Randy Credico Interviews Craig Murray (12/13/2016)

italkyoubored Apr 4th, 2017 (edited) 225 Never
Not a member of Pastebin yet? Sign Up, it unlocks many cool features!
  1. Supplemental document for: "Theory that Roger Stone's go-between for Wikileaks was Randy Credico", link:
  3. "Live on the Fly" with guest Craig Murray excerpt. From 3:40 to . Broadcast date: December 13, 2016.
  5. File link:
  7. Audio of the excerpt where Murray says he knows who the leakers are can be found here:
  10. Craig, uh, you have been in the papers _a lot_ in the last couple of days...with some very compelling, cogent, captivating, maybe captious...provocative articles ["The CIA's Absence of Conviction" link:]...throwing cold water on the hysteria that seems to be happening in this country, and in your country, and maybe in Europe, about this link between _Russia_ and _Julian Assange_. Could you...clarify, elucidate, this audience [sic] on what that article was about? And why it's become so very controversial?
  13. Yeah. Well, to start with, as I've said on your show before, there is no link...between Russia and Wikileaks. That I know for certain. And none of the emails that Wikileaks have released have been sourced from the Russian government, or from any proxy on behalf of the Russian government. And that connection simply doesn't exist, and I know that for...certain.
  16. Ah, well-
  18. MURRAY
  19. And the extraordinary rubbish that's been put out in the mainstream media, all over the world, but originating in the United States, from the Washington Post, with anonymous briefers from the CIA, who may be or may not officially be from the CIA, and ordered by the director, nobody quite knows...saying they have evidence that it's mysterious Russian people, but they're not actually going to name them or tell anybody who they are, or produce this evidence, but they know for certain...but at the same time, that they do know for certain, who the people are...even if they're not going to tell us. It's just absolute rubbish. You know, the burden of proof should be on the CIA, to come up with some justification for these wild assertions that a foreign power has interfered in U.S. elections. And yet no evidence is being offered at all.
  22. Why would some- Yes, go ahead, I'm sorry.
  24. MURRAY
  25. Well, and at the same time, of course, this is making great power relations much worse. And stoking up this Russo-phobia, hatred of Russia, and trying to return us into a Cold War situation, with all the danger of conflict that that brings.
  28. It's really amazing, that we really seem to be heading in that direction. It's like saber rattling with a nuclear armed country that has been surrounded by the U.S. Most people here...have fallen for it! They believe the CIA, as if they have any exposed them and their torture cells in Uzbekistan, when you were a diplomat from FCO [Foreign and Commonwealth Office] there...and you also have made this connection, Mr. Murray, between what is happening now, and what Obama has done, over the last eight years. His war on whistleblowers, and it's basically blowback. That is what caused this leak, not a hack, but a leak, to whoever published it, whether it be was a leak, not a what you have been saying.
  30. MURRAY
  31. That's absolutely right. There are two separate things, if you like. There are the DNC, and there are the Podesta emails. And they're separate, it's not the same source. Um, but in both cases, it's a leak, not a hack. Um, and it's worth bearing in mind that Podesta and his brother, they were paid and declared agents, peddling influence inside the Obama administration on behalf of the Saudi government, which was paying them huge amounts of money to represent and lobby for the government of Saudi Arabia, using all their connections to Clinton and the State Department, and the Obama administration, um, and the fact that they were paid agents of a foreign power, made them perfectly legitimate targets for security service surveillance, [there is a critical point here that is flatly wrong - it was Tony Podesta that was a lobbyist for Saudi Arabia, _not_ John Podesta, whose emails would end up being published by Wikileaks, and therefore _John Podesta_ could not have been under NSA surveillance under the terms which Murray presents here, and this point is made in a larger critique of Craig Murray's leak theory by Marcy Wheeler in "Craig Murray’s Description of WikiLeaks’ Sources" link: ] for the American security services, and indeed, for that matter, quite a lot of security services around the world. Um, so it should not be any suprise to anybody, that Podesta's emails were being intercepted and collected and recorded. You do not need to think in terms of an illegal hack in order to explain that.
  34. So, in other words, the NSA, any spy agency since they have the power, they could tap into that, willy-nilly.
  36. MURRAY
  37. Yeah. Absolutely. I mean, to be perfectly fair, I'm no big critic of the NSA, I don't like the way they really extended their power, to hoover up the personal information of millions, hundreds of millions of absolutely innocent Americans...there's no reason to suspect of anyone. [sic] And that's a very terrible thing. But in the case of the Podestas, it's quite right that the NSA should have been looking at their emails. 'Cuz if the NSA weren't monitoring the emails of registered agents of a foreign power, then the NSA wouldn't be doing its job.  
  40. Right. So, they got that by possibly monitoring foreign powers...and here's Podesta, co-mingling with foreign's really an interesting article, you have, you are in huge demand, I have people asking me, how do they get in touch with you...I suppose, you are probably hiding, I mean, you just got out of the hospital a couple of weeks ago, and you must be completely overwhelmed with all of the attention you are also wrote about Aleppo. Now, it seems like there's a concerted effort, by the CIA and U.S. government, to really rough up Russia right now. What is the motivation, Craig Murray?
  42. MURRAY
  43. Well, I think partly, it's pride. In Syria, in particular, the United States has really backed the wrong...side, because it has backed, you know, jihadists, who were sponsored, financed, armed, and ideologically supported by Saudi Arabia and other extremist Gulf states to wage jihad. And these are the people who had been beheading captured Syrian government soldiers, and mis-treating civilians. How on earth the United States managed to get itself on the side of the Islamic terrorists in this conflict, I have no idea. [laughs] But they might land themselves in that position, [sic] then their bluff was called by Putin, and they've not been able to back down on it, and they're left looking very impotent, as the Russians have managed to mop up the last rebel stronghold in Aleppo. Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not a fan of the regime of President Assad...but I do think, that given the way the revolution went terribly wrong, and the civil war that broke out...I do think the best result, at the moment, for the world, and for the people, of Syria, is an end to the fighting and the jihadist side to lose.
  46. And we have been supporting the jihadist's very difficult for Americans to swallow that. But that's the picture that we get, that we are not, from the mainstream media, which I basically call a government infommercial. The mainstream media, here in the United States. And I think, I was talking to John Pilger last week, the BBC is probably better, the Guardian is probably better, but I think you might _confute_ [sic] that assessment.
  48. MURRAY
  49. Yeah...I think, basically, it's an out-of-date assessment, it was true a decade or so ago, but now the BBC and the Guardian, particularly the Guardian, are very much part of the entire neo-conservative propaganda machine now. You really don't get anything by way of fairness or balance...out of any of the major media organizations anymore.
  52. I will say that I am hearing the same thing from you about...and it's to me, it's very disappointing...because I will watch BBC at night here, because at least there's some news here, maybe it's seventy percent government controlled here, whatever it is, but here it's twenty four hours of pro-government, pro-CIA information, that's coming out. We never get to see any news, unless there's a plane wreck out of Malaysia. That's about it. That's the only news and analysis that we get, Richard Qwest talking about a plane wreck, flight 860, or whatever flight it was. Another thing that happened the last couple of days, that Facebook, your story, thousands of people posted the story that you wrote about the CIA, and the absence of conviction, is the name of the article on your web page [link:], and Facebook, apparently, was censoring you.
  54. MURRAY
  55. Yeah, there's no doubt at all that was happening...and Twitter as well. There's a phenomenon called "ghost banning" where they pretend they're not posting you, and people think that everything's working normally, so, for example, somebody may see my article on Facebook, and they may like it, so they share it, and it looks to them like it's being shared, but actually, none of their friends, who they shared it too, is able to see it, it doesn't appear. And people were sharing it, and then being amazed their share had received zero likes at all over a twenty four hour period. And eventually people were putting it together. I'm now seeing it on my website. Because normally about thirty percent of the traffic comes in through Facebook postings, and that was down to zero. But it had been down close to zero, really ever since I started releasing stuff with Wikileaks on the Podesta emails, that led both Facebook and Twitter to pull the plug on me. Um, and this is actually very very important, because if you say the mainstream media gives no genuine news at all, so people have to become highly reliant on Facebook and engines to get truth out. I think it was actually very effective during the election. But what the corporations, if you like, are striking back, and Facebook and Twitter are increasingly censoring what they allow to be seen by other people...and, of course, we now have politicians, with this "fake news" meme, that anything the mainstream media and the elite don't endorse is fake news, actually arguing for censorship of the internet to stop people from getting the truth out there. So, we're moving into very very dangerous times.
  58. Yes. I agree. If you want to stop fake news, shut down CNN, MSNBC, the Guardian, and BBC. There are very few outlets that are giving us real news, it's very difficult to be seen. One way to get the truth is to go to [gives out url for Craig Murray's site]. So, that's where you want to get some information, in case he gets censored again on Twitter or Facebook, please go there. The audience, and get what Mr. Murray has to write [sic] are an extraordinary individual, I just want to recommend to the audience, your book, _Sikunder Burnes_ is out there, it's a fascinating, it's the best book I've read since _War and Peace_ by Tolstoy. Really is quite an adventure. This character's biography, Sikunder Burnes, I recommend it, get it on Amazon, Barnes & Noble, written by Craig Murray, it's a six year effort, and it's really a fascinating ride. Craig Murray, we appreciate you taking the time out to be on the show, we are going to stick to that promise to you not to keep you past ten minutes, but we're at twelve now, so we're gonna play some of your music here, Craig, as we go out...I think this is one of your favorite tunes, can you hear us?
  60. MURRAY
  61. Um, yeah [inaudible]...
  64. This is Supertramp. We're going to talk about Supertramp the next time we have you on our show. ["The Logical Song" by Supertramp plays]
RAW Paste Data
We use cookies for various purposes including analytics. By continuing to use Pastebin, you agree to our use of cookies as described in the Cookies Policy. OK, I Understand