Entered by hand, yet it fits my definition. Here’s my favorite:
To make up your own mind about Craig Murray, please see:
Because, after all, Laurence and I get our opinion directly from the desk of Karl Rove. At least that’s what one would think reading Murray’s campaign website. I love that in addition to throwing quotation marks around the phrases that one would expect leftists to hang them on, they refer to the Uzbek government as such:
As a straight-talking British Ambassador, Craig Murray unmasked the tyrannical “Karimov” regime, in Uzbekistan. While others kept quiet, our man in Tashkent hit the headlines, working tirelessly to expose the mass-murder at the heart of this Central Asian dictatorship.
I was under the impression that Karimov was real. But now that mine eyes have been struck by the light of Craig Murray’s courageous truth crusade, I’m no longer a dupe.
I think we’ve said so much about Murray that I don’t need to repeat myself. I think he’s a cynical opportunist taking advantage of a fawning press and an ignorant public. He has out and out lied about things, exhibited a profound lack of knowledge about certain aspects of Uzbekistan (unless he’s lying about them, of course), and has a rather shaky case–all touched on here.
But hey, Blackburn, if you want a man who can’t keep his story straight and blames everyone but himself for his failure as a husband, father, and diplomat, go right ahead.
{ 1 trackback }
{ 4 comments }
Carpet-bagging is all part and parcel of Westminster politics, but how wil the burghers of Blackburn react to a candidate born and raised in Scotland, trained in the Foreign Office, and now resident in a very, very chi-chi part of West London?
At least when Martin Bell ousted Neil Hamilton in the Tatton constituency he was a well-respected, modest, self-effacing man, respected by all and sundry (or as modest as the BBC’s best known foreign correspondant, famous for wearing linen suits, can be.) Murray, on the otherhand, has over-played the victimisation card – and it’s not as if he didn’t know what he was letting himself in for.
Sounds like Murray is doing the typical pandering to the paranoid. It’s hard to believe what people will believe!
Today’s New York Times has a defense of CIA’s “rendition” policy written by Michael Scheuer, who points out it originated with Sandy Berger in the Clinton administration. Here’s the link to the article. So don’t blame Karimov, blame Bill Clinton. I personally agree with the article’s implication that we could have arrested and tried Bin Laden and the others here in the USA–before 9/11–instead of letting him go to Afghanistan.
I’ve read the many posts regarding Craig Murray but, for all the personal attacks on this particular individual, I am unable to find in your discourse any sense of the true level of torture in Uzbekistan. I am able to identify the obvious hyperbolic rhetoric used by Mr Murray but is torture in Uzbeckistan “systemic”, as he suggests? Perhaps you could enlighten me with your expert knowledge of the region so that a fuller picture of this man’s increasingly public campaign in my home town can be assertained.
regards
Major Mike Ford (retired, Blackburn, UK)
Comments on this entry are closed.