WORLD-BEATING LIAR

First of all, you can have free ports and be in the EU and the proof of that was that Britain had some until the Tories closed them in 2012.

According to BBC Fact Check:

The claim: The UK does not have free ports because of its membership of the EU.

Reality Check verdict: It is not true to say you can’t have free ports or tax-free zones if you are a member state of the EU. There are more than 80 such zones across the Union. It would be easier to take advantage of potential benefits outside the EU.

Oh, and freeports are all well and good but it seems that Liz Truss forgot some important points when bragging about them. Not so free, after all?

The European Super League is a corker. He and his dim cabinet clearly hoped to gain political advantage from trying to sell the tale that anything with “European” in its title was being forced on all the EU states by Brussels. And that thanks to his brilliance in negotiating Brexit, Britain no longer had to suffer under the tyranny that was the EU.

The trouble with that is that there were only three countries which got involved in the Super League: Namely England, Spain and Italy.

So 25 EU countries, some with superb football clubs, somehow managed to avoid the diktat from Brussels?

As for the vaccine roll out, although there was a European effort, member states were at liberty to take their own steps. And some did, as could have Britain.

So 25 seconds and 3 total lies.

Still, we should be grateful that he didn’t get a begging bowl out for yet more goodies from donors.

90 thoughts on “WORLD-BEATING LIAR”

  1. The Truth is that the big flounder is the only gold medal winner in this year’s Olympic games.
    Only his late buddy, trump, could have been a serious contender for the medal for the most lies in the shortest time.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. BTW, I see it’s been announced that Her Ladship has taken up a directorship of a London company for £85,000 a year.

      That of course on top of £300+ a day plus expenses for going for lunch in the superior settings of the House of Peers.

      She doesn’t waste much time. I just hope her partner is going to have the time to spend with the kid.

      Liked by 1 person

        1. It’s the oddest thing.

          I can understand that there were people who liked Cameron, and those even who liked May, but I’m trying hard to imagine what kind of person actually “likes” Johnson.

          Like

          1. It is hard to understand.

            David Allen Green frequently says that the problem is not exposing corruption and lies but getting anyone to care about it. On a related point, he says that the UK’s current problem is not its constitution but the lack of regard for it by ministers of state, MPs and voters. I think he’s right.

            Brexit brought us directly here.

            Liked by 1 person

  2. Listening to some englanders and their voting intentions make you wonder what has happened to the english education system for the plebs.
    This morning the handcock says the government are ‘Worried’ about the Indian variant.
    The big flounder says that pubs and restaurants can open up from Monday and social distancing and masks wearing rules are to be relaxed.
    The english government says that a new Indyref is a distraction BUTT they’ve been busy with voter suppression ID card legislation and more weapons and expenditure for the armed forces.
    All the coverage of the flat cash, the contracts cash and the death rate are all forgotten, our Nicola is now the target.
    The baroness will need a nice income to be able to afford the ermine dressing up costume and the new flat remodelling in London.
    In the meantime the B word has been removed from the media coverage, Brexit has been done, the effects of it are all down to the covid virus.
    Yesterday’s Sky response to the result where the presenter asks if we will give up english as our language, yes we will just be using American as our language just the same as the plastic Yanks in englandland.

    Liked by 2 people

  3. As far as the Super League is concerned, Boris and his henchmen had already signalled those concerned that they were happy with the plan, only to backtrack rapidly when they found out that everybody else was less than pleased with the whole thing.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Yes. Well, it was a plan the central plank of which was making a lot more money for the rich businessmen who own these clubs.

      What was not to like?

      Rich businessmen are donors, either to the party or to individuals.

      And wallpaper doesn’t come cheap.

      Like

  4. O/t Craig Murray sentenced to 8 months imprisonment. Currently debating whether he’ll be allowed to remain at liberty during appeal.

    I imagine the polis are on their way to arrest Severin Carrell, Dani Garavelli et al right way of the same thing. Ah they only reported the prosecution case so that will be a no then.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. What, that’s horrendous. Jeez. He definitely does not deserve months in jail for his coverage of the Salmond trial. There are many people in powerful positions who should be locked up however. Scary times.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Yes dictator Sturgeon, must be true! The anti Nicola Sturgeon like on at
        C. Murray’s blog is horrific. Nasty SNP, the usual blanking out the Brit states’ dirty tactics.
        I suspect the sentence is deliberate to attempt to portray the Scottish (largely unionist!) judiciary in a very negative light indeed, and thereby the Scottish government (SNP) by association. You can see the headlines when Murray is locked up. Scotland locks up political activist! The so called media are ignoring it the now, but be in no doubt they are waiting to pounce!
        I don’t know a lot about how law, and government work in Scotland, nor how closely they function, (as one and the same entity, according to the anti SNP anti N. Sturgeon justice for all freedom fighters, on blogs) but a nod and a wink from those on high in England would be all it takes to interfere in the system in Scotland.
        Someone wants to punish Craig Murray, and where there is a will there is a way, but N. Sturgeon ain’t the person folks should be pointing the finger at.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. I agree, ArtyHetty, the idea that LadyDorian/Scottish Judges are acting on a political agenda drawn up by Nicola/SNP is absurd.
          I’m surprised at the sentence though… he’s received a sentence of 2 months more than the blogger who actually named the complainants in the case.

          Liked by 2 people

          1. Did the other blogger ‘fess up? That can make a huge difference regards sentencing.

            I was following CM’s reporting, he was warned several times (by posters on his own blog) that he was sailing close to the wind.

            Liked by 1 person

        2. I didn’t know enough about it to comment to be fair.

          I’m still mystified how people could bring a case against ANYONE based on lies (as it appears they largely were), the person, with their name all over the press be found innocent and the people who brought the changes get away with still being anon.

          They cost us a fortune and according to the judge and jury, lied about the situation, presumably at the behest of a senior civil servant.

          I’m not sure why they are not in the dock themselves.

          I’m talking no sides between Salmond and Sturgeon. I can’t possibly know enough to make a decision on that that isn’t based on personal preference.

          But I still can’t see how you can lie to the police and lie in court and get away with it…

          Or have I got something wrong there?

          Liked by 1 person

          1. I’m absolutely convinced nobody lied.

            The question was about the criminality of mutually acknowledged incidents of poor conduct. Did it reach the bar of criminality? Well, the answer was no. Would it have got you sacked from an office job? Yes. Any of the mutually acknowledged incidents would have got anyone sacked from a normal job.

            I’m not sure how many similar cases reach a guilty verdict but an innocent verdict does not indicate that lies were told. It would be scary world if courts had a 100% conviction rate, after all.

            There are definitely lessons to be learned about process. Procedure and legislation both lacked certainty. Unfortunately, the circus that followed this case means that nothing has been learned and the complainers have been dismally failed by the system. Who could come forward in a similar case now if you know that thousands of people will be questioning your integrity on social media and big-headed bloggers will be destroying your anonymity?

            Liked by 1 person

            1. Well, I was thinking specifically about the person who complained of some inappropriate behaviour on an occasion when she wasn’t even in Edinburgh.

              I’m assuming the judge would have checked that the woman hadn’t simply mixed up the dates and that it had happened the previous week… before she dismissed the case.

              I realise that one person’s appropriate is another person’s inappropriate, but that one sounded like a 100% lie,

              Liked by 2 people

              1. We can all make mistakes with memory. These were historic incidents, after all. I just don’t see why anyone needs to be accused with telling lies in court.

                Liked by 1 person

                1. Absolutely… I’m a complete diddy at memory things, To be fair though, you would have thought that the prosecution would have checked up in what was going to be a high profile case.

                  Clearly the defence did.

                  I’m not sure I’d forget that I wasn’t at that meeting when x had tried it on with me…

                  Of course she may have been at other meetings… but she didn’t mention them.

                  I t was thrown out by the judge on that.

                  I don’t know if she then protested that it had been the week before or the week after that it had happened.

                  I’m not sure what the procedure for judges to say… ok, we’ll strike that one but add one for the other week.

                  I’m not supporting or condemning, just interested in how that works, lest I should ever wish to make a false accusation against someone.

                  🙂

                  Liked by 2 people

                  1. I also have no idea how this works. I don’t even know if both sides have unfettered access to the evidence accumulated by the other side.

                    I’ve never been in court and I can’t imagine how I’d react in such stressful circumstances. This must have been a huge moment in all the womens’ lives. Actually, a sequence of huge moments over many, many years. The idea that one out of nine made a mistake with dates seems plausible to me.

                    Liked by 1 person

            2. It’s hard to find the right way to deal with this sort of thing.

              The best way would be, like for kids, the whole thing to be done in private

              But that’s begging for people to accuse you of hushing the whole thing up

              Like

              1. I don’t think that complaints of sexual misconduct should be dealt with in private. Criminal prosecutions are perfectly normal, as are innocent verdicts. Any change to that would be very worrying.

                There is a huge weight of history here with men behaving appallingly, abusing their power and getting away with it. Alex Salmond is one of those men. He behaved appallingly, his power prevented people seeking justice, and he carried on doing it. He now struts around as though he did nothing wrong and is the victim of a conspiracy, a view widely shared all over social media by people like Craig Murray who believes he is himself a victim of this conspiracy. In all of this we see institutions being trashed and traduced, just like the Brexit campaigners enjoyed doing.

                His behaviour was not criminal but that does not mean his behaviour cannot be criticised and judged. Whenever I think of this case, I remember how he described each mutually acknowledged incident: “Sleepy cuddles”, “a foooter”, a bit of “how’s your father”. I also remember that he asked Nicola Sturgeon to “help” and the reason for his anymosity towards her is that she refused his request. I really have no respect for him now and cannot understand how anyone could join his political party or campaign for him. There is no question that he was a formidable politican and party leader but there is absolutely no need for him today. If none of this had happened, would he have started Alba? I doubt it.

                Liked by 1 person

                1. No. I think he would still be in the SNP.

                  I too don’t think these things (and not just sexual things) should be dealt with in private.

                  Well known people have to be treated like anyone else, but it is bound to lead to all manner of lurid details being made public.

                  Endless details which in the case of Tam and Jemima would be of interest to almost no one, become major news when they involve high profile people and are bound to be the subject of endless speculation.

                  Interestingly when there was a case in London of this kind of behaviour, the name of the accuser was also kept quiet, although people certainly guessed at his identity, given that he had been high profile and was suddenly no where to be seen.

                  I’d just add, that in fairness, it is not only women who suffer from this kind of touchy feely behaviour at the hands of bosses. In these days when bosses are as likely (almost) to be female as male, this kind of behaviour works the other way too, as I know from experience. I have had experience of this.
                  And of course there is and presumably has always been same sex bad behaviour.

                  It is very unpleasant, and I’m sorry for anyone who suffered it.

                  Liked by 1 person

                2. Again, Terry, I don’t agree.
                  Its my experience that what the complainant wants should be front and centre. If they want it private then every effort to that end should be the priority.

                  Liked by 1 person

                  1. That’s a good point. I think there’s a case for accused and accuser to have their anonymity preserved. However, in-camera trials would be a worrying turn, I think. Some level of transparency is important or we end up effectively applying a super-injunction to every case.

                    Like

              2. As an old woman I find the points raised by both Terry and Trsh interesting and can see no easy solution. From my perspective from long ago when a young female worker there was much less talk or condemnation of such behaviour, so we sorted things out for ourselves.
                We warned new recruits not to go to the stationary cupboard with Mr X , shared our experiences and sometimes we objected publicly about behaviour we didn’t like and had to ignore being told it was harmless fun or that we must be lezzies.
                However much of the behaviour described in court, even when given the most salacious interpretion by the media, was, in my opinion pretty minor apart from the ‘sleepy cuddle’ which had apparently been dealt with previously by apology and mutual agreement with the woman in question continuing to work with the former FM. It is not clear why she changed her mind and agreed to take it to court much later.
                As for the alleged rape which was dismissed because she was not in the building at the time of the alleged incident, surely any competent lawyer would have made sure of the date and checked the Bute House records before making it an official complaint,
                What concerns me more is the fact that all the complainers were women from a very small circle of colleagues well known to Nicola Sturgeon and Lesley Evans. Alex Salmond was an MP in London and an MSP in Scotland before that and despite exhaustive police enquiries about his conduct then, nothing emerged. That makes it seem convincing to me that it was a (botched) attempt to smear AS with a political motive and that the women who complained were used to further this end.

                Liked by 1 person

                1. I remember my mother telling me of her experiences in offices where male bosses had been touchy feely.

                  And she reckoned that the only way to deal with it was to humiliate the person (and possibly risk the sack).

                  She told of one occasion when a man made an inappropriate suggestion to her in front of other staff, and she (possibly involuntarily) made a sound of revulsion and disgust “euchhh”. He left with a red face and deflated ego and never came near her again.

                  But not every woman in capable of that and not every boss would fold his tent so readily. My mother was lucky in that she didn’t need the job, but some desperately do.

                  As I’ve said all along, I take no sides on this because I simply don’t know enough about what happened except third hand. Needless to say I take the largely English owned newspapers’ reports with a pinch of salts given that they probably rubbed their hands together with glee at the thought of discrediting someone in the independence movement, and better still TWO main players..

                  My understanding of the case that Salmond seemed to confirm, was that it was consensual but there was perhaps a bit of after guilt.

                  I still would like someone to look at the roll of Evans in the whole thing.

                  Like

            3. Terry,
              Sorry, but I don’t agree.
              “Any of the mutually acknowledged incidents would have got anyone sacked from a normal job” you said.
              Pinging curly hair or quips about “killer heels” … are these the standards of behaviour that would get a person sacked? Not in my experience. You’ve clearly worked in places with much more rigid and exacting standards than me.

              Liked by 2 people

              1. I think the problem is working out how “mutual” the feelings are.

                In the end if you have men and women of a certain age (or, I should add, men and men or women and women) together a lot, some feelings are bound to emerge.

                If you add alcohol to the mix…

                It’s a fraught subject.

                I seem to recall that Edith Cresson (premier ministre français 1991-2) accused Anglo Saxon men of being gay because they didn’t flirt with her.

                https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1991-06-18-mn-996-story.html

                Liked by 3 people

                1. I remember that story about Edith Cresson. Her quote managed to invoke narcissism, xenophobia and probably a bit of homophobia in just a handful of words. That takes skillz.

                  Liked by 1 person

                  1. She didn’t get to be premier ministre for nothing…

                    A few more lessons and she could have been as inept and undiplomatic as Boris the Scarecrow.

                    Like

              2. Quips about “killer heels” are in a different category from jumping on someone naked. He described that incident as “sleepy cuddles”. That gets you sacked.

                Liked by 2 people

                1. I don’t think AS admitted jumping on the woman naked and , even if he did, apparently that incident was initially agreed as mutual ,resolved after discussion and apology and she continued to work with him. Why she changed her mind and it was then brought up in court, we don’t know.

                  Liked by 2 people

                  1. Exactly. Further up this thread Terry mentions mutually acknowledged incidents (plural). This was the only one. And the woman was happy to continue working with AS. Why , years later, she came up with an exaggerated version of what happened is unexplained.

                    And if nobody has lied, how come woman H can have been subjected to an alleged rape after dinner at Bute House when she couldn’t go to the dinner. A friend testified that she had gone in her place. And the Bute House records show that she was not signed in or out of the building on that date or in the weeks before and after. Why it came to court when all this evidence was available is unexplained.

                    The hair tugging incident has been mentioned. In fact 2 other women who were in the lift at the time testified that AS did not actually pull her hair.

                    The jury were in court and heard the evidence. Unfortunately the only published account of the defence evidence was in posts by Craig Murray. These have been taken down on the orders of the court.

                    Liked by 2 people

  5. 3 lies in 25 seconds ?
    that’s just not good enough
    ole Boris will have to up his
    game iffen he even wants
    to match the snp whoppers.

    like Nicola’s bald faced deceit
    lying all the Scots back her
    falsehhoods.

    she best take a good look
    50% are standing with the Union wall
    bring it on Nicola be another snp first
    minster booted out quick smart.

    By all the extremists in the snp mind
    cos that’s wot they do.

    Holyrood graveyard of snp leaders

    Liked by 1 person

    1. So we have asked you several times now. Will you tell us what kind of future you see for Scotland in the UK?

      Will Labour come back from the dead?

      Will they get rid of Patel’s Bills?

      Will they look at how the UK could re-join the EU?

      Would they even consider looking at how Scotland could re-join, given that it didn’t want to leave in the first place?

      Or, as appears to be the case at the moment (after 11 years of Tory rule) are the Tories just going to go on getting more and more popular and more and more right wing?

      Is that what you want for us?

      Like

    2. “Holyrood graveyard of snp leaders” LOL
      Labour leaders since 1999:
      Donald Dewar
      Henry McLeish
      Cathy Jamieson
      Jack McConnell
      Wendy Alexander
      Iain Gray
      Johann Lamont
      Jim Murphy
      Kezia Dugdale
      Jackie Baillie
      Richard…um…
      Anas Sarwar

      Liked by 3 people

  6. These election things are so divisive, maybe we should just have the one party.
    The english nationalist party, the rebranded onionist parties of englandland so no more tory red tory or yellow tory. No more division all in it together.
    Join the ENP and no need to vote ever again.
    The pm can lie with ease and nothing is said, Craig Murray does a satire on a botched up political confidence trick and wins a holiday in the queen’s hostelry.
    Way over the top even if he was ill advised to meddle in the affair and not retract the article.
    The ‘in pocket’ journalists will walk away.

    The new rules say you can hug a family member, carefully, you can take your daughter to the pub but not to church to a wedding.
    All well thought out when you’re worried about the Indian variant.
    The GMB chat with handcock was another shocker, we keep our promises on mental health, you’ll just have to wait.

    Liked by 3 people

    1. Yep, the English government have admitted that the Indian variant is a problem. It’s already in the UK, quite a few cases in England. WHO have said they think current vaccines protect against it, let’s hope so.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. The worry is that it appears to have been found in care homes in London where, you would hope people have have been vaccinated, twice!

        At the same time the prime minister said that people can travel anywhere in teh UK, so I suspect we will soon see it in Scotloand.

        One cheering thing, I heard from a neighbour today, is that the intercity cross border trains are grounded at the moment becasue of some faults in their construction… (His holiday in York has had to be postponed.)

        Maybe that will limit people coming here.

        Like

    2. If Hancock promised to breath in and out I wouldn’t believe him.

      Unless of course his sister, mother, step father and himself were going to be making money out of it, in which case, yeah, maybe.

      Like

  7. Wee lizzie the last says her government are going to level up the country.
    This might be a problem for me as I don’t need a london pad with 700 rooms that are getting a refurbishment of tens of millions of pounds.
    She has multiple homes that she can only use for short periods at a time.
    Maybe a consideration of using the rooms to help the quarter of a million homeless have a place to sleep would help level up.
    What a country we live in , we really need to get out of the union as it is becoming a single party state in englandland and we just get whatever they deem is our share.
    Wondering what a fifth share of 2 aircraft carriers looks like, will it float?

    Liked by 1 person

  8. Just to say I think the EU have banned free ports in EU as of April 21, rife for money laundering etc. Richard Murphy blog talks about the subject. They are not a good idea basically. Who will police them in Scotland, a reserved power. Hmm.

    Like

    1. Thanks, Hetty.

      I didn’t know that.

      Have you any idea why the Cameron government got rid of them when they were allowed in the EU?

      Money laundering sound right up their street.

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.