Notes From the Northern Colony


by Greum Maol Stevenson

On Hogmanay, the streets of Glasgow were quiet. An hour before midnight, England left the EU, dragging Scotland with it.

Not for long.

Nicola Sturgeon knows this. That is why she immediately tweeted, “Scotland will be back soon, Europe. Keep the light on.”

The UK is like the character played by Bruce Willis in the film The Sixth Sense, who is dead but does not yet know it.

It became terminally ill when Scotland voted against Brexit — a vote that was ignored by the UK government.

It died when the Scottish government voted against England’s “rotten” Brexit deal, which excludes Scottish seed potatoes — a vote that was ignored by the UK government.

The death certificate will be signed at the Scottish election in May, when the SNP will win by an unprecedented majority, and the Scottish people will insist that the election is also a mandate on Scottish independence. The UK will not be brought back to life by those who quaver that England should be able to decide whether a Scottish referendum is “legal,” or by reactionaries who chatter that there is “division” in the SNP because of the presence of such relics from the 80s and 90s as Joanna Cherry, Joan McAlpine and the lurching zombie that was once Alex Salmond, who led us to defeat seven years ago.

This year, Scotland will tell, not ask.

Bliadhna mhath ùr.

#scottishindependence #brexit #nicolasturgeon #joanmcalpine #alexsalmond #snp #scottishblogs #greummaolstevenson


by Greum Maol Stevenson

Dear Mr Murray,

You are an impressively meticulous reporter. You are also thin-skinned and self-absorbed, and, as I have previously written (while defending you), you have a tendency to embarrass yourself when you take things personally.

This was demonstrated by your response to my previous post.

Bella Caledonia magazine posted a link on Tw**ter, and your reaction was to ignore the questions I had asked and make it about yourself. In response to my asking if you had blocked Protonmail, or if your Russian email provider did so automatically, you wrote, “I don't know what Protonmail is, let alone have blocked it.” For someone who is supposedly concerned about surveillance — and who is a friend of Julian Assange — to not know about a popular encrypted email service is bizarre, and indicates you are dangerously ignorant and naive, as I suggested here. (I wonder now if it was a similar naivete, rather than something more sinister, that caused you to obtain “press credentials” from Black Isle Media, an amateur “news” site run by a wannabe terrorist who assaulted a pregnant woman.)

You then wrote: “Better query – why is Bella Caledonia obsessed with promoting paranoid attacks on Craig Murray?”

You did not explain how what I wrote was paranoid, or even how it was an attack. And, of course, it was not. Not only am I not your enemy, I recently agreed to testify as your witness at your impending trial for contempt of court, and your lawyers took a precognition from me and filed it as an affidavit.

The only paranoia on display was yours, when you told Bella Caledonia, “I find it very hard to understand why anyone is accusing me of anything.” But I had not accused you of anything.

While you ignored my questions, you answered a question I had not asked. “I have a account because I used to live in St Petersburg and Tashkent,” you wrote. “I also have btinternet and gmail and a blog contact button.” Leaving aside the naivete of a journalist and activist using email provided by Google, you seem to be using the classic politician's evasion — ignoring the questions being asked and talking about something else instead. And you did not explain why, of your various email addresses, the Russian one is the one on your website.

It turns out that your Russian mail server does indeed block Protonmail.

After the email sent to you bounced back, the person who sent it then tried to post it as a comment on your blog. It said: “I work in tech. The reason they're insisting that people dial in is so they can track their phone numbers and devices. I strongly advise against doing so.” The comment never appeared, which you claim was the decision of “the mods.” You wrote: “To be fair, it does seem the mods may have blocked a comment. I can't find the comment but there seems to be a response to it from one of the mods... I think the mod wasn't chuffed when I was asking people to listen to the hearing, by someone posting telling them not to. I would not have blocked it myself.”

This raises two additional questions, and I hope you will answer them rather than evading them or lashing out. They are:

  1. Who are “the mods” who decide what comments are allowed on your blog, rather than you making the decisions yourself?

  2. Now that you know that people who attend your trial virtually will be tracked and surveilled, are you concerned enough to warn them, or are you only concerned about yourself?

Sincerely, Greum Maol Stevenson

#craigmurray #julianassange #alexsalmond #surveillance #protonmail #russia #scottishpolitics #bellacaledonia #scottishblogs #greummaolstevenson


by Greum Maol Stevenson

On August 25, Craig Murray asked his supporters to virtually attend a procedural hearing for his trial for contempt of court, which was being held the following day. To attend, you had to dial a phone number; you could not simply watch a livestream in a browser.

A person in the tech world discovered that this was so phone numbers, and devices, could be tracked. Using the encrypted service Protonmail, this person emailed Mr Murray, who has a Russian email address, telling him this, and advising people not to call the number. The email bounced back, with a message saying Protonmail was blocked. The person then posted a comment on Murray's blog, sharing the information and asking whether Protonmail was blocked by him personally (and, if so, why) or his Russian email provider,

The comment was not allowed to be posted.

#craigmurray #alexsalmond #scottishpolitics #protonmail #russia #surveillance #scottishblogs #greummaolstevenson


by Greum Maol Stevenson

Craig Murray reports that his trial for contempt of court, which could end with him being imprisoned for two years, will be without a jury. The evidence he presents that the judge will not be impartial is convincing — and chilling.

The hearing at the High Court in Edinburgh is on June 10. Mr Murray writes:


The hearing on 10 June is supposed to be public, but it will be virtual because of coronavirus. While it is a case management hearing, I shall nevertheless be grateful if you are able to “attend” virtually, as I am very keen indeed that I am not stitched up out of the public eye. Please send an email requesting access to the virtual hearing on 10 June to I am very keen as many people do this as possible. Journalists please in addition copy in for accreditation.

Secondly, many people come to this blog through social media and I am currently suffering a very high level of suppression, on Facebook and especially on Twitter. Rather than just retweet and share any soical media post that brought you here, (which may appear on the face to have worked but the dissemination will be suppressed), I would be very grateful if you could also write your own new posting and put a link. If you have your own blog or access to one, a commendation of this post with a link would be very welcome, even if it is not your normal policy. And finally of course, the entire post is free as always to copy, republish and translate as you wish.

Also published on The Harbourmaster's Loug

#craigmurray #alexsalmond #scotland #snp #markhirst #lordturnbull #alexprentice #scottishpolitics #scottishblogs #greummaolstevenson


by Greum Maol Stevenson

As discussed here previously, Scottish mainstream media made no mention of Craig Murray's being removed by police from the High Court in Edinburgh during Alex Salmond's trial. Since then, Murray has published a J'accuse that, in forensic detail, makes a compelling case that there is a conspiracy against Alex Salmond.

And apparently not just Mr Salmond.

Paul Hutcheon, political editor at the Daily Record, has investigated Mr Murray's home and his personal finances and published a misleading article, without addressing any of his concerns. The paper also published a photo of Mr Murray's home.

In his article in response, Mr Murray writes:

The key point is not one mainstream media journalist has even attempted to refute the facts of my article J’accuse. It is packed with facts. Might not the political editor of the Daily Record better spend his time researching the conspiracy against Alex Salmond, rather than threatening an independent journalist for the crime of doing journalism? ...What I am now waiting for is all these people to step in and condemn the publishing of my home and the subsequent risk to the security of my wife and family, with as much vigour as they today defended the privacy of the Edinburgh third house of the Head of MI6.

Also published on The Harbourmaster's Loug

#craigmurray #alexsalmond #paulhutcheon #dailyrecord #scotland #alexsalmondtrial #alexsalmondconspiracy #snp #mediaharassment #bullying #scottishpolitics #scottishblogs #greummaolstevenson


by Greum Maol Stevenson

It did not take the jury long to decide whether Alex Salmond was guilty of rape, attempted rape, and the other sex crimes he was on trial for at Edinburgh High Court. Deliberations began last Friday, and on Monday Mr Salmond was acquitted of all 13 charges.

Since then, there has been talk of a conspiracy against Mr Salmond. But, in all the news reports and opinion pieces, one thing has been glaringly absent: any mention of Craig Murray, and his being removed from the courtroom the day before the trial ended.

Mr Murray is a former British Ambassador to Uzbekistan, turned whistleblower and columnist. He is also a friend of Alex Salmond’s. While Mr Murray is a fine journalist, he tends to embarrass himself when writing in defence of his friends. He covered Julian Assange’s recent extradition hearing, and his portrait of Mr Assange was such cringe-inducing hagiography that anyone who had read Andrew O'Hagan's reporting on Mr Assange’s incompetence, grandiosity and dishonesty would be inclined to question anything else Mr Murray wrote.

It got worse when Mr Murray wrote about Salmond’s trial. In his fervour to praise Mr Salmond’s record as First Minister, and trash Nicola Sturgeon’s, he praised Huawei, and, without offering evidence, cast doubt on Russia’s poisoning a former spy and his daughter in the UK.

But he wrote respectfully about the judge, Lady Dorrian, and had to admit his friend was getting a fair trial.

And then, the day before the trial ended, police removed Mr Murray from the courtroom and told him he was banned for the duration of the trial. The prosecution had asked the judge to remove him because of a “possible contempt of court.” No further explanation was given.

Mr Murray wrote:

To be excluded from a public trial on the basis of something I have “possibly” done, when nobody will even specify what it is I have “possibly” done, seems to me a very strange proceeding. I can only assume that it is something I have written on this blog as there has been no incident or disturbance of any kind inside the courtroom. But if the judge is genuinely concerned that something I have written is so wrong as to necessitate my exclusion, you would expect there would be a real desire for the court to ask me to amend or remove that wrong thing. But as nobody will even tell me what that wrong thing might “possibly” be, it seems only reasonable to conclude that they are not genuinely concerned, in a legal sense, about something I have written.

It was clear from the start that someone wanted to keep Mr Murray out of the courtroom. First, it was announced that only “accredited media” (i.e. corporate and state media) would be allowed in — no independent or “citizen” journalists. Even though Mr Murray’s blog has a bigger readership than some newspapers, and he has been praised by such journalists as John Pilger and Guardian editor Alan Rusbridger, this criteria excluded him. When the prosecution had finished making its case and it was time for the defence to begin, the public gallery was opened, and Mr Murray sat there.

Until the police came for him.

Sources say Mr Murray was so depressed by his banning — and the threat of a charge of contempt of court, which can get you two years in prison — that, during the weekend Mr Salmond spent waiting to find out his fate, he was so worried about Mr Murray that he called him to see if he was all right.

When the verdicts came in, Mr Murray was so happy he got too drunk to write about it in any depth. So… not an impartial reporter, and not pretending to be. But, whether you think he is a truth-teller, a friend blinded by loyalty, or a conspiracy theorist, why has there been nothing about his banning in any mainstream media? Both The Herald and The National have given copious space to theories that there was an SNP conspiracy against Alex Salmond, but Craig Murray’s existence has not been acknowledged.

It is enough to make you wonder if there is a conspiracy.

Also published on The Harbourmaster's Loug

#alexsalmond #craigmurray #snp #nicolasturgeon #alexsalmondconspiracy #scottishpolitics #alexsalmondtrial #scotland #scottishblogs #greummaolstevenson