Latest from Craig Murray on torture in Uzbekistan

[The Reaper]

A must read!
The full article: http://www.sundayherald.com/52305

Here are some quotes:

UZBEKISTAN is one of the destinations where “rendered” prisoners end up after being kidnapped by the CIA . Uzbekistan is also somewhere where prisoners are literally boiled alive in cauldrons in the Tashkent torture chambers of the SNB, the Uzbek secret police. Every type of torture the mind can imagine happens in the Central Asian dictatorship.

When a rendered suspect is tortured in Uzbekistan, for example, the SNB forward the confession to the CIA. The CIA then forward the confession to MI6. MI6 pass the information to Cabinet ministers, who use it to make pronouncements about security threats to the UK. The routine is followed no matter in which country the rendered suspect is tortured.

“In Uzbekistan, it works like this,” he says. “Person X is tortured and signs a statement saying he’s going to crash planes into buildings, or that he’s linked to Osama bin Laden. He’s also asked if he knows persons X, Y and Z in the UK who are involved in terrorism. He’ll be tortured until he agrees, though he’s never met them.”

“The CIA then issues a debriefing document, which does not name the individual. It does not say he was tortured. It only says that it is a detainee debriefing from a friendly overseas security service.
......
“I’d look at these reports and, to be frank, I realised they were bollocks. One talked about terror camps in the hills near Samarkand. I knew the precise location being talked about and it wasn’t true.

No comments... :evil:

TR

[Uzbekxonim]

Craig Murrey's reputation both in Uzbekistan and in UK is very doubtfull. thus, I would not reccomend to believe his words. if you're interested in Torture issues in Uzbekistan its better to read the reports prepared by the UN Committee Against Torture.

[Ulug'bek]

Craig Murrey's reputation both in Uzbekistan and in UK is very doubtfull. thus, I would not reccomend to believe his words. if you're interested in Torture issues in Uzbekistan its better to read the reports prepared by the UN Committee Against Torture.

What reputation can we expect for him in Uzb. after critisizing IAK's policy and government openly:) ?
The same is true till some extent, about his reputation in UK.
As an uzbek citizen, I read in most part of what he wrote things, I have seen or heard.

A part from reports prepared by the UN Committee Against Torture, it also worth to read detailed and well-documented reports of Human Rights Watch on Uzbekistan.

[Uzbekxonim]

What reputation can we expect for him in Uzb. after critisizing IAK's policy and government openly:) ?


it's not only about critisizing IAK's policy but the way he behaved himself while being an Ambassador in Uzbekistan, he did things that would never a normal Ambassador (he drank much in night clubs, relations with 'bad' women etc).

[Gareeb]

Craig Murreyni bu boradagi gaplariga qo'shilaman.Uzbdagi qiynoqlar masalasidagi ahwol bundan ham battar.

[Ulug'bek]

it's not only about critisizing IAK's policy but the way he behaved himself while being an Ambassador in Uzbekistan, he did things that would never a normal Ambassador (he drank much in night clubs, relations with 'bad' women etc).

Is it not a private life?:) where people have "right" to practice their "rights"? If a gay is allowed to be president of a country, what is wrong in going to a night club, leads to be not normal ambassador?:)

And is there any thing wrong in doing that according to you:) ?

Anyway, don't take these sentences that serious, I am just playing words, to open more channels to think deeper.
And please feel that you are one of the most wellcomed and respected (at least by me) users of the forum!

I have read in one of his articles deep respect for our nation and our history. A person with this view, in addition to his deep consern about our presence and future, with will and wish to see us in better situation deserves to be respected by every one of us (and not the opposite), although it does not mean that all what he says is right!
This is all what I wanted to say.

[Uzbekxonim]

Is it not a private life?:) where people have "right" to practice their "rights"? If a gay is allowed to be president of a country, what is wrong in going to a night club, leads to be not normal ambassador?:)

And is there any thing wrong in doing that according to you:) ?

Anyway, don't take these sentences that serious, I am just playing words, to open more channels to think deeper.
And please feel that you are one of the most wellcomed and respected (at least by me) users of the forum!

I have read in one of his articles deep respect for our nation and our history. A person with this view, in addition to his deep consern about our presence and future, with will and wish to see us in better situation deserves to be respected by every one of us (and not the opposite), although it does not mean that all what he says is right!
This is all what I wanted to say.

harakatlari ambassador nomiga yarashmasdi-da, whatever.

I agree with your words (underlined).

[The Reaper]

it's not only about critisizing IAK's policy but the way he behaved himself while being an Ambassador in Uzbekistan, he did things that would never a normal Ambassador (he drank much in night clubs, relations with 'bad' women etc).

As usual, women care about absolutely irrelevant things...
"Bad" women? Now, that's jealousy! :D
Who cares what he did in his leisure time!?

TR

[INSOMNIA]

Uzbekhonum, as a lawyer, or the one, who studied law, you should be aware of argumentum ad hominem. So, please let's concentrate on the statement the person made, and not the person itself.
After all, Murray is one of the very few people with honor and dignity, who put his political career at stake to tell the truth.

[PainKiller]

Oh, damn. Why I never thought about this? This is Genious!
SNB aka Tortures Mirzaqul, who confesses in planning to crash White house, and +he confesses that he knows the Osama, even more- they have even met once! Then This Information goes to CIA(which definetely trusts the Uzbek Authorities, and does not have any other ways of spying but Help of Uzbek SNB:lol: ) Then they Bomb Irak and then they wait whether next teshaboy will be tortured and will share the information whether Iran has a nuclear bomb or not. gaaaaaaaaaaaa

[INSOMNIA]

Well, as far as I can see from the article you are trying to distort the chain of events.
So, SNB aka first tortures Mirzaqul, who confesses in planning to crash WH, and he confesses that he knows Osama. And then Mirzaqul tells SNB aka that he also knows Mamarayim, citizen of some Middle Eastern state, who is currently residing in London, and THIS report is sent to CIA.
CIA gets this information, and sends it to MI6. And here is the evidence for MI6 to send Mamarayim in custody.
Plus SNB aka is also getting his share from Messrs Bush and Blair in the form of financial aids, as SNB aka is preventing possible attacks to the US and its allies.
Oh, damn. Why I never thought about this? This is Genious!
SNB aka Tortures Mirzaqul, who confesses in planning to crash White house, and +he confesses that he knows the Osama, even more- they have even met once! Then This Information goes to CIA(which definetely trusts the Uzbek Authorities, and does not have any other ways of spying but Help of Uzbek SNB:lol: ) Then they Bomb Irak and then they wait whether next teshaboy will be tortured and will share the information whether Iran has a nuclear bomb or not. gaaaaaaaaaaaa

[Uzbekxonim]

As usual, women care about absolutely irrelevant things...
"Bad" women? Now, that's jealousy! :D
Who cares what he did in his leisure time!?

TR

oh, yes, yes, you're right. I'm so jealous of Mr. Murrey, especially jealous of falling down in his career with a jet speed.:lol:

[Uzbekxonim]

Uzbekhonum, as a lawyer, or the one, who studied law, you should be aware of argumentum ad hominem. So, please let's concentrate on the statement the person made, and not the person itself.
After all, Murray is one of the very few people with honor and dignity, who put his political career at stake to tell the truth.

I think that the arguments of this person should not be taken as 100 % truth until real evidence are provided by him. similarly, without presenting any evidence, anyone can accuse US and UK that they use intelegence information obtained by alliens through illegal kidnapping and experimental abuse of humans.

as a person who studied law I would not rely on a person's statement knowing the cases when he said lies before and understanding his afforts to get back into politics by making 'high flown statements'.

regards.

[PainKiller]

Well, as far as I can see from the article you are trying to distort the chain of events.
So, SNB aka first tortures Mirzaqul, who confesses in planning to crash WH, and he confesses that he knows Osama. And then Mirzaqul tells SNB aka that he also knows Mamarayim, citizen of some Middle Eastern state, who is currently residing in London, and THIS report is sent to CIA.
CIA gets this information, and sends it to MI6. And here is the evidence for MI6 to send Mamarayim in custody.
Plus SNB aka is also getting his share from Messrs Bush and Blair in the form of financial aids, as SNB aka is preventing possible attacks to the US and its allies.INSOMNIA, you got my shape, but Not the Taste I guess:lol:
What I am trying to say is, does not matter how it works Mirzaqul-SNB-CIA-FBI and etc. etc. My point was:Do you really think, that FBI will view SNB or any Uzbekistan based source as a relieable?:lol:

[infolife]

I've read in one of his articles when he went to Samarkand he had a dinner with the rector of INYAZ there(former one)They discussed the issues like bribery in education system and corruption. That day the rector's 18 year-old grandson was taken and killed and 'they' left his dead body at the door. That's soooooo true cos I've checked this with people in Samarkand.

I think that the arguments of this person should not be taken as 100 % truth until real evidence are provided by him. similarly, without presenting any evidence, anyone can accuse US and UK that they use intelegence information obtained by alliens through illegal kidnapping and experimental abuse of humans.

as a person who studied law I would not rely on a person's statement knowing the cases when he said lies before and understanding his afforts to get back into politics by making 'high flown statements'.

regards.

[PainKiller]

I've read in one of his articles when he went to Samarkand he had a dinner with the rector of INYAZ there(former one)They discussed the issues like bribery in education system and corruption. That day the rector's 18 year-old grandson was taken and killed and 'they' left his dead body at the door. That's soooooo true cos I've checked this with people in Samarkand.About the Rector, All I know is that because of his mouth and talks he lost his job.:?

[Legend]

...................Why not?INSOMNIA, you got my shape, but Not the Taste I guess:lol:
What I am trying to say is, does not matter how it works Mirzaqul-SNB-CIA-FBI and etc. etc. My point was:Do you really think, that FBI will view SNB or any Uzbekistan based source as a relieable?:lol:

[The Reaper]

Yusuf aka Abdullaev, the former rektor of Samarkand InYaz, is one of the most intelligent and decent people I've ver met.
I've met him personally on many occassions; and his humbleness, intelligence and professionalism never ceased to amaze me!

It's a shame what they did to him.
Last I heard, he's currently teaching at a university in South Korea.

TR

[INSOMNIA]

:) ok my bad.

Imagine this situation: You are an intelligence officer working for US Immigration and Naturilisation and you are doing a background security check on Mamarayim. Let's say you did not like Mamarayim's bashara, or let's assume you somehow suspect that his bashara might pose a threat to the security of the United States.
Therefore, you want to kick Mamarayim out of the country.
However, you know that you can't rely on your naked intuition to do that. You know perfectly that you have to abide by the regulations of Geneva Convention, and provide a more solid basis to kick Mamarayim's as*.

So, what you do is to ask your uzbek colleagues, who have arrested so far a bunch of freaks from Al-Qaeda, to interrogate their detainees and ask them if they have any information on Mamarayim.

Uzbek SNB, following the routine, politely boils dead a couple of detainees, rapes the other couple, and eventually finds the one that confesses in knowing Mamarayim personally.

Now, you know that Uzbecks torture prisoners systematically, and you know perfectly that these confessions that had been extracted under torture are unreliable, but WHO CARES?
The most important thing is you have some kind of an evidence on hard copy, evidence that is not based on your brilliant intuition.

IN SHORT, they believe in these reports because they WANT TO believe in them. Because these reports serve their interests. I admit I might be wrong, but this is my opinion.


INSOMNIA, you got my shape, but Not the Taste I guess:lol:
What I am trying to say is, does not matter how it works Mirzaqul-SNB-CIA-FBI and etc. etc. My point was:Do you really think, that FBI will view SNB or any Uzbekistan based source as a relieable?:lol:

[INSOMNIA]

Uzbekhonum, I respect your opinion, but to my mind Craig Murray lost his job due to his, as you say, "high flown statements". IMHO he started talking about these issues long before he was fired. correct me if I'm wrong. CAUSE and EFFECT... remember? these "high flown statements" cost him his job.
And I would really appreciate it if you could back up this statement: "as a person who studied law I would not rely on a person's statement knowing the cases when he said lies before"
Please share with us any information about any of his lies.

I think that the arguments of this person should not be taken as 100 % truth until real evidence are provided by him. similarly, without presenting any evidence, anyone can accuse US and UK that they use intelegence information obtained by alliens through illegal kidnapping and experimental abuse of humans.

as a person who studied law I would not rely on a person's statement knowing the cases when he said lies before and understanding his afforts to get back into politics by making 'high flown statements'.

regards.

[Uzbekxonim]

why everybody has such a protective feelings for Mr. Murrey?
only because he's critising IAK's policy?

[PainKiller]

I know Mr Murray personally. The things you wrote below seems to me as nonsense.
r u sure u know him close enough? and if yes, how close? :lol:

[Кумушбиби]

Uzbekhonum,

Крэга Мюррея устранили от исполнения посольский обязанностей на почве сфабрикованных слухов: "аморальное поведение", "виза в обмен на интимность" и пр. ложь. Хотя на самом деле он был устранён и отозван по политическим мотивам. Знаете ли, Билла Клинтона, в своё время, тоже хотели дискредитировать, руководствуясь аналогичным методом. Когда он "отбился от рук", то кому-то понадобилось раздуть историю с Моникой Луинской, от которой, извините, у многих натёрлись мозоли на глазах.

Всё дело, в том что Мюррей зазвонил в колокола, в неугодное временное пространство, т.е. в то время, когда Узбекистан назывался союзником в "войне против террора", а Каримыч считался "своим с....м сыном". Если бы Мюррей сделал своё заявление сейчас (т.е. после того как между Узбекистаном и Великобританией пробежалась чёрная кошка) то навряд ли бы лишился дипломатического портфеля.

[Gareeb]

:) ok my bad.

Imagine this situation: You are an intelligence officer working for US Immigration and Naturilisation and you are doing a background security check on Mamarayim. Let's say you did not like Mamarayim's bashara, or let's assume you somehow suspect that his bashara might pose a threat to the security of the United States.
Therefore, you want to kick Mamarayim out of the country.
However, you know that you can't rely on your naked intuition to do that. You know perfectly that you have to abide by the regulations of Geneva Convention, and provide a more solid basis to kick Mamarayim's as*.

So, what you do is to ask your uzbek colleagues, who have arrested so far a bunch of freaks from Al-Qaeda, to interrogate their detainees and ask them if they have any information on Mamarayim.

Uzbek SNB, following the routine, politely boils dead a couple of detainees, rapes the other couple, and eventually finds the one that confesses in knowing Mamarayim personally.

Now, you know that Uzbecks torture prisoners systematically, and you know perfectly that these confessions that had been extracted under torture are unreliable, but WHO CARES?
The most important thing is you have some kind of an evidence on hard copy, evidence that is not based on your brilliant intuition.

IN SHORT, they believe in these reports because they WANT TO believe in them. Because these reports serve their interests. I admit I might be wrong, but this is my opinion.
This is the point.As long as they need it they can easily rely on it, even if it is a sh*t.Those informations might not be true but it is not worthless .They can use it in the name of war on terror.

[Uzbekxonim]

Uzbekhonum, I respect your opinion, but to my mind Craig Murray lost his job due to his, as you say, "high flown statements". IMHO he started talking about these issues long before he was fired. correct me if I'm wrong. CAUSE and EFFECT... remember? these "high flown statements" cost him his job.


with the cause you mentioned here I would disagree - the cause is that he didn't think properly before saying and doing something (not always but in some cases), effect => he's lost his job.

I do not consider him as a person who's saying smth. for the sake of truth, he's doing that for his own sake (as I mentioned before -to get back into politics)


And I would really appreciate it if you could back up this statement: "as a person who studied law I would not rely on a person's statement knowing the cases when he said lies before"
Please share with us any information about any of his lies.


Any statement without prove or evidence provided I consider as lies. even this statement of Murray mentioned in the above article is not provided with ANY relieble evidence or prove as well as his previous statements. I assume that this person is not trustworthy.
regards.

[Uzbekxonim]

Uzbekhonum,

Крэга Мюррея устранили от исполнения посольский обязанностей на почве сфабрикованных слухов: "аморальное поведение", "виза в обмен на интимность" и пр. ложь. Хотя на самом деле он был устранён и отозван по политическим мотивам. Знаете ли, Билла Клинтона, в своё время, тоже хотели дискредитировать, руководствуясь аналогичным методом. Когда он "отбился от рук", то кому-то понадобилось раздуть историю с Моникой Луинской, от которой, извините, у многих натёрлись мозоли на глазах.

Всё дело, в том что Мюррей зазвонил в колокола, в неугодное временное пространство, т.е. в то время, когда Узбекистан назывался союзником в "войне против террора", а Каримыч считался "своим с....м сыном". Если бы Мюррей сделал своё заявление сейчас (т.е. после того как между Узбекистаном и Великобританией пробежалась чёрная кошка) то навряд ли бы лишился дипломатического портфеля.

Gospoja Kumushbibi,
pozvol'te vas slegka ispravit' on bil osvobojden ne tolko ot posolskih obyazannostey, on takje bil uvolen iz MIDa UK. takim obrazom, eto bila ne edinstvennaya prichina ego uvolneniya.

eshe odna prichina bila narushenie Venskoy konvetsii o dip. snosheniyah chem on oporochil imidj svoey strani. narushenie zaklyuchalos v sled. - soglasno Venskoy konventsii diplomat akreditovanniy v strane A ne imeet pravo kritikovat' politiku strani prebivaniya - strani A (vozmojno iz-za togo chto etim deystviem on mojet uhudshit' otnosheniya mejdu stranami), Mr Murray pozvolil sebe eto ne uchitivaya interesi i imidj predstavlyaemoy im strani.

regards.

[Uzbekxonim]

I know Mr Murray personally. The things you wrote below seems to me as nonsense.

I assume that you didn't know him enough, espesially the reasons of his being fired.

[Кумушбиби]

Уважаемая Узбекхоним,

А теперь позвольте исправить вас.

В октябре 2003 года Мюррей официально заявляет: "В действительности Узбекистан не является демократической страной, и он очевидно не идет по пути демократии. Крупнейшие политические партии находятся под запретом, состав парламента не зависит от демократических выборов, отсутствует система сдержек и противовесов, которая позволяла бы контролировать исполнительную власть". Через некоторое время после выступления Мюррея отзывают в Лондон, после чего он вновь возвращается.

Вопрос: "Почему Мюррею позволяют вернуться?"
Узбекхоним, вы случайно не задумывались над этим вопросом? Почему Мюррея отзывали в Лондон (не один раз), но вскоре возвращали обратно и позволяли приступить к исполнению служебных обязанностей? Возможно британцы невнимательно читали упомянутую вами конвенцию.;)

Ещё раз повторяю, что устранение Мюррея от должности было вызвано недовольствием со стороны Белого Дома, для которого в то время РУз являлась ключевым союзником, а на её территории располагалась одна из основных баз американской авиации. Не секрет, что заявления Мюррея рассердили американского посла в РУз Джона Хербста. Так что считайте, что Мюррея принесли в жертву американцам. А конвенция - это было дело десятое. Уж простите.

[Uzbekxonim]

Уважаемая Узбекхоним,

А теперь позвольте исправить вас.

В октябре 2003 года Мюррей официально заявляет: "В действительности Узбекистан не является демократической страной, и он очевидно не идет по пути демократии. Крупнейшие политические партии находятся под запретом, состав парламента не зависит от демократических выборов, отсутствует система сдержек и противовесов, которая позволяла бы контролировать исполнительную власть". Через некоторое время после выступления Мюррея отзывают в Лондон, после чего он вновь возвращается.

Вопрос: "Почему Мюррею позволяют вернуться?"
Узбекхоним, вы случайно не задумывались над этим вопросом? Почему Мюррея отзывали в Лондон (не один раз), но вскоре возвращали обратно и позволяли приступить к исполнению служебных обязанностей? Возможно британцы невнимательно читали упомянутую вами конвенцию.;)

Ещё раз повторяю, что устранение Мюррея от должности было вызвано недовольствием со стороны Белого Дома, для которого в то время РУз являлась ключевым союзником, а на её территории располагалась одна из основных баз американской авиации. Не секрет, что заявления Мюррея рассердили американского посла в РУз Джона Хербста. Так что считайте, что Мюррея принесли в жертву американцам. А конвенция - это было дело десятое. Уж простите.

naskolko ya pomnyu - perviy raz ego otozvali v London chtobi prokonsultirovat', potom on ostalsya v Londone polechitsya, posle lecheniya on priehal v Uzbekistan 'under investigation of UK MFA", (naverno otpustili chtobi sobrat' svoi veshi;)). vot uje kogda on vtoroy raz poehal na lechenie v London posle etogo on ne vozvrashalsya.

i agree with your points.
regards.

p.s. do you know anything about Chris Hurst? I think that another reasons of him being fired was a behaviour of Chris Hurst (Second secretary of UK Embassy). Murrey neglected his responsibilities to control that man. Chis Hurst was recalled few days after Murrey.

[INSOMNIA]

Uzbekhonum, as you see from the timeline, Murray, who had been appointed British Ambassador to Tashkent in August 2002, first spoke about the receipt by the CIA and MI6 of intelligence extracted under torture back in November 2002.

So, there is no point in claiming that Murray is currently using this information to get back into politics. What I mean is, Murray was talking about this long back in November 2002 and he is still talking about it, which, to my mind, means he is doing it for the sake of truth. I'm 100% sure that had ne not spoken about the receipt of intelligence extracted under torture, he would have been still serving his term as an Ambassador.

August 2002: Craig Murray is appointed British Ambassador to Uzbekistan, a US ally in the "war on terror".
October 2002: In a speech to "Freedom House", Craig Murray details grave concerns over the human rights situation in Uzbekistan.
November 2002: In a secret telegram to London, Craig Murray first criticises the receipt by the CIA and MI6 of intelligence extracted through torture.
November 2002 - March 2003: Craig Murray continues to speak out about human rights abuse in Uzbekistan, and support local human rights activists.
8th March 2003: Craig Murray is summoned to London and told formally of Jack Straw's decision that intelligence material obtained under torture is both legal and useful.
March 2003 - August 2003: Craig Murray continues to speak out about human rights abuse in Uzbekistan.
August 2003: The Foreign Office presents Craig Murray with 18 disciplinary charges, including an allegation that he gave out British visas to Uzbek girls in exchange for sex. He is suspended and given a week to resign. He denounces the charges, and refuses to resign. The charges are not made public.
October 2003: The Guardian newspaper discovers that Craig Murray has been suspended, and reports details of the charges against him (http://politics.guardian.co.uk/foreignaffairs/story/0,11538,1065839,00.html). A senior unnamed Foreign Office source talks of a "campaign of systematic undermining" against Craig Murray to pressure him to stop criticising the Uzbek government. The source suggests that the pressure was partly "exercised on the orders of No 10". The Foreign Office refuses to make any official comment.
January 2004: All 18 disciplinary charges are disproved (http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,1130080,00.html), and Craig Murray returns to his post - though he is disciplined for speaking to colleagues about the charges.
January 2004 - July 2004: Craig Murray continues to speak out about human rights abuse in Uzbekistan, and support local human rights activists.
July 2004: In a secret memo, Craig Murray criticises the British and US policy of accepting information extracted through torture by the Uzbek government. "We are selling our souls for dross", he says.
October 11th 2004: Craig Murray's secret memo is published in the Financial Times (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3732488.stm), following a leak by an unknown official.
October 15th 2004: Craig Murray is sacked from his Ambassadorial post "for operational reasons" (http://news.independent.co.uk/world/asia/story.jsp?story=572349), but remains on the Foreign Office payroll.
October 16th 2004: In a Radio 4 interview, Craig Murray speaks out against his sacking (http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/today/reports/politics/craigmurray_20041015.shtml), claiming that he is a "victim of conscience". He goes on to give other media interviews, in which he is critical of the Foreign Office.
October 21st 2004: Craig Murray is charged with "gross misconduct" for criticising the Foreign Office publicly (http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,,1332894,00.html).
February 2005: Craig Murray resigns from the Foreign Office, and announces his intention to stand as an Independent candidate against Jack Straw in Blackburn.


with the cause you mentioned here I would disagree - the cause is that he didn't think properly before saying and doing something (not always but in some cases), effect => he's lost his job.

I do not consider him as a person who's saying smth. for the sake of truth, he's doing that for his own sake (as I mentioned before -to get back into politics)



Any statement without prove or evidence provided I consider as lies. even this statement of Murray mentioned in the above article is not provided with ANY relieble evidence or prove as well as his previous statements. I assume that this person is not trustworthy.
regards.

[PainKiller]

This is the point.As long as they need it they can easily rely on it, even if it is a sh*t.Those informations might not be true but it is not worthless .They can use it in the name of war on terror.
Why are you so naive? U do not start anything like this only because all u have is the information from highly respected Uzbeki officials. :?

[Guardian]

Uzbekhohum, I reckon you would read some of Craig Murray's articles, web-blogs and some reliable third party sources before over-detracting.
My help would be to present the sources:

http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/weblog.html - his web blog
Craig Murray's website (http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/)

Timeline of Craig Murray's ambassadorship in Uzbekistan (http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2005/04/timeline_of_cra.html)
Speech at Chatham House (http://www.riia.org/pdf/meeting_transcripts/081104murray.pdf) (PDF (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portable_Document_Format)) - Monday 8 November (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/November_8) 2004 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004)
British Embassy, Tashkent Press And Public Affairs (http://www.britishembassy.gov.uk/servlet/Front?pagename=OpenMarket/Xcelerate/ShowPage&c=Page&cid=1068720964825) - links to some speeches and interviews
The Uses of Torture (http://ukwatch.net/article/251) - Speech transcript, February 2005
London Friends of Craig Murray (http://craigmurrayfriends.blogspot.com/)
Craig Murray's campaign song "Hit The Road Jack Straw" (http://www.globalizer.org/mp3/RubJackStraw.mp3)
Postman Patel and his dog Jack (http://www.postmanpatel.blogspot.com/)
Press
The envoy who said too much (http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,3604,1261480,00.html) from The Guardian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Guardian), 18 October 2003

The Australian Broadcasting Corporation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_Broadcasting_Corporation), 29 March (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/March_29) 2005 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005) - Uzbekistan - Torture Trail (http://www.abc.net.au/foreign/content/2005/s1330326.htm)
The BBC (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BBC)
2 October (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/October_2) 2003 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003) - British envoy leaves Uzbekistan (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3157196.stm)
8 November (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/November_8) 2003 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003) - 'Smeared' UK envoy's return urged (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/3252679.stm)
12 November (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/November_12) 2003 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003) - Envoy to resume Uzbekistan post (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3262581.stm)
15 November (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/November_15) 2003 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003) - UK envoy back at work in Tashkent (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3272523.stm)
20 November (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/November_20) 2003 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003) - Uzbekistan ambassador back in UK (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3286323.stm)
11 October (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/October_11) 2004 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004) - 'Torture intelligence' criticised (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3732488.stm)
6 May (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/May_6) 2005 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005) - Murray's election result (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/vote2005/html/65.stm)
Muslim Uzbekistan (http://www.muslimuzbekistan.com/)

6 October (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/October_6) 2003 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003) - Has The Hand Of Uzbek Dictator Reached London? (http://www.muslimuzbekistan.com/eng/ennews/2003/10/ennews06102003a.html)
19 October (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/October_19) 2003 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003) - Repression In Uzbekistan Is 'Terrible' Says Short Backing Envoy Who Criticised U.S. (http://www.muslimuzbekistan.com/eng/ennews/2003/10/ennews19102003_1.html)
25 October (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/October_25) 2003 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003) - Uzbekistan: British Diplomat Quits At Strife-Ridden Embassy (http://www.muslimuzbekistan.com/eng/ennews/2003/10/ennews25102003a.html)
7 November (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/November_7) 2003 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003) - UK-Uzbekistan: FO Backs Down Over Envoy's Sacking (http://www.muslimuzbekistan.com/eng/ennews/2003/11/ennews07112003.html)
24 January (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/January_24) 2004 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004) - UK's Embattled Envoy To Tashkent Cleared Of Charges (http://www.muslimuzbekistan.com/eng/ennews/2004/01/ennews24012004.html)
1 March (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/March_1) 2004 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004) - The Undiplomatic Ambassador (http://www.muslimuzbekistan.com/eng/ennews/2004/03/ennews01032004.html)
5 May (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/May_5) 2004 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004) - British Envoy Blasts Uzbek Government (http://www.muslimuzbekistan.com/eng/ennews/2004/05/ennews05052004_1.html)
The Registan's controversial view of the Murray debacle (http://www.registan.net/) See also: A young Uzbek woman's reflection on the Murray controversy at Thinking-East.Net (http://www.thinking-east.net/site/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=119)
UK Indymedia - Neocon blog launches smear campaign against Craig Murray (http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2005/04/308370.html)
Uzbekistan's human rights record, from Amnesty International (http://web.amnesty.org/report2004/uzb-summary-eng)
Press freedom conditions in Uzbekistan (http://www.ifex.org/en/content/view/full/185/) - IFEX (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IFEX)

[Uzbekxonim]

Uzbekhonum, as you see from the timeline, Murray, who had been appointed British Ambassador to Tashkent in August 2002, first spoke about the receipt by the CIA and MI6 of intelligence extracted under torture back in November 2002.

So, there is no point in claiming that Murray is currently using this information to get back into politics. What I mean is, Murray was talking about this long back in November 2002 and he is still talking about it, which, to my mind, means he is doing it for the sake of truth. I'm 100% sure that had ne not spoken about the receipt of intelligence extracted under torture, he would have been still serving his term as an Ambassador.

August 2002: Craig Murray is appointed British Ambassador to Uzbekistan, a US ally in the "war on terror".


Did you compile this chronology yourself?
You have a right to have your opinion and I respect that. I also have a right to have and to keep my opinion as it is.
regards.

[PainKiller]

OMG, pochemu u tebya vsegda misli poshlie:rolleyes:Poshlie emas, ti sama poshlaya poetomu v takom nevinnom voprose videsh' poshlost'. Ladno, tebe po polochkam razlozhu:
Prsto, ponimaesh', dlya togo chto-bi sudt' o tom Murray takoe delal ili ne delal, kak on smotrit na chto-to, kak on dumaet i tp i tp, Chelovek dolzhen bit' minimum ego sekretaryom kotoi prorabotal s nim mnogo-mnogo let. Vot chto ya sprosila.:D

[INSOMNIA]

Uzbekhonum, I did not compile the chronology myself.;)
and let's stop our discussion in here then:D :D :D
coz i'm pretty sure whatever i say, whatever i do will not change your mind.
"Audi, vide, tace, si vis vivere in pace". (http://www.eveandersson.com/photos/japan/nikko-tosho-gu-3-monkeys-medium.jpg) just a joke;)



Did you compile this chronology yourself?
You have a right to have your opinion and I respect that. I also have a right to have and to keep my opinion as it is.
regards.

[Bonik]

It's a difficult task :)