7 comments

[ 3.2 ms ] story [ 23.8 ms ] thread
Not sure why this tagged ‘Assange Trial’ as that only gets a tangential mention. The author is writing that he has been excluded from the Alex Salmond trial.
(comment deleted)
"Assange Trial" gets far more interest from an international audience. A previous post title "The Alex Salmond Trial and Censorship" did not get any traction whereas this post is accumulating upvotes fast.
Isn't that the definition of click-bait? Promise something in the headline just for the clicks, but don't deliver it in the article
The post is about how the state is able to abuse it's position in the pursuit of people who oppose it's agenda. Craig's position is that the Alex Salmond trial is just a continuation of what happened to Julian Assange.

Craig Murray is a supporter of Alex Salmond. He was in court last week then the public were allowed in after the prosecution had made it's case - the witnesses for the prosecution had their identities hidden. Despite his obvious preference in outcome his writing on the proceeding were, in quality, light years beyond was published in the mainstream media, https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2020/03/your-man-fin... It's certainly worth a read if only to see what quality news reporting looks like.

Remember that the trial is not over. The jury are deliberating their verdict and were sent home on Friday. The court will reconvene on Monday. Consequently certain statements could be considered as contempt of court. You might want to consider that if you comment here and live in the UK.

Disclaimer: I read Craig Murray's blog regularly and believe Scotland should stand on it's own two feet.

The story just continues to be corrupt. The last thing I remember was that Twitter blocked WikiLeaks' account for no reason and without any justification or answer after being prompted for comment.
This has nothing to do with the Assange trial... can we get the title changed?