Guardian

Guardian legitimises Craig Murray’s anti-Israel conspiracy theory on Russian spy poisoning


On our Facebook page, we recently linked to a post at Harry’s Place focusing on a blog post by the former British ambassador to Uzbekistan Craig Murray bizarrely alleging that Israel may be behind the poisoning of former Russian spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter.

Murray wrote:

“Israel has the nerve agents. Israel has Mossad which is extremely skilled at foreign assassinations. Theresa May claimed Russian propensity to assassinate abroad as a specific reason to believe Russia did it. Well Mossad has an even greater propensity to assassinate abroad. And while I am struggling to see a Russian motive for damaging its own international reputation so grieviously, Israel has a clear motivation for damaging the Russian reputation so grieviously. Russian action in Syria has undermined the Israeli position in Syria and Lebanon in a fundamental way, and Israel has every motive for damaging Russia’s international position by an attack aiming to leave the blame on Russia.”

As Harry’s Place noted, Murray – author of the book “Zionism is Bullshit“, and a former member of the pro-Palestinian Facebook group shown by David Collier to be saturated with antisemitism –  has a history of defending people who’ve engage in antisemitism.

Murray’s current risible claims also echo tweets and Facebook posts, circulated hours after the Salisbury attack, by Russian troll accounts blaming the Mossad.

However, it’s especially troubling that Murray’s blog post was amplified in a March 15th piece in the Guardian, by their Defence Correspondent Ewan MacAskill, in an article questioning assertions by the British government that Russia was to blame for the attack in Salisbury. 

MacAskil wrote:

The former British ambassador to Uzbekistan, Craig Murray…is among those advocating scepticism about the UK placing blame on Russia.

In a blog post, he wrote: “The same people who assured you Saddam Hussein had WMDs now assure you Russian ‘novichok’ nerve agents are being wielded by Vladimir Putin to attack people on British soil.”

The Guardian correspondent’s selective quoting of Murray’s post omitted his central thesis: that Israel is likely responsible.  Further his claims regarding Israel’s likely role in the attack was accompanied by broader libels.  Murray, in the same post, accuses Israel of engaging in genocide against the Palestinians, and evokes the Livingston Formulation by suggesting that his views on Israeli culpability for the Salisbury attack won’t be publicized by the MSM because mere criticism of Israel is often falsely characterised as antisemitism.

By linking to Murray’s wild, completely unsubstantiated and incendiary charges, and uncritically citing it as grounds for readers to be skeptical of the government’s assessment, the Guardian has legitimised a full-out anti-Israel conspiracy theory – the kind of malign, obsessive and often delusional Israel root-cause explanations for world events which continues to fuel antisemitism in the UK. 

Related Article

61 replies »

  1. The lengths people go to in order to substantiate their antisemitism is astounding.

    These people miss belonging to a medieval society in which there is a devil figure or an entity on which all mishaps and crimes can be blamed, making it unnecessary to strain themselves in thinking.

    They are also freed of the guilt for their own crimes, certain that there is someone always and reliably much worse and more evil. The Jews of history bore this burden which the antisemites now place squarely on the shoulders of the Jewish state. Logic, proof and reasoning have no place in their world picture

  2. It wouldn’t surprise me if Murray and his ilk were to accuse Israel of engineering the asteroid to crash into Earth in order rid “Palestine” of dinosaurs.

    • Well that didn’t work did it Michael.
      ‘Palestine’ still has dinosaurs, it has one as President.
      Indeed his election was so long ago there were probably dinosaurs roaming the Earth when it took place.

  3. Margie is correct. Poland needs to clean house of its anti-Semitic filth, closely followed by Britain.

      • I like how you’re so drunk and macho and you’re ready to take on the anti-Semites, but that’s only after you blow your gasket and lose your poop after seeing a “wretched spittle-flecked creep” make a comment on this board.

    • and followed by France, Scotland, Ireland, Norway, Sweden, Spain, Belgium…

      Eurabia, soon to be a Caliphate is toast.

  4. The Guardian is going bankrupt. It will take a few years, but it is slowly bleeding out. Unless Al Jazeera buys it.

    • Daniel one of the things about The Guardian that a number of people overlook is it depends on its global readership more than the readership in the U.K.
      Of the 36.9 million users of its website only 12.5 million of those are in the U.K.
      Two thirds of the readership of its website are outside the U.K., with a considerable number of those (and it is a growth area for The Guardian) being in the USA.

        • That is a worrying trend, but I think the Guardian is exaggerating the depth of its influence over here (at least for now). When I think of the word “popular” I think of a household name. In the UK, I’m sure everyone must know of the Guardian, but not so much over here. A dedicated readership of 12.7 million? Not so fast. I too have read articles in the Guardian, but I wouldn’t say I’m part of their ‘readership.’

            • I call BS (British Scam).

              I don’t believe the quoted readership of Der Guardian or Der Economist in the US for a second.

              American magazines and newspaper readership is falling to new lows so how could British media do any better? Nah. BS for duped advertiser dollars.

            • There’s no parade to rain on, Gerald. I’m just a bit more skeptical than you. Especially after reading the link.

              • Scepticism is healthy jeff, but closing ones eyes to reality about what is happening in your own backyard while criticising your neighbours for what you believe is happening in their backyard is deluding yourself.
                But feel free to carry on claiming that it is all the fault of the dastardly British media. Even if a large part is owned by people, including American citizens, who are not British and most of its readership is outside Britain.

                As above jeff scepticism to a certain degree is healthy, but to dismiss factual evidence because it doesn’t fit in with your own prejudices is not only deluding yourself but a clear indication of a closed mind and that is definitely not healthy.

                Now you and Edward can carry on slapping each other on the back and trying to convince yourselves that all the problems with anti-Semitism and a biased media are in Britain or other parts of Europe and how wonderful it would be if we all behaved like Americans. I prefer reality so I’ll stay in the real World, feel free to come and join me someday but you’ll have to leave your blinkers behind.

                • “Scepticism is healthy …, but closing ones eyes to reality about what is happening in your own backyard while criticising your neighbours for what you believe is happening in their backyard is deluding yourself.”
                  Right back at ya, Gerald.

                  “Now you and Edward can carry on slapping each other on the back and trying to convince yourselves that all the problems with anti-Semitism and a biased media are in Britain or other parts of Europe and how wonderful it would be if we all behaved like Americans.”
                  That’s not what I think. But I do think it’s worse in Europe. And I think the facts back me up on that for now. American journalism is in decline. But generally speaking the anti-Israel animus is still nowhere near the level it is over there, and Israel still gets broad support here. That support is becoming more partisan, and that’s a problem which has been building for quite some time and was exacerbated greatly by the election of Obama and a press that was acquiescent during his presidency for a variety of reasons. And a great share of the anti-Israel feeling has been imported from Europe, especially the UK, and especially the Guardian which you are pretty much admitting. I wasn’t aware that Edward and I slap each other on the back. I give your comments far more up votes than I give his, so make of that what you will.
                  But here’s the thing: This website is called UKMediaWatch. My thoughts on American media are not private, let me assure you.

      • Gerald,
        I am well aware of the Guardian’s global read, thankfully they can not capitalize on it. Last time I dared go there I noticed a completly different layout and more fluff pieces. They are hemorrhaging money every year and their foundation can not replace lost funds. This although the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is already giving them money for pro migrant reporting. I have to assume that the US readership is the MSNBC class. The Economist supposedly also depends on the US market. It would not surprise me of some left leaning billionaere will buy the Groan. It is peanuts to them.