. Of course Craig Murray is not a journalist, God only knows what he is. He is an enemy of the Great British public and we should know it.
Oh and if folks want to know more they should read people like David Leask and Paul Hutcheon in the howling remorseless diatribes against Craig Murray. As political prostitutes in the pay of the State, they just about do hand stands and tumbles trying to undermine Craig Murray. All part of the propaganda war folks.
Mind and stay warm in your folks now though folks. Turn the heating up and dance. Every one should be warm. Can’t think why not.
Bill Binney, Seth Rich, The Twitter Files, The FBI and Russia Gate. More on the Forum…_
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/forums/topic/bill-binney-concerns/
It’s official – Martin Lewis did a Twitter Poll (Today): Do you believe mainstream broadcast news is biased?
It is not biased 17%
It is biased to the left 28%
It is biased to the right 47%
It is biased to the centre 8%
It is a shame that the “It is biased” category was split, particularly as the bias is towards what the elite want to push which can be left, right or centre depending on the subject matter.
Absolutely disgraceful. Effectively holding secret courts, with secret evidence and witnesses, handing out unjustified verdicts – precisely the sort of thing journalists are supposed to get to the bottom of, and practices journalists should expose in a rotten institution.
These people have no business calling themselves a Union. They act more as a cabal.
To be blunt about it you’d think they’d want you inside the tent peeing out rather than outside the tent peeing in. Obviously not about standards, proof of earnings. Very obviously a political decision which seems to stand against everything that the NUJ are supposedly for..
What’s to say? That you are not told what you did wrong says it all. Kafka’s The Trial fits, except what is going on is clear.
I have a book on quantum electrodynamics by Julian Schwinger. It starts with a message: “If you can’t join them, beat them”.
I don’t need to see things the way you do, but I know you are a good man in the fullest sense; I always get new insights from reading your work. I will support as much as I can. If we don’t push back now we will all be suffocated. You are certainly not alone.
Background: The NEC appointed a subcommittee to consider the membership application of Craig Murray comprising the Honorary General Treasurer, the Chair of Finance Committee, and the NUJ Vice President. The committee held two meetings and *** reviewed substantial material relating to the application. ***
——————————————-
See phrase between the added asterisks. Apologies if I’ve missed this in a previous instalment of the saga but you have put in a Subject Access Request to the NUJ, haven’t you…? Clearly a whole heap of personal data has been amassed in the union’s hands.
Just carry on being an honest citizen-journalist, Craig. Why would you really need the imprimatur of the National Union of Mediawhores? Sure, being a NUMW member might have a bit of strategic use, but the attempt to silence dissident comment will continue amongst the censors, even so. Just do without the membership, In the long run, it won’t make much difference.
Despite some early-life experience in hacking, I never applied for membership of the NUMW; and I’d be inclined to keep quiet about belonging to such a shameful organisation if I had done so.
When you reflect on the people who compose His Majesty’s 4th Estate it’s pretty easy to visualise the kind of ‘executives’ who are running this union. I’d hazard a guess that they would fit snugly into the category of most dishonest, amoral humans in the country.
With the greatest of respect Craig, they cannot have the likes of you, showing the uneducated masses, the truth!
The powderpuff NUJ is a MI5 construct.
It’s amazing what … enough…. thick brown envelopes can buy!
More union members, like sir Bill Sirs, for peerages and seats in the lords?
Keep fighting….. we ….. humanity …. needs the likes of you, to know, we aren’t lost.
Mr Murray, once again, you’ve entered a Kafkaesque world.
The aspect that is most laughable is the NUJ’s “finding” (without allowing your rebuttal) that you’re an unfit person to be a member. Not that I’d wish to shower plaudits on the rag ‘Private Eye’ which is as much a member of ‘the Establishment’ as the intelligence agencies, but its ‘Street of Shame’ section publishes, in great detail sometimes, conduct from journalists, editors and others, undoubtedly members of the NUJ, which would be more at home in a post-match rugby drinking scrum down the pub.
As Tatyana (and others) have suggested, consider starting your own union rather than seeking to join what has become one of the most reactionary (and that’s saying something) of unions. I’m sure there are many other journalists who’d join it rather then staying in a union which arselicks the establishment and has lost all principles that led to its formation. I’ve made a small donation as funds are low at present.
If the great British public don’t see how sinister this all is now, by the time they do see it, it’ll be too late!
“you’ve entered a Kafkaesque world”
The colonial environment is described as “a Manichaeism world” (Fanon), in which the institutions are all colonial in nature, their main goal being to protect at all times the interests of the colonizer, especially when “colonialism is imperilled” (Memmi).
Lady Dorian is a state employee. She made it clear that the Journalists of the national newspapers and broadcasters are protected, They are seen as patriots. They print what the state wants printed. Holding power to account is a fairy story. Look at the nonsense written in the MSM about the various wars we have been involved in recently.
You are not viewed in the same light by the state. Nor by the NUJ.
We live in a crazy world where you have something like 60 Members of Parliament writing to the Sun Newspaper’s editor asking her to take action against Clarkson. She is the editor; she printed the story. The MP’s must know this.
I think that if the opportunity to take on the NUJ is there, then you should see if you can raise the funds to do so. I have not previously contributed to your campaigns but I would make a modest contribution to this one as I think you may win. I wonder if Cook or Pilger are NUJ journalists. The way that Cook calls out Monbiot, a member of the NUJ, is extremely impressive.
The USAF is training hard over South Norfolk for the last two hours of luttle cloudcover over here.
Its Incessant, manassing dog f8ght8ng. Now and then they appear between clouds and you can see their manouvers.
I wish’ed they drop out of the sky.
You should try Spike Milligan’s anti-aircraft curse, “F*ck off, you noisy bastard, I hope you crash”. He claims it worked for him.
i wouldn’t join a club that would have me….comes to mind.
Nor would I 🙂
Haven’t read this all through yet, took a detour for the Leask thread and – him complaining about the way a Russian word is represented in English! Eh? He should check out “glasnosc”, and force google to lookup that spelling, not the more usual one. Note my use of the word “lookup”, rather than “look up”. On a similar vein, perhaps he complains that when people say “Munich”, they should pronounce that “ch” as in “loch” rather than as in “lock”. Hint: that’s not what a German calls their city anyway. Ho hum.
On a similar note, I prefer if someone says “I ate them apples wot grew in me uncle’s garden last year”, to “I ate those apples”, as the first version tells you where and even when the apples came from. Note my transliteration of the spoken “wot” into the written “wot”, though the person didn’t actually spell “wot” out loud..Ho hum indeed.
Incidentally, since I worked there for a time I was pretty fluent in German. So much so that the people of Schwabia thought I was Dutch. Yes, Netherlandish if you want to be incorrectly pedantic. Swabia? Where’s that?
It’s in Schwaben of course, while Munich, i.e. Muenchen, have not found the ” for the u to spell it as it is [München], is the capital of Bayern, Bavaria.
It’s always interesting of which placenames we are allowed to have and use our own version and of which we are told to use the locals’ version.
Embarrassing by the NUJ but not in any way surprising. I imagine their Executive has been owned for decades.
Is that Executive likely to contain even one impartial, good faith adjudicator? It’s an industry committed to demonizing and silencing heretics and dissenters unfortunately, not protecting and elevating them. Look at the silence on the stitching up of Salmond and all the injustices within Starmer’s Labour Party. And that’s only small beer. It doesn’t matter how grave the issue is, British journalists will black it out it if it jeopardizes the perception of reality they want to foster among the public. Does it get any more serious than their government blowing up the gas pipelines of a nuclear power? Or the further evidence the US security state murdered one of America’s most beloved presidents? In the collective eye of British journalism these are not fit and proper news stories to which the public should be exposed. Do not expect anything from this crowd or their union.
We now know also that the CIA and the Pentagon were behind the ousting of President Nixon.
In early 1972, the CIA had planned to assassinate Nixon but it was abandoned because the assassin, Edwin Kaiser, did not agree that he should be assassinated.
Frank Sturgis of the CIA, one of the Watergate burglars, confirmed the assassination plans in an interview with Bill O’ Reilly in 1977.
Nixon suspected that Lyndon Johnson was in charge of the JFK assassination. Jack Ruby had been introduced to Congressman Nixon back in 1947 as ‘one of Lyndon Johnson’s boys’. He saw that as link between LBJ and the JFK assassination.
Nixon was right about this.
Hope you find this useful.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MMjnvd9fssU
More topical.
Peruvian President Pedro Castillo. Removed and jailed for 18 months, triggering waves of street protests and diplomatic condemnation from neighbouring leftist-led Central and S.American countries. Peru’s congress is notoriously corrupt and basically rejected peasant farmer Castillo before he’d even won the Presidency.
Peru coup: CIA agent turned U.S. ambassador met with defense minister day before president overthrown.
https://mronline.org/2022/12/18/peru-coup/
Mexico (the second-most populous country in Latin America)
Colombia (the third-most populous country)
Argentina (the fourth-most populous)
Venezuela (the sixth-most populous)
Bolivia
Nicaragua
Honduras
Cuba
Antigua and Barbuda
Dominica
Grenada
Saint Kitts and Nevis
Saint Lucia
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines
….have all condemned the coup and expressed support for Peru’s jailed President Castillo. While the US and Canada have shown strong support for the unelected coup regime.
A similar chain of events occurred in Pakistan.
And they talk about meddling. Some only respect democracy insomuch as they agree with the results, reserving the right to interfere if they don’t.
As Tom Lehrer put it, sixty years ago,
“They’ve got to be protected,
All their rights respected,
Until someone we like can get elected..”
Thanks, did not know that. They were certainly behind RFK’s assassination too, fearing that if he became president he would expose their responsibility for his brother’s murder. The media’s role continues to be to run cover for them, casting any mention of CIA crimes as conspiracy theory, whataboutism, etc etc. So what are we to make of that industry?
Sarge:
Yes, the assassination of RFK was a CIA operation.
Sirhan Sirhan is definitely not the assassin. He was a hypnotised decoy whose bullets missed RFK.
Ultimately, the man behind it was President Johnson.
Johnson repeatedly asked White House aide Jo Califano:
“Is he dead yet?”
Ted Van Dyk was an aide to Vice President Hubert Humphrey. He says that Humphrey ordered an air force plane out to Los Angeles with a top brain surgeon on board. He then got a call from the White House telling him he had no such authority and that the plane was grounded.
Johnson’s motives for killing RFK:
1. He might end the war in Vietnam which would be a repudiation of Johnson.
2. He might seek to investigate the assassination of JFK—not good news for Johnson.
3. He might seek to re-open the Senate investigations that had threatened to send Johnson to prison. Getting those investigations closed down was a high priority for Johnson once he became president.
I hope you find this useful.
Indeed, thanks Tony. It’s a strange old beast, US liberal democracy, when you peak behind the curtain!
Neither liberal, nor a democracy
Quite extraordinary.
And those Foreign Office exams would be extremely hard.
Am I the only one that finds it amusing that in his spiteful, typo-ridden, thirteen-tweet rant about a blogpost that was written two months previously, David Leask can’t even attempt to correct our host’s transliteration without ****ing things up?
‘Grazdanstvo looks like a simple spelling or transliteration error for grazhdantsvo (sic)’.
https://nitter.net/LeaskyHT/status/1598776113244737537
As he writes later in the thread: ‘It’s hard to fake language skills. You You either have them or you don’t.’ On the basis of this, I’d say that we can safely put him in the ‘don’t’ category – even when the language in question is English. Shout out to The Herald’s sub-editors.
Wow, that is such a classic example of the line of argument that goes, “Since I have proved you wrong in one tiny thing, I have proved you wrong in everything”. The only thing that can be said about it is that it is fractionally more convincing than the ad-hom argument, for fractions with very large denominators.
Thanks for your reply Bayard. The thing is Leask hasn’t proved our host wrong about ‘grazdanstvo’. The eighth letter of the Russian alphabet is pronounced like the ‘s’ in measure, and is usually transliterated as ‘zh’ or ‘z with a carat (upturned hat) diacritic’. In English, it’s acceptable to write foreign words without accents, which dates from the time when English typewriters didn’t have them, so ‘grazdanstvo’ is acceptable. (You’d think that having a degree in Russian and being a former professional translator, Leask would be aware of this, but apparently not.) However, in attempting to write ‘grazhdanstvo’, Leask has (repeatedly) mixed up the ‘s’ & ‘t’, which I think is funny.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_alphabet
He’s on slightly safer ground with ‘narodnost’ for ‘narodnosc’ – though, to some extent, it depends on how you transliterate a palatalized Russian ‘T’. To compound the lack of grace in Leask’s Twitter rant, the original blogpost was casting aspersions on Russian claims to territory in Ukraine (which might have cost our host one or two subscriptions), a position which Leask supports.
Happy Christmas.
“The thing is Leask hasn’t proved our host wrong about ‘grazdanstvo’.”
Indeed he hasn’t, except in his own mind, it’s what makes his arguing from the particular to the general even more pathetic.
I suspect old Leasky was trying to catch the eye of Integrity Initiative etc, but I doubt he’s impressed anybody.
Thanks for your reply Jules. I think that Leask was merely aiming to get one over on our host, as well as showing off his Russian skillz. Unfortunately for him, he seems to have landed on his arse:
‘Possibly a confusion with the Russian for an ethnic group – narodnost.’
https://nitter.net/LeaskyHT/status/1598776113244737537
Che? In my Russian-English (mini)-dictionary, ‘narodnost’ is translated as ‘nationality’ or ‘national principle’. I guess we’re finding out why Leasky is a former professional translator – you’d probably be better off with Google Translate. He certainly doesn’t seem to have impressed anyone who’s replied to his thread, as he got ratio’d to ****.
Happy Christmas.
Sex, Gender, Holyrood, Westminster and Pantomime…. Forum…_
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/forums/topic/sex-and-gender-in-humans-is-not-binary/#post-90150
Are not sex and gender supposed to be synonyms?
Living in England, the Scottish govt’s obsession with the controversial subject of gender recognition, in a cost-of-living crisis, seems somewhat bizarre.
Not insomuch as it’s bad legislation per se, I’m instinctively libertarian on social policy and I haven’t really studied the arguments in favour and objections. Which as I understand it, they stem around safety concerns relating to trans male to female access to designated female spaces. But of all things to fight a battle over, when the numbers affected by any change are so minuscule? Are they being led astray by bad advice from unionist civil servants? Conspiratorial maybe, but wouldn’t be surprised. How many votes will this lose the SNP? And before some say, ‘it’s about doing what’s right, not necessarily doing what’s popular,’ there are many more urgent priorities that need the same logic applied. And when supposedly pushing for independence it’s a huge distraction.
Getting back on topic to journalists and journalism. Do the SNP have a plan to overcome the controlled media? The unionist media will again be by far the biggest obstacle to independence.
Supporters of independence may be interested in this recent workshop that celebrated technologist and cryptographer Bruce Schneier was invited to speak at, titled ‘Reimagining democracy’ – the premise they were given was that of being in the position of starting a new country afresh, from scratch(link below). Sturgeon’s tyrannical like grip certainly begs the featured talking point of ‘Does it make sense to have a singular leader “in charge” of everything?”. It’s well worth a read, we may be doing democracy/representation all wrong based on outdated thinking based on the now – thanks to technology – easily bridgeable distance.
https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2022/12/reimagining-democracy.html
One thing I don’t understand, and it’s a point Craig has raised here, is the question as to why the SNP aren’t organising similar workshops. Sturgeon’s objections perhaps? Such workshops across Scotland and involving interested groups and universities are a way to drum up enthusiasm and get people talking about shaping their destiny. The SNP claim there will be a referendum in 2023, but don’t seem to be doing the preparatory groundwork. In interviews it’s all silly shy grins and giggles, nods and winks to presenters, as if it’s all a big con, a ruse to win votes that the public aren’t in on.
“I’m instinctively libertarian on social policy”
Yes, so am I but the trans issue is not exactly straightforward. I suggest there are serious limits to such simplistic nostrums.
Scotgov, mainly in the form of Ms Sturgeon, promotes the legislation because they think it addresses some deficit of equality for individuals who wish to change their ‘gender’ to a ‘preferred’ condition (there should be no doubts about sexual dimorphism-It is a complex, intricate, multi-dimensional, irreversible, ontological process).
‘Gender’ has come to mean the adoption of superficial sexual social signals such as clothing, makeup and personal presentational matters such as hairdo’s (wigs?) and changes of hair pattern by shaving or in some cases the use of pharmacological/endocrine interventions such as doses of hormone to promote or inhibit hair growth or the adoption of sex-related behaviour. This does not alter the pattern of sensitivity of the skin to (say) facial hair. This hormonal sensitivity is part of the development process that causes certain zones of the skin to be altered by the presence of a hormone. There are complex epigenetic homeostatic controls/dynamic mechanisms that are difficult or impossible to alter or can only, at best, partially, bring about changes. The underlying idea is that ‘gender’ is ‘fluid’ and can be induced to ‘flow’ in particular ways is not widely questioned and in my mind is a delusion propagated by influential actors such as the pharmaceutical industries.
I have a considerable objection to this ideology. Firstly, it is fraught with hazards and requires extremely careful medical implementation and care. Secondly I fear that the way the debate has been conducted in Scotland (and elsewhere) has been trivial and superficial and has promoted the idea that the issue is akin to a personal choice. I am not surprised that younger voters are more supportive of the legislation as they are more susceptible to this kind of misinformation or manipulation.
One must also question the political motives of the main promoters of the legislation. Ms Sturgeon’s (along with some of her close subordinates) fingerprints are all over this issue. I am astonished that she has not foreseen the problem of having separate legislatures within the UK. A GRC from Scotland will not conform to the legislation of England, Wales and NI. The urgency with which she and others have pursued has been incautious or foolhardy, bearing in mind the profound change to long accepted near universal norms, the technical/scientific and medical uncertainty, and the controversy over women’s rights that surround the issue. These recent events reveal serious ineptitude and a deplorable preference for absolutism and zealotry that reveals her unsuitability for leadership. Sturgeonism and SNP mediocrity will need to be rooted out before there can be progress on the overarching issue of independence.
I second your post, DG. The differences that exist between Scotland and a wider UK, with regards to recognising gender dysphoria and the regime that stipulates counselling and treatment, as well as gender reconstruction, is at loggerheads, different in its approach and handling.
Mrs Nicola S. Murrells approach is highly haphazard, with a hint of narcissism thrown in. Her policy is framing the issue she wants to argue at the next election. She is guaranteed arguments and TV appearances ad nauseum to make her crummy unworkable policy points, burying the debate on Independence and a new form of democracy/representation.
Will it work?
Beware the savage jaw – Of 1984
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x2xfpMMQIJ8
Courtesy of the American (Fourth Reich) Empire, the British Idiocracy, the corrupt and craven EU, the crawling anglosphere, and, I guess, with some of the loons of Eastern and Central Europe playing walk-on bit parts.
In the meantime the rest of the world says ‘goodbye to all that’ and ‘The West’ as a force for progress disappears from the stage into the dustbin of history.
Unless …
Assuming we can avoid WW3.
Craig and family,
The term ‘the tyranny of the weak’ sums up well the collection of petty acts against you – but given how often they happen, perhaps, ‘The Tyranny of the week’ applies?
Reading your writings has been a help to me and I want to openly thank you. There is a commentator on your posts – Tatyana – and I want to acknowledge her too – I always gain something from her words. You too – Vivian Oblivian: keep up the good work.
My Christmas parting thought – I doubt Santa vists Belmarsh.
MickD
Why do you, or why does Craig want membership with this body?
Seems to me the N.U.J is part of the problem. I Wonder who told them not to include you.
There appears to be a need for an alternative union for real journalists like yourself. Forget about the corrupt self serving NUJ and start over with like minded colleagues.
Good luck in the future and Happy Christmas to you and your family
You haven’t figured this out, have you Craig? Actual JOURNALISTS don’t belong to official bodies. They’re not “respectable”, they’re considered seedy characters by “proper” journalists and they never get asked onto Question Time. What distinguishes them is the pathological pursuit of truth at any cost. The higher up the food chain a “proper” journalist is, the worse they are. Always trust a tabloid over a broadsheet, a broadsheet over broadcast media, and absolutely ANYONE over the BBC. You should wear this rejection like a Distinguished Service Medal. Like the man said, if you’re taking flak, you’re over the target.
I guess there are decent journalists out there but with most of them being held in lower regard than used car salesmen and many of them working hand in glove with the intelligence agencies well I guess it’s a formality to be a member.
I was a member of Teamsters 700 and it’s previous incarnations for 13 years and 98% of the time it was aggravating or shameful. Mostly goons hacks snitches and other criminals. These were the filth that worked for the City of Chicago that one mob enforcer declined to accept a position overseeing the Local because he considered the membership beneath even him.
The “leadership” of the NUJ must be terrified of allowing Murray into membership if they have to resort to the “not a fit and proper person” clause . Either that, or they have been got at, by the spooks perhaps?
I was a member of the NUJ national executive between 1977 and 1997 – including a spell as president and 17years as the Deputy General Secretary of the union – and in all those years we had only one case where the “not a fit and proper person” designation was used. As I recall, it involved the threat of physical violence against a regional organiser.
From reading Craig Murray’s account it looks as if a small cabal of paid officials and lay members of the National Executive Council have driven the proverbial coach and horses through the union’s Rules and its founding principles. They may have some explaining to do – and they could begin by giving chapter and verse on how often the “not a fit and proper person” clause has been used in, say, the last 20 years.
Shame on the NUJ !