6 ms·

> Unlike our adversaries including the Integrity Initiative, the 77th Brigade, Bellingcat, the Atlantic Council and hundreds of other warmongering propaganda op

by kmlx 6y ago

> Unlike our adversaries including the Integrity Initiative, the 77th Brigade, Bellingcat, the Atlantic Council and hundreds of other warmongering propaganda operations, epic, huge, massive grain of salt as he's a known conspiracy theory fan with a wide array of issues.

kmlx 6y ago
i really really don't get how this guy ends up on the first page of HN. he clearly has issues: > As a blogger, he tried to dispute Russia’s involvement in the Salisbury poisonings and has written about Salmond’s acquittal on sexual offences charges. > Murray has claimed “corrupt” institutions conspired against the former First Minister and insists the former First Minister's female accusers lied. > He also wrote about having “definite good source information” about MI5’s involvement in the Salmond allegations - a claim that led to him being mocked. tldr: Cults and conspiracy theories offer the easy answer to hard reality or as one of his friends put it: > He is profiting from fuelling the conspiracy theories that have no concrete basis.
- srtjstjsj 6y ago
  Having issues is not a disqualifier from HN. If there's a better source, mods would switch it. But no one else is reporting on this major event.
- vidarh 6y ago
  He ends up on the first page of HN because there is hardly any reporting of the extradition hearing. If the press was doing its job, his reporting wouldn't be necessary.
- marcus_holmes 6y ago
  I think his background as a UK ambassador who was then hounded by the UK establishment[0] has given him a frame of reference where it's hard not to see conspiracies. However, it's true he is currently being taken to court by the Scottish government for contempt of court over his reporting of the Salmond case. That's not something that happens to the average conspiracy nutjob. [0] and yeah, I totally believe his stories of the UK political establishment closing ranks against an outsider. I grew up in that world, and that chummy upper-class clubhouse can get very cold and hostile very quickly. It also has very long reach.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
raxxorrax 6y ago
Hard reality is that intelligence agencies conspired against the current president of the US with a story of Russian collusion and tried to frame innocents. These agencies have issues, because that was a clear conspiracy. Journalists can be wrong, but we have seen direct propaganda that mirrors the talking points of some of these institutions. The Atlantic council for example is broad, doesn't mean anything to attend their parties, but it certainly is an influential network that should be put under scrutiny. Bellingcat did some good investigative work, but is also connected to the Atlantic Council and I think they just look into a certain direction for recognition purposes. In contrast to Wikileaks for example.
- pjc50 6y ago
  The number of associates of the President who have received criminal convictions is remarkable, many of whom have links to Russian economic crime of one sort or another. Are you saying that all these convictions are framed? https://www.axios.com/trump-associates-convicted-mueller-investigations-206295a1-5abc-4573-be25-4da19d9adcc9.html https://www.axios.com/trump-associates-convicted-mueller-inv...
  - raxxorrax 6y ago
    Association isn't evidence of anything. FBI attorney Kevin Clinesmith pleading guilty is and spying did happen, that is quite factual. This isn't an argument for Trump being a good or bad person, it is about certain intelligence agencies have stifled democratic processes in the worst matter imaginable.
mhh__ 6y ago
He definitely has a grudge against bellingcat. He had a big spat over the identities of the Skripal poisoners, but ended up looking like he was just making it up. The nicest way I can think of Murray politically is as one of these people who is not supportive of the west's enemies but sufficiently anti-western to end up aligning with them. Calling Bellingcat warmongerers is an example of this.
- jonathanstrange 6y ago
  He doesn't seem to be wrong, though. Bellingcat has all the indicators of one of those typical intelligence information/disinformation outlets close to one or more intelligence agencies. I personally find it rather entertaining that Bellingcat has won the Machiavelli Award for public communication. I didn't know it existed and find it hard to believe that someone would accept an award in that name.
  - mhh__ 6y ago
    1. How does that imply warmongering 2. What have they been wrong about? Bellingcat are probably being fed clues by the western intelligence services but that just makes them one source amongst many - even if they knew they answer prior to using OSINT that doesn't make them wrong. Murray is contrarian as long as he breathes, of course he would say that. Craig Murray was (this on his word keep in mind) apparently approached with DNC emails in a clandestine manner just as he was publicly pooh-poohing the Russia connection - if hes not making it up someone tried the same thing but from the other side.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
    - mantap 6y ago
      Bellingcat sure does seem like a front for the UK intelligence services. A way for intelligence to release information to the media without having to be named as a source. UK/US are known to have fabricated pretexts for war in Iraq. If you put the two together then you get Murray's position. Bellingcat are the intelligence services. The intelligence services are warmongers. And so the Russia publications are warmongering. I don't personally accept it as logical, I think Russia was probably responsible for the attacks, but maybe the world does need people who put reputation above fact.

by kmlx 6y ago

kmlx 6y ago

i really really don't get how this guy ends up on the first page of HN. he clearly has issues: > As a blogger, he tried to dispute Russia’s involvement in the Salisbury poisonings and has written about Salmond’s acquittal on sexual offences charges. > Murray has claimed “corrupt” institutions conspired against the former First Minister and insists the former First Minister's female accusers lied. > He also wrote about having “definite good source information” about MI5’s involvement in the Salmond allegations - a claim that led to him being mocked. tldr: Cults and conspiracy theories offer the easy answer to hard reality or as one of his friends put it: > He is profiting from fuelling the conspiracy theories that have no concrete basis.

srtjstjsj 6y ago
Having issues is not a disqualifier from HN. If there's a better source, mods would switch it. But no one else is reporting on this major event.
vidarh 6y ago
He ends up on the first page of HN because there is hardly any reporting of the extradition hearing. If the press was doing its job, his reporting wouldn't be necessary.
marcus_holmes 6y ago
I think his background as a UK ambassador who was then hounded by the UK establishment[0] has given him a frame of reference where it's hard not to see conspiracies. However, it's true he is currently being taken to court by the Scottish government for contempt of court over his reporting of the Salmond case. That's not something that happens to the average conspiracy nutjob. [0] and yeah, I totally believe his stories of the UK political establishment closing ranks against an outsider. I grew up in that world, and that chummy upper-class clubhouse can get very cold and hostile very quickly. It also has very long reach.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

raxxorrax 6y ago

Hard reality is that intelligence agencies conspired against the current president of the US with a story of Russian collusion and tried to frame innocents. These agencies have issues, because that was a clear conspiracy. Journalists can be wrong, but we have seen direct propaganda that mirrors the talking points of some of these institutions. The Atlantic council for example is broad, doesn't mean anything to attend their parties, but it certainly is an influential network that should be put under scrutiny. Bellingcat did some good investigative work, but is also connected to the Atlantic Council and I think they just look into a certain direction for recognition purposes. In contrast to Wikileaks for example.

pjc50 6y ago
The number of associates of the President who have received criminal convictions is remarkable, many of whom have links to Russian economic crime of one sort or another. Are you saying that all these convictions are framed? https://www.axios.com/trump-associates-convicted-mueller-investigations-206295a1-5abc-4573-be25-4da19d9adcc9.html https://www.axios.com/trump-associates-convicted-mueller-inv...
- raxxorrax 6y ago
  Association isn't evidence of anything. FBI attorney Kevin Clinesmith pleading guilty is and spying did happen, that is quite factual. This isn't an argument for Trump being a good or bad person, it is about certain intelligence agencies have stifled democratic processes in the worst matter imaginable.

mhh__ 6y ago

He definitely has a grudge against bellingcat. He had a big spat over the identities of the Skripal poisoners, but ended up looking like he was just making it up. The nicest way I can think of Murray politically is as one of these people who is not supportive of the west's enemies but sufficiently anti-western to end up aligning with them. Calling Bellingcat warmongerers is an example of this.

jonathanstrange 6y ago
He doesn't seem to be wrong, though. Bellingcat has all the indicators of one of those typical intelligence information/disinformation outlets close to one or more intelligence agencies. I personally find it rather entertaining that Bellingcat has won the Machiavelli Award for public communication. I didn't know it existed and find it hard to believe that someone would accept an award in that name.
- mhh__ 6y ago
  1. How does that imply warmongering 2. What have they been wrong about? Bellingcat are probably being fed clues by the western intelligence services but that just makes them one source amongst many - even if they knew they answer prior to using OSINT that doesn't make them wrong. Murray is contrarian as long as he breathes, of course he would say that. Craig Murray was (this on his word keep in mind) apparently approached with DNC emails in a clandestine manner just as he was publicly pooh-poohing the Russia connection - if hes not making it up someone tried the same thing but from the other side.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - mantap 6y ago
    Bellingcat sure does seem like a front for the UK intelligence services. A way for intelligence to release information to the media without having to be named as a source. UK/US are known to have fabricated pretexts for war in Iraq. If you put the two together then you get Murray's position. Bellingcat are the intelligence services. The intelligence services are warmongers. And so the Russia publications are warmongering. I don't personally accept it as logical, I think Russia was probably responsible for the attacks, but maybe the world does need people who put reputation above fact.