Sexual Allegations and Government Fit-Ups 124


After I protested internally and in writing about UK complicity in torture, I found myself suddenly faced with eighteen allegations against me by my employer, the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, including an allegation that I had criminally expedited visas for women in return for sexual favours, or to put the same allegation more bluntly, blackmailed visa applicants into sex.

My world collapsed. Like Strauss-Kahn, I ended up on suicide watch. I don’t know if DSK is innocent; he could indeed be a monster; but should he be innocent, I know the absolute hell he is going through.

After an official British government investigation, I was presented with the file of a single visa applicant, for a young lady named Albina Safarova. From her passport photo, she was very beautiful. On the back of her application, the visa officer had written “HMA [Her Majesty’s Ambassador] authorises issue.”

But if I had authorised issue, my signature should have been there; it wasn’t. What was there, was a letter from the lady’s visa sponsor, a man named Dermot Hassett. In his letter of support for the application, he stated that the circumstances of the application were known to the British Ambassador, Mr Craig Murray. On top of which, there was a letter from the visa issuing officer, Lorraine Clarke, who stated that she had issued the visa after being informed by two named British diplomats that Mr Hassett was a friend of mine.

So far, so damning. But I had never even heard of Mr Dermot Hassett or of Ms Albina Safarova. I had never met him. I had never met her. I was mystified. I eventually passed the papers on to a seasoned investigative journalist, Bob Graham. He tracked down Dermot Hassett, who told him that the British Embassy had advised him to add the phrase about my knowing the circumstances of the application to his letter of support. They said that would guarantee the visa would be issued.

I have no reason to believe that Dermot Hassett and Albina Safarova were anything other than unwitting dupes. But this application was directly and officially shown to me as evidence of my sexual inolvement in visa applications. I have no doubt at all that it was fabricated evidence to damage my reputation and lessen the impact of any potential public revelations I may make about UK complicity in torture or extraordinary rendition.

I was cleared on all charges, but that did not matter because the British government had damaged my reputation forever by promoting the allegations to the media. Those who deny the very possibility that modern western governments connive in quite deliberate conspiracies of injustice, have no idea what they are talking about. If you threaten them in any political way, they can certainly fabricate evidence against you.

I know; they did it to me.


124 thoughts on “Sexual Allegations and Government Fit-Ups

1 2 3 4
  • Paul Johnston

    Sometimes they fabricate, yes I agree, but sometimes they don’t have to!
    I all walks of life you see a situation where you think surely they wouldn’t have done that, but often it seems to me that people in posts of power do really stupid things because they think they are untouchable. The present expenses issues in the Houses of Commons and Lords show that. Or the judge who falsifies the speeding ticket. Hubris is the term I think!
    Off topic I was speaking to Dr Elizabeth Teague last night, possibly you remember her, really nice lady7.

  • CanSpeccy

    “Those who deny the very possibility that modern western governments connive in quite deliberate conspiracies of injustice, have no idea what they are talking about.”

    But that does not exempt someone who accuses the British Government of having a “State racial hate machine…” from providing rational grounds for their assertion.

    Anyway, who believes that modern western governments do not connive in quite deliberate conspiracies of injustice? Most Americans believe 9/11 was in some way or another, an inside job — unlike you. LOL.

  • Pete B

    Craig, You say: “(I am in Accra) where callers are more or less unanimous that as the woman is from Guinea, in Francophone Africa, the Sarkozy connection is to blame. ”

    I didn’t realise the woman was a francophone. Did you see that the first to release the news was a French UMP activist who claimed he heard from ‘a friend’ in the hotel? The timing of his information – and the source – would be very interesting.

    As you say, “That fact is certainly a boon for conspiracy theorists.” And the Daily Mail agrees (Oh Good! I hear you say)

    “Such theories were bolstered by the fact that the first person to break the news of Strauss-Kahn’s arrest was an activist in Mr Sarkozy’s UMP party – who apparently knew about the scandal before it happened.

    Jonathan Pinet, a politics student, tweeted the news just before the New York Police Department made it public, although he said that he simply had a ‘friend’ working at the Sofitel where the attack was said to have happened.

    The first person to re-tweet Mr Pinet was Arnaud Dassier, a spin doctor who had previously publicised details of multi-millionaire Strauss-Kahn’s luxurious lifestyle in a bid to dent his left wing credentials.”

    More here:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1387625/IMF-chief-Dominique-Strauss-Kahn-feared-political-enemy-pay-woman-allege-rape.html#ixzz1MjlJiyKE

    Regards,

    Pete

  • Paul Johnston

    When comparing it with your case Craig I suppose at least he will have his day in court, unlike yourself.

    • craig Post author

      Yes, although I haven’t totally abandoned hope that there will one day be legal action against those who tried to frame me.

  • kathz

    I agree that DSK should have the benefit of the presumption of innocence. I even think that previous allegations of sexual harassment against DSK, which have been known for years, don’t mean he’s guilty of this – it would be logical to frame him in this way.

    However the maid is also entitled to a presumption of innocence. It concerns me that the majority of the French public assume that she is guilty. And I know from experience that it’s very difficult – and often very unwise – to allege any improper activity against people who are wealthy and powerful. While the U.S. – and Sarkozy and above all Marine Le Pen – may benefit from these allegations and the arrest of DSK, that doesn’t mean they set him up or that they did.

    Both are likely to suffer considerably whatever the facts. Both may find their future lives damaged. The best outcome would be the establishment of the truth – but I’m not convinced that’s at all likely.

  • Tom Welsh

    If it’s his word against hers, how can any progress be made towards proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt?

    Not that I should have to ask, in view of the deluge today of people (mostly women) demanding that the “conviction rate” (of those accused of rape) should rise sharply. They seem to have no trouble whatever in assuming that every allegation is true, and hence that every acquittal (or failure to convict) is a miscarriage of justice.

    It does rather make one wonder what is the point in having courts of law at all. Especially since the judgment of a court is conditional on prosecutors deciding to bring a case.

  • Bill Jackson Jr

    I guess I’m still scratching my head about the usefulness of “framing” a Bilderberg turd like DSK at all. He threatened no power centers and was in fact part and parcel of power itself. It looks at first glance as though he stepped on his willy at a most unfortunate time and his proclivities may have caught up with. Time will tell. What I have noted both here as elsewhere, however, is a curious lack of concern for his accuser.

  • Courtenay Barnett

    @ Craig,

    You have been on the frontline and have felt the heat of state power directed against you.

    However, let’s all be sober.

    What is the IMF and the Washington agenda?

    How does one rise to be head of the IMF if not by sharing the ideological stance of the IMF and by being supportive of the Washington agenda?

    Is it possible to have variations and degrees of opinion within the same sphere of support for the IMF/Washington agenda? – sure it is?

    Against that background, is this in and of itself some sort of clever “false flag” operation?

    Did the system know about the proclivities of the IMF chief? – sure it did.

    Is the present French presidential race the kind that makes it expedient to out an insider who is not as “right” as one might like to have him at this time of bombing Libya and pressing ahead with NATO operations etc? Well – Khan is not, and never has been, any real threat to anything, but if you set in place assumed parameters of division and cast one guy as the bad sex fiend and the other candidate gets to breathe new life – maybe the politics of it all plays out in the end – just “right”.

    Storm in a chief’s underwear if you ask me.

    Over to you Craig.

  • YugoStiglitz

    May I respectfully point out something? I hope it’s not a bother.
    It would seem that there is a big difference between what you experienced and what DSK is now subject to. It would seem that what you experienced could very well be the result of the schemings of one person. On the other hand, if this situation with DSK were a product of a scheme to set him up, it would necessarily involve a great number of parties. At a minimum, the New York County District Attorney and many of his employees, along with the NYPD, would have to agree to be pawns in the designs of some higher authority. They would have to agree to break the law and subject themselves to conviction and incarceration if it were ever effectively leaked by one of their cohorts that they were taking part in the scheme.
    Ambassador Murray, might I most humbly ask how this higher authority could have convinced local police and prosecutors to risk the livelihoods of themselves and their children?

    • craig Post author

      I am afraid that what I experienced could not possibly have been done by one man. It is a long story, and you have to read the book, I am afraid, But I am sorry to say it was a government conspiracy – but not one that stretched outside the FCO, No 10, and MI6 – I was in fact desperate to bring in the police, but was blocked off.

      There is absolutely no reason a conspiracy would have to involve the police. A possible scenario (NB I am not saying this happened. He may have raped her. I am saying it is possible). Woman set up to seduce possible next french President with known history of sex addiction. May involve s and m or other mark leaving practices. Gets bodily fluid, exaggerates dishevellment and rushes into path of security camera screaming. NYPD of course obliged to act.

      Turns out DSK was at lunch at time given. Woman says “I was traumatised, I was in shock, I couldn’t count time, English not my first language”. NYPD and prosecutors of course have to test the case.

      Yhe problem is with 9/11 obsessives like you, is that you move from saying that because one claimed conspiracy was not a conspiracy, no conspiracy has ever existed. And that any conspiracy to exist would need a massive cast, because a 9/11 conspiracy would. Think.

  • Courtenay Barnett

    Further – I understand the motivational factors that led to the analogy that you drew with Khan – but, truth be told Craig, I respect you as a different sort of individual and I see you as truly an honourable man. No need to sit in and set sail in the same boat as the IMF chief – albeit the boat is being directed to the same rocks for both men’s destruction. Beyond the intial trajectory – I do not see your plight ( as it was then) as really the same as Khan’s. I, at least due to my respect for you, distance you from him – you are a totally different sort of man.

    Let’s see if subsequent events and noble history vindicate my views.

  • mark_golding

    Craig Murray – A window on extraordinary Integrity – a lesson to us all as we peek into the mind of this great man:

    “They turned up at my door with broken teeth and burns from torture. Some would spend the night in my home. On one occasion the grandson of a dissident I had met was murdered within hours of my speaking to his grandfather. They left his body on the doorstep. His hands and knees had been smashed with a hammer. It was a warning not to speak to me,” Craig 2004

    http://craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2004/10/daily_telegraph/

    “Anyone who even internally questions what’s happening is going to seriously damage their employment prospects ” Craig 2007

    http://craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2007/04/leaking_secrets/

    On the IMF:

    The integrity of the IMF (although we all doubt it sometimes) should not be sacrificed. Its purpose must be to promote development, not a tool of regional politics. Craig 2006

    UK COMPLICITY IN TORTURE:

    CONFIDENTIAL
    FM TASHKENT
    TO IMMEDIATE FCO
    TELNO 63
    OF 220939 JULY 04
    INFO IMMEDIATE DFID, ISLAMIC POSTS, MOD, OSCE POSTS UKDEL EBRD
    LONDON, UKMIS GENEVA, UKMIS MEW YORK
    SUBJECT: RECEIPT OF INTELLIGENCE OBTAINED UNDER TORTURE
    SUMMARY

    1. We receive intelligence obtained under torture from the Uzbek intelligence services, via
    the US. We should stop. It is bad information anyway. Tortured dupes are forced to sign up to confessions showing what the Uzbek government wants the US and UK to believe, that they and we are fighting the same war against terror.

    2. I gather a recent London interdepartmental meeting considered the question and decided to continue to receive the material. This is morally, legally and practically wrong. It exposes as
    hypocritical our post Abu Ghraib pronouncements and fatally undermines our moral standing. It obviates my efforts to get the Uzbek government to stop torture they are fully aware our intelligence community laps up the results.

    3. We should cease all co-operation with the Uzbek Security Services they are beyond the pale. We indeed need to establish an SIS presence here, but not as in a friendly state.

    DETAIL

    4. In the period December 2002 to March 2003 I raised several times the issue of intelligence material from the Uzbek security services which was obtained under torture and passed to us
    via the CIA. I queried the legality, efficacy and morality of the practice.

    5. I was summoned to the UK for a meeting on 8 March 2003. Michael Wood gave his legal opinion that it was not illegal to obtain and to use intelligence acquired by torture. He said
    the only legal limitation on its use was that it could not be used in legal proceedings, under Article 15 of the UN Convention on Torture.

    6. On behalf of the intelligence services, Matthew Kydd said that they found some of the material very useful indeed with a direct bearing on the war on terror. Linda Duffield said
    that she had been asked to assure me that my qualms of conscience were respected and understood.

    7. Sir Michael Jay’s circular of 26 May stated that there was a reporting obligation on us to report torture by allies (and I have been instructed to refer to Uzbekistan as such in the
    context of the war on terror). You, Sir, have made a number of striking, and I believe heartfelt, condemnations of torture in the last few weeks. I had in the light of this decided to
    return to this question and to highlight an apparent contradiction in our policy. I had intimated as much to the Head of Eastern Department. 8. I was therefore somewhat surprised to hear that without informing me of the meeting, or since informing me of the result of the meeting, a meeting was convened in the FCO at the level of Heads of Department and above, precisely to consider the question of the receipt of
    Uzbek intelligence material obtained under torture. As the office knew, I was in London at the time and perfectly able to attend the meeting. I still have only gleaned that it happened.

    9. I understand that the meeting decided to continue to obtain the Uzbek torture material. I understand that the principal argument deployed was that the intelligence material disguises
    the precise source, ie it does not ordinarily reveal the name of the individual who is tortured.
    Indeed this is true – the material is marked with a euphemism such as “From detainee debriefing.” The argument runs that if the individual is not named, we cannot prove that he was tortured.

    10. I will not attempt to hide my utter contempt for such casuistry, nor my shame that I work
    in and organisation where colleagues would resort to it to justify torture. I have dealt with hundreds of individual cases of political or religious prisoners in Uzbekistan, and I have met with very few where torture, as defined in the UN convention, was not employed. When my then DHM raised the question with the CIA head of station 15 months ago, he readily
    acknowledged torture was deployed in obtaining intelligence. I do not think there is any doubt as to the fact.

    11. The torture record of the Uzbek security services could hardly be more widely known. Plainly there are, at the very least, reasonable grounds for believing the material is obtained
    under torture. There is helpful guidance at Article 3 of the UN Convention;
    “The competent authorities shall take into account all relevant considerations including, where applicable, the existence in the state concerned of a consistent pattern of gross, flagrant or mass violations of human rights.” While this article forbids extradition or deportation to Uzbekistan, it is the right test for the present question also.

    12. On the usefulness of the material obtained, this is irrelevant. Article 2 of the Convention, to which we are a party, could not be plainer:
    “No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat of war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture.”

    13. Nonetheless, I repeat that this material is useless – we are selling our souls for dross. It is in fact positively harmful. It is designed to give the message the Uzbeks want the West to
    hear. It exaggerates the role, size, organisation and activity of the IMU and its links with Al Qaida. The aim is to convince the West that the Uzbeks are a vital cog against a common foe,
    that they should keep the assistance, especially military assistance, coming, and that they should mute the international criticism on human rights and economic reform.

    14. I was taken aback when Matthew Kydd said this stuff was valuable. Sixteen months ago it was difficult to argue with SIS in the area of intelligence assessment. But post Butler we
    know, not only that they can get it wrong on even the most vital and high profile issues, but
    that they have a particular yen for highly coloured material which exaggerates the threat. That is precisely what the Uzbeks give them. Furthermore MI6 have no operative within a
    thousand miles of me and certainly no expertise that can come close to my own in making this assessment.
    =
    15. At the Khuderbegainov trial I met an old man from Andizhan. Two of his children had been tortured in front of him until he signed a confession on the family’s links with Bin Laden. Tears were streaming down his face. I have no doubt they had as much connection with Bin Laden as I do. This is the standard of the Uzbek intelligence services.

    16. I have been considering Michael Wood’s legal view, which he kindly gave in writing. I cannot understand why Michael concentrated only on Article 15 of the Convention. This
    certainly bans the use of material obtained under torture as evidence in proceedings, but it does not state that this is the sole exclusion of the use of such material.

    17. The relevant article seems to me Article 4, which talks of complicity in torture. Knowingly to receive its results appears to be at least arguable as complicity. It does not appear that being in a different country to the actual torture would preclude complicity. I talked this over in a hypothetical sense with my old friend Prof Francois Hampson, I believe an acknowledged World authority on the Convention, who said that the complicity argument and the spirit of the Convention would be likely to be winning points. I should be grateful to
    hear Michael’s views on this.

    18. It seems to me that there are degrees of complicity and guilt, but being at one or two removes does not make us blameless. There are other factors. Plainly it was a breach of
    Article 3 of the Convention for the coalition to deport detainees back here from Baghram, but it has been done. That seems plainly complicit.

    19. This is a difficult and dangerous part of the World. Dire and increasing poverty and harsh repression are undoubtedly turning young people here towards radical Islam. The Uzbek
    government are thus creating this threat, and perceived US support for Karimov strengthens anti-Western feeling. SIS ought to establish a presence here, but not as partners of the Uzbek
    Security Services, whose sheer brutality puts them beyond the pale.
    MURRAY

  • dreoilin

    “if this situation with DSK were a product of a scheme to set him up, it would necessarily involve a great number of parties. At a minimum, the New York County District Attorney and many of his employees …. and subject themselves to conviction and incarceration if it were ever effectively leaked” –Yugo/Larry
    .
    I thought the whole point of the possible set-up was that it would have been done by Sarko’s people. In which case the Americans would have known nothing, and be going about their duties normally.
    .
    I came across some info on Twitter tonight, but I haven’t kept the sources, so anyone who wants to follow-up will need to Google. I read that she’s not a single mother, but rather a widow. Also, the New York Post is saying that she is living in an apartment that is reserved for HIV/AIDS sufferers, although they don’t go so far as to day she has HIV/AIDS. They do say that her previous apartment was also one set aside for such sufferers. I found a link for that:
    http://www.dailyindia.com/show/440418.php
    .
    Also, another bail application has been made asking that he be released into home detention (I assume at his daughter’s home) with an electronic tag.
    .
    DSK has apparently also undergone the taking of (police) photos of him naked, to make sure any scratches or other markings are noted. The man did have a reputation for predatory sexual encounters, and women who worked with him plus female journalists had been advised (and knew) not to be alone in a room with him.
    .
    From his past behaviour, he sounds like a bit of an animal where women were concerned. However, I recognise that if one wanted to set him up, since he already had that reputation, that would be the area to set him up in. (And Sarko is a little shit.)
    .
    Since DSK is admitting sex, but saying it was consensual, this will be down to a very simple ‘his word against hers’ and DNA tests will make little difference. There was however talk that she was bleeding when she ran downstairs.

  • dreoilin

    PS, Since he’s admitting sex, and claiming it was consensual, it doesn’t look like the timing mix-up (“one and a half hours wrong in a period of three hours” on the previous thread) makes any difference now.

  • Oliver

    “…Lorraine Clarke, who stated that she had issued the visa after being informed by two named British diplomats that Mr Hassett was a friend of mine.”

    “…the British Embassy had advised him to add the phrase about my knowing the circumstances of the application to his letter of support. They said that would guarantee the visa would be issued.”

    1. Who were the two diplomats who lied?

    2. Who placed that call to Dermot Hasset?

    If you can’t answer these questions maybe you can look into getting your site hosted in Iceland or follow guidofawkes’ business set up…then you can spill all the beans without the legal hassle…for the time being.

    • craig Post author

      Oliver,

      I never shy from telling the truth from fear of libel action – I have probably received more lawyer’s letters than Paul over the years, but nobody has ever dared take me to court.
      I published the names in my book, Dirty Diplomacy. The reason I do not repeat them now is that at least one of them had a serious psychiatric breakdown as a result of whht he did, and was himself acting under extreme duress, which caused him to resign from the FCO shortly thereafter.

  • Herbie

    Dreoilin

    Where has he admitted “sex”, as you term it, and why doesn’t it matter that the prosecution changed their story and timing when they found out he had an alibi for their original timing and story?

    It’s interesting too that you’re so swayed by untested accounts of what you term his “past behaviour” which make him “sound like a bit of an animal where women were concerned”. Are you for real?

    It’s seems to me that you’re easily swayed by media and have little in the way of an understanding of what due process is all about, nor indeed how the world really works.

    It’s because of people like you that the banksters of this world can do as they please.

    The fascism of Feminism and the greed of banksterism go hand in hand. That’s a given. It was always a given. Unfortunately for feminists, they’re little more than useful idiots.

    There’s a lesson there but I doubt you’ll understand.

    I expect it’s that glass ceiling in your brain. You know, the one you always blame on men.

  • YugoStiglitz

    Jon, are you going to censors Herbie’s comments directed at dreoilin? Let’s be consistent.

  • Herbie

    Why should I be censored?

    Dreoilin is an adult woman and must stand by her statements and be questioned upon them.

    Are there special easier rules for female arguments or something?

    To my mind she’s talking rubbish and I pointed that out.

    I’ve always said that Feminism is a fascism, even in the earliest days from a centre left perspective.

    Why should I be censored when that fact is now becoming more obvious than ever, day in day out.

    But thanks anyway for your intervention. It shows at least the truth that neo cons like yourself and feminism are fellow travellors.

    Which is kind of what I was saying and it’s like kinda obvious anyway etc.

    Just because the nice people at the BBC aren’t yet saying it don’t mean it ain’t true. That’s a good rule of thumb.

  • YugoStiglitz

    I’m actually not in favor of striking your comments, but the standard that Jon seems to have set with me should be applied to you. You made an odd, irrelevant personal attack on Dreoilin.

  • Herbie

    Angrysoba

    Nice to see that you too are keen to benefit from argument-lite feminist distractions.

    It used to be called hiding behind women’s skirts.

    I’m sure you’ve invented a more pleasing description of yourselves these days.

    Either way, Feminism and Neo Conism are fellow travellors.

  • Herbie

    I haven’t said anything that I cannot defend in argument.
    I seek no favour.
    I stand by my words. I speak my truth. I can do no other.

  • angrysoba

    Herbie Goes Bananas!
    .
    Nice to see that you too are keen to benefit from argument-lite feminist distractions.

    It used to be called hiding behind women’s skirts.


    .
    I embrace my Feminine OverLadies!
    .
    What’s that you say, John? I can’t hear you over that *screeeeeech* *screeeeech* I think that axe is sharp enough old boy.
    .
    I’m sure you’ve invented a more pleasing description of yourselves these days.

    Either way, Feminism and Neo Conism are fellow travellors.

    .
    I fail to see what you’re so upset about? Is it because you know – you know – that this despicable woman is lying like the lying woman that she is? Or is it tautologous to call her a lying woman?
    .
    And yes, please do call me a neo-con. I quite like that. And a Zionist FemiNazi while you’re at it. What’s that you say Herbie?
    .
    “I’m not a misogynist!” *screeeeech* “Women are just liars, that’s all!” *screeeeech*

  • angrysoba

    It’s seems to me that you’re easily swayed by media and have little in the way of an understanding of what due process is all about, nor indeed how the world really works.
    .
    I think I’ve lost count of the number of times I’ve seen someone say this type of thing. It’s the empty boast of a screwball on most occasions.
    .
    I haven’t said anything that I cannot defend in argument.
    I seek no favour.
    I stand by my words. I speak my truth. I can do no other.

    .
    Unsolicited bragging of someone’s own integrity is also a sign of someone not to be trusted. I always find myself asking, “Why do they need to tell me they are telling the truth? Don’t we usually think that is the least we can expect from someone? And why do they feel they need to preface their comments with assurances that they know the way the world works? Maybe they’re just very insecure…”

  • dreoilin

    Herbie needs to calm down. He sounds like another JimmyGiro only less intelligent.
    .
    I believe I wrote: “I came across some info on Twitter tonight, but I haven’t kept the sources, so anyone who wants to follow-up will need to Google.” I would hope Herbie can use Google?
    .
    As far as I’m concerned DSK is innocent until proven guilty. Although, as in many other cases, it looks like it may fall to the woman to prove – somehow – that she didn’t agree to have any sexual dealings with him. Whether the reports that she’s a “shy, religious, Muslim” will carry any weight in that, I know not. Quoting from the link I have given further down: “Obviously, the credibility of the complainant is a factor in cases of this nature,” Kelly said. “One of the things they’re trained to look for, and what was reported to me early on, was that the complainant was credible.”
    .
    As for me being “easily swayed by media”, I’m not quoting media when I refer to his reputation. I have it from someone who worked with him in the assemblée nationale that the standing advice for women was not to get into an elevator alone with him. (I said “room” but on checking I find that it’s “elevator”.) There are indeed lots of media reports out there that seem to back this up.
    .
    As for him admitting to having had sex with this woman, I got that WRONG. (I told you I was reading Twitter.) However, this is where the implication came from: “One of Strauss-Kahn’s attorneys, Benjamin Brafman, said at his client’s arraignment this week that the forensic evidence ‘will not be consistent with a forcible encounter’. That led to speculation the defense would argue it was consensual sex.”
    http://www.iol.co.za/news/world/imf-chief-to-apply-for-bail-1.1070956 [Sapa-AP]
    .
    Have I covered everything? I’m not giving evidence in court, you know, Herbie, I’m commenting on a blog.
    .
    Craig/Jon, I probably should have posted all this on the previous thread. Apologies. It was late at night when I posted my first comment.
    .
    Angry, you made me laugh and splutter my coffee.

  • dreoilin

    “but the standard that Jon seems to have set with me should be applied to you. You made an odd, irrelevant personal attack on Dreoilin.” –Yugo/Larry

    How revealing.

  • Dick the Prick

    Yup, you were screwed and there’s a pathetic irony that the FCO could have gained from your interventions had they had any wit, decency, strategic understanding or ability.

    The FCO is running rings round the Tories now with both Cameron and Haigh being overwhelmed by bullshit geo-politics.

    Good luck Craig in your endeavours to get the wankers.

1 2 3 4

Comments are closed.