Liar Liar ... Pants on Fire Part 2

Now we are slowly coming to the crux of the matter. UKBA Complaints Team were investigating my complaint regarding my detainment ... which you can see here.

The UKBA complaint wasn't actually a complaint to them specifically as l'd sent my complaint to the airport and not UKBA but seeing as they were investigating, l let it continue. Today l recieved their response ... well sort of. lt seems that the UKBA Complaints Team sent their response to the Head of UKBA  at the airport, he read it and then wrote a response of his own to my complaint. l do find this somewhat strange and l have no idea what the Complaints Team response says ... l only have the Head of UKBA at the airport version. :) He's responding to a complaint about his own team of which he is in charge of. :)

Anyway, this response states that l was never detained! ... quote :-

"At no point did any of our officers tell you that you were under arrest or being detained. ............................................
As I have said above at no time were you detained or arrested you were asked to wait which you did"

Oh really? what's this then? Mr UKBA saying "Keep them there ...." "Let them go" (these clips taken from full recording here)

Added to this is the Chief Superintendent now writing to me today and saying the UKBA officer did issue orders to hold me but did not give any justifiable reason for doing so. He apologises for the inconvienience caused to me and says that he is now revising how his officers respond to instructions from the UKBA at the airport. Specifically the UKBA have to give valid legal reasons to his officers before they act ... or don't, if no justifiable legal reason is not forthcoming.

l have now written to this Head of UKBA at the airport and accused the UKBA officers involved in my detainment of not telling the truth ... er, what's the word for it? Ah yes, l think it's called perjury! LYING! (h/t Adi ... comment 5)

lnteresting times indeed!


  1. Hi Smoking Hot, I hope you are well. Been up to to the Westminster Bubble and have brought your website to the attention of of the more libertarian sections. Can you drop me a line as a major liberty website would like an article from you on the Big Brother tactics of the UKBA. Your man is a star and it is no names no pack drill.

  2. A truly impressive site SH and l would say unique. lt takes some balls to do what you are doing. l've suffered at the hands of these state sponsored criminals called the UKBA. I despise them.

    P Lusby

  3. They must have an interesting file on you by now. Why haven't they learned to be careful? Don't they do "Intelligence"?

  4. "not telling the truth ... er, what's the word for it? "
    Umm - 'spin'?

    Well done anyhow!

  5. "not telling the, what's the word for it?"

    No, isn't 'spin' nor 'perjury'. The word you're looking for is LIE. Let's not dress it up. It's a cowardly and despicable lie. If you can't trust a copper...

  6. Adi ... you are correct. l shall change it.

  7. No honestly Adi, when politicians do it it really is called spin. It's called lying if you or I were to do it.
    Me cynical, no?

  8. Keep chipping away at the bastards SH

  9. @ Woodsy42

    No you're still wrong. When politicians do it then the correct word is 'talking', unless they are doing it on paper then it's properly called 'statistics'.

    Me more cynical than even you? Perish the thought.

  10. Nah nah , yeer all wrong when politicians do it it is called necessary and expedient becomes an official secret and gets buried in a filing cabinet in a deep underground basement with the words danger man eating leopard on the door.
    you got em by the short and curlies methinks SH well done matey , well done!

  11. @nomine, Au Contraire, the man eating leopard was made redundant years ago. It gets left on an USB Stix on a random train, sold on ebay or posted to the oh-so-appropriately named Mr Assange


"In the eyes of the Tribunal the review letter contained several preconceptions, prejudgments and non-sequiturs"

"the absurdity of this reason is demonstrated by simply stating it"

"We therefore find that Mr Sked misdirected himself as to the Policy in carrying out the review and his decision is therefore one that no reasonable review officer could have arrived at."

... commonly known here at N2D as 'Skeds' ... that is to say these are Judges comments regarding UKBA Review Officer Ian Sked's reasons for rejecting peoples appeals against seizures.

Comments are now moderated to keep out spam and those with malicious intent. The author of this blog is not liable for the content of any comments ... period!