#ToryProtectionRacket | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

llewelynpritch · 8 months ago

Text

Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson held key responsibilities including National Security, MI6, Intelligence, Protection of UK Citizens, International Relations As PM he misled Parliament about 'Partygate'. original image Guardian Editorial 22 March 2023

JOHNSON'S 'COVER-UP' JUSTICE FOR DAWN STURGESS Mother-of-three Dawn Sturgess died after coming into contact with the Russian nerve agent Novichok original image BBC

JOHNSON'S COVER-UP Indirect responsibility for murder of Dawn Sturgess original image Guardian Editorial 22 March 2023

‘The common denominator linking Lord Evgeny Lebedev, Alexander Lebedev (a ‘former’ KGB agent), and Boris Johnson is primarily their interactions and the broader context of Russian influence in UK politics, as well as the handling of sensitive security and political issues.

Meetings and Relationships

- Boris Johnson, as the UK's Foreign Secretary and later Prime Minister, had significant and controversial interactions with the Lebedev family. In April 2018, Johnson attended a party at Evgeny Lebedev's Italian mansion, where he also met Alexander Lebedev, a former KGB agent, without any officials or security present. This meeting occurred shortly after Johnson had attended a NATO meeting to discuss the Russian response to the Salisbury Novichok poisonings [2][3].

Security Concerns and Protocol Breaches

- The private meeting between Johnson and Alexander Lebedev raises serious security concerns. Former MI6 agent Christopher Steele highlighted that such off-the-books meetings pose significant risks to the UK, as they may not have been properly recorded or reported back into the government. This breach of protocol is particularly alarming given Johnson's role as Foreign Secretary at the time [1][2].

Delay of the ISC Russia Report

- The delay in publishing the ISC Russia Report, which investigated Russian interference in UK politics, including the Brexit referendum and other events, is another critical point. Johnson's government was criticised for delaying the report's release until after the 2019 general election, despite the report being completed in March 2019. This delay has been seen as an attempt to avoid scrutiny of potential Russian influence during the election period [2][4].

Appointments and Conflicts of Interest

- Boris Johnson's decision to nominate Evgeny Lebedev for a peerage in 2020, despite concerns from UK intelligence agencies, further complicates the picture. This move has been criticised for potentially allowing Russian influence to penetrate deeper into British politics and society [1][2].

Handling of Russian Aggression

- The way Johnson's government handled incidents of Russian aggression, such as the polonium poisoning of Alexander Litvinenko and the Novichok poisonings of the Skripals and Dawn Sturgess, has been questioned. The timing of Johnson's meeting with Alexander Lebedev, just after discussing Russia's actions with NATO, adds to the concerns about his judgement and the potential for Russian influence [2][3].

Misconduct and Leadership Failures

- Johnson's overall handling of these issues, including his ill-judged prime ministerial ambitions and the allegations of misconduct in public office, obstruction of justice, and breach of duty, have raised significant questions about his leadership and integrity. His actions have been criticised for not adequately addressing the threat of Russian influence and for potentially emboldening Russian aggression, including Putin’s invasion of Ukraine [1][2].

In summary, the common denominator is the complex web of relationships and interactions between Boris Johnson and the Lebedev family, set against the backdrop of concerns about Russian influence in UK politics, breaches of security protocols, and the handling of sensitive security and political issues.’

Citations:

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ag4qR91JUOc

[2] https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-ap-evgeny-lebedev-london-conservative-party-b2131696.html

[3] https://www.gov.uk/government/news/novichok-nerve-agent-use-in-salisbury-uk-government-response

[4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence_and_Security_Committee_Russia_report

[5] https://www.dw.com/en/uk-russia-report-brexit/a-54182899

[6] https://www.europeansources.info/record/uk-conservative-party-leadership-contest/

[7] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_Conservative_Party_leadership_election

[8] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2019-50765773

NOTES Explain why it is important for users of AI Language software to exercise critical thinking, independently verify validity, reliability -'fact-check' data from generally reliable sources and not solely rely on the model's responses for important decisions or information. Llewelyn Pritchard 21 October 2024:

Perplexity: ‘Exercising critical thinking, independently verifying the validity and reliability of data, and fact-checking information from generally reliable sources are crucial for users of AI language software for several reasons:

Hallucinations and Inaccuracies: AI language models, even advanced ones, can generate responses that are not grounded in reality, a phenomenon known as "hallucinations." These models can confidently provide incorrect or misleading information, which can be particularly problematic if users rely solely on the model's responses [1][2][4].

Limited Training Data: AI models are trained on specific datasets, and their accuracy is limited by the quality and scope of these datasets. For example, Google's DataGemma tool, while effective, has limitations in terms of the data it can access and the questions it can answer accurately. If the relevant data is not in the model's training set or database, the model may not provide accurate or reliable information [1].

Real-Time Information Challenges: AI models often struggle with real-time events or breaking news, as their training data may not include the latest developments. This can lead to incorrect or outdated information being provided, as seen in the case of Meta AI's responses to the attempted assassination of former President Trump [4].

Subjective Framing and Nuance: Fact-checking is not always straightforward, as AI models may not capture the nuances of human communication. A quote or statement might be technically accurate but misleading due to the context or framing. Human judgement is often necessary to understand the full implications and context of the information provided [5].

Error and Unknown Rates: Studies have shown that even the most accurate AI fact-checking models have error rates. For instance, Originality.ai, which has a high accuracy rate of 72.3%, still has a small error rate and may return "unknown" results for certain queries. This underscores the need for users to verify information independently [2][3].

Manipulated Media and Information Warfare: Bad actors can engineer ways to circumvent AI fact-checking tools, spreading misinformation or manipulated media that might evade detection. This means that relying solely on AI for fact-checking can leave users vulnerable to misinformation [5].

Impact on Decision-Making: For important decisions or critical information, relying solely on AI model responses can be risky. Incorrect or misleading information can have significant consequences, whether in personal, professional, or public contexts. Independent verification from reliable sources ensures that decisions are based on accurate and trustworthy information.

In summary, exercising critical thinking and independently verifying the validity and reliability of data from generally reliable sources are essential because AI language models can generate inaccurate information, have limitations in their training data, struggle with real-time events, lack nuance in their responses, and are not immune to errors or manipulation. These factors highlight the importance of a multi-layered approach to fact-checking to ensure the accuracy and reliability of the information used for important decisions.

Citations:

[1] https://www.technologyreview.com/2024/09/12/1103926/googles-new-tool-lets-large-language-models-fact-check-their-responses/

[2] https://originality.ai/blog/ai-fact-checking-accuracy

[3] https://originality.ai/automated-fact-checker

[4] https://about.fb.com/news/2024/07/review-of-fact-checking-label-and-meta-ai-responses/

[5] https://www.niemanlab.org/2022/12/ai-will-start-fact-checking-we-may-not-like-the-results/

[6] https://www.techtarget.com/whatis/feature/Steps-in-fact-checking-AI-generated-content

[7] https://libguides.uel.ac.uk/artificial-intelligence/using-ai-critically

[8] https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/how-generative-ai-chatbots-responded-questions-and-fact-checks-about-2024-uk-general-election

Source: https://www.perplexity.ai/search/explain-why-it-is-important-fo-wLezjtPtReucQFNpfsd9ZA #OpenSourceAI #Perplexity 21 October 2024

DeepAI: ‘The text emphasises the importance of critical thinking and independent verification when using AI language models. Key points include:

1. Inaccuracy: AI may produce plausible but inaccurate information, which can be outdated or false.

2. Contextual Understanding: AI lacks human-like comprehension, leading to incomplete or skewed responses.

3. Bias: AI training data may include biases, which can influence the outputs and reinforce stereotypes.

4. Source Variability: AI responses can stem from both reputable and unreliable sources, necessitating careful evaluation of credibility.

5. Static Information: AI cannot provide real-time updates, making it essential to consult current, trustworthy sources for changing topics.

6. Complexity: Many subjects require deep understanding that AI responses might not adequately cover.

7. Consequences of Misinformation: Relying solely on AI for critical decisions can lead to severe consequences due to potential misinformation.

8. Promoting Critical Thinking: Engaging critically with information leads to better decision-making and understanding.

In conclusion, while AI can be a useful resource, users should approach its outputs cautiously and verify information to make informed, responsible decisions.’ https://deepai.org/chat DeepAI 21 October 2024

ChatGPT4o: ‘It is essential for users of AI language software to exercise critical thinking and independently verify the validity and reliability of information for several key reasons:

1. Potential for Errors: AI models, while highly advanced, are not infallible. They can generate incorrect, outdated, or misleading information because they rely on vast datasets that may include inaccuracies or biases. Although these models can analyse data efficiently, they don't inherently understand the truthfulness of that data.

2. Bias in Data: The data that AI models are trained on can contain inherent biases that reflect the information they were fed. This may result in responses that perpetuate stereotypes, skewed perspectives, or factual inaccuracies. Critical thinking allows users to identify and account for these biases.

3. Dynamic Nature of Information: The real world is constantly changing, and information - especially in areas like science, politics, or technology - may quickly become outdated. AI models, unless specifically updated or browsing current information, may provide responses that do not reflect the most up-to-date facts. Independent verification ensures that the information is current and reliable.

4. Limitations in Context Understanding: AI can sometimes misunderstand the full context of a user's question or lack nuanced interpretation. While it can produce highly accurate responses in many cases, it might miss subtle details or the broader implications of a question, which a human reviewer or expert could more easily identify.

5. Ethical and Responsible Use: Relying solely on AI-generated content for critical decisions (e.g., medical advice, financial planning, or legal matters) without verification can be risky. AI tools should be seen as aids to decision-making rather than the final authority. Fact-checking ensures that important decisions are based on robust, well-rounded information from multiple reliable sources.

6. Avoiding Misinterpretation: AI models, including language models, generate responses based on probability, not understanding. This means that they can sometimes output responses that seem plausible but are incorrect or misinterpreted. Users need to cross-check information from reputable sources to avoid potential harm.

In summary, critical thinking and independent fact-checking help ensure the responsible and effective use of AI. By verifying the reliability and validity of AI-generated content, users can avoid errors, mitigate bias, and make better-informed decisions.’

Source: https://chatgpt.com/c/67164309-62c4-8003-9c1b-58fdbb98ecad ChatGPT4o 21 October 2024

https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vSy0h0Lxo1P6ZJAuewBDa2zGm_78ggYkvGpzVzkdJVbcPNQafNZ-ayPMuOXC9jQBrOdruPOmeybTQn2/pub https://unitedforclimate.blogspot.com/2024/11/the-common-denominator-linking-lord.html https://landprotectorshumanrightsmovement.blogspot.com/2024/11/the-common-denominator-linking-lord.html https://muskratfallscivilrightsmovement.blogspot.com/2024/11/the-common-denominator-linking-lord.html https://labradorleadstheworld.blogspot.com/2024/11/the-common-denominator-linking-lord.html ‘The common denominator linking Lord Evgeny Lebedev, Alexander Lebedev (a ‘former’ KGB agent), and Boris Johnson is primarily their interactions and the broader context of Russian influence in UK politics, as well as the handling of sensitive security and political issues.’ #AI #Perplexity Llewelyn Pritchard 1 November 2024

Links

https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vQ4mLpSPlG0cGz-RXCFa21Vo6AshonvWUwxydZu-o3TKvxiEp55ksNOwzw_1tTu-yEO6BLewd24Cg4_/pub JOHNSON DELAY ON RUSSIA DOSSIER HELPS PUTIN, SAYS LITVINENKO WIDOW wife of poisoned ex-spy warns of risks in suppressing report on RUS interference. Luke Harding, Dan Sabbagh 5 Nov 2019 #JohnsonsCoverUp #Sleaze #Fraud #Crime #ECHR #JohnsonLies #JailTime

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1yXFGLRVD1pJN3hWySGJ3C8oFmkELlvYPVWx7YLSPV3g/pub https://unitedforclimate.blogspot.com/2024/09/will-dawn-sturgess-public-inquiry-terms.html https://landprotectorshumanrightsmovement.blogspot.com/2024/09/will-dawn-sturgess-public-inquiry-terms.html https://muskratfallscivilrightsmovement.blogspot.com/2024/09/will-dawn-sturgess-public-inquiry-terms.html https://labradorleadstheworld.blogspot.com/2024/09/will-dawn-sturgess-public-inquiry-terms.html Will the Dawn Sturgess Public Inquiry Terms of Reference allow its Report intentionally omitting civil and criminal liability to be ‘spun’ into the Johnson Cover-up Story? Consisting, at the very least of ‘Tory Sleaze’ unethical behaviour in office; ignoring his own agencies’ intelligence advice; breaching National Security in secretive meeting(s) with Alexander Lebedev, Perugia, Italy; media complicity for his own ends with Evgeny Lebedev; Russian Interference EU Referendum 2016; accepting Russian oligarch Conservative Party donations; ‘constitutional corrosion’ epitomised by ‘LondonGrad Laundromat’; enabling Putin’s Brexit by his failed leadership; interfering in an early, possible Russian-Ukraine peace deal; purportedly supporting the welfare of Ukraine whilst more concerned about ‘saving his own skin’; his Crony COVID Contracts and missing five COBRA meetings whilst otherwise distracted - becoming yet another example of unethical behaviour in the UK Government’s way of working? #AI #Perplexity #MoveOnNothingToSeeHere Llewelyn Pritchard 3 October 2024

https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vTamYLuCvWJJ_QQ5m96G3LILzAg8i7PGoXB1rrxlxZ1oa3c6_6RDKCmzOpNa8UpXcLd4GqaXBUj8d4_/pub https://unitedforclimate.blogspot.com/2024/10/in-summary-boris-johnsons-leadership.html https://landprotectorshumanrightsmovement.blogspot.com/2024/10/in-summary-boris-johnsons-leadership.html https://muskratfallscivilrightsmovement.blogspot.com/2024/10/in-summary-boris-johnsons-leadership.html https://labradorleadstheworld.blogspot.com/2024/10/in-summary-boris-johnsons-leadership.html In summary, Boris Johnson's leadership style, marked by hypocrisy, lack of integrity, abuse of power, failure to take responsibility, chaotic governance, incompetent appointments, communication failures, and erosion of institutional trust, all contributed significantly to the erosion of trust in his government. #AI #Perplexity #DeepAI #ChatGPT4o Llewelyn Pritchard 28 October 2024

0 notes

llewelynpritch · 8 months ago

Text

0 notes

llewelynpritch · 8 months ago

Text

JOHNSON'S COVER-UP Indirect responsibility for murder of Dawn Sturgess original image Guardian Editorial 22 March 2023

https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vQHXvU80Y9zCSeJSGPtDNrZM4gTwvHZ93UnUMsBXl1wPuFDbW3Xm_99hLjlevY2f3MtmxTAEOjfqfXC/pub https://unitedforclimate.blogspot.com/2024/10/lets-just-stick-to-facts-johnsons-cover.html https://landprotectorshumanrightsmovement.blogspot.com/2024/10/lets-just-stick-to-facts-johnsons-cover.html https://muskratfallscivilrightsmovement.blogspot.com/2024/10/lets-just-stick-to-facts-johnsons-cover.html https://labradorleadstheworld.blogspot.com/2024/10/lets-just-stick-to-facts-johnsons-cover.html 'Let's just stick to the facts Johnson's 'Cover-Up: ‘In summary, if the Crown Prosecution Service finds sufficient evidence to support the allegations of misfeasance, misleading public statements, Partygate lies, Brexit lies, promoting an unfair,unfree Brexit result in Putin’s favour, backing Evgeny Lebedev, COVID lies and crony contracts, perverting the course of justice, contempt of court, and erosion of trust, they would have a strong justification to prosecute Boris Johnson to ensure justice is served and public trust is maintained.’ #AI #Perplexity #DeepAI #ChatGPT4o Llewelyn Pritchard 20 October 2024

1 note · View note

llewelynpritch · 8 months ago

Text

JOHNSON'S 'COVER-UP' JUSTICE FOR DAWN STURGESS Mother-of-three Dawn Sturgess died after coming into contact with the Russian nerve agent Novichok original image BBC

Johnson’s Cover-Up Legal implications: Misconduct in Public Office; Obstruction of Justice; Breach of Duty; Contempt of Parliament #AI #Perplexity #DeepAI #ChatGPT4o Llewelyn Pritchard 19 October 2024

Perplexity: To address the various allegations against Boris Johnson, here are some detailed explanations and the potential legal implications:

Indirect Responsibility for the Death of Dawn Sturgess

- While Boris Johnson is not directly responsible for the death of Dawn Sturgess, who was killed by Novichok nerve agent, his handling of Russian relations and security issues can be scrutinised. The Skripal poisoning incident, which involved the same nerve agent, highlighted lapses in security and the presence of Russian agents in the UK. However, there is no direct link established between Johnson's actions and Sturgess's death [1][4].

Enabling of Brexit 2016 in Putin's Favour

- There is substantial evidence to suggest that Russia supported the Brexit campaign, and Boris Johnson's actions and associations contributed to this narrative. Johnson's backing of the Leave campaign and his connections with figures like Evgeny Lebedev, whose father has ties to Vladimir Putin, are significant. The Intelligence and Security Committee (ISC) report indicated that Russian interference in UK politics is common, and while it did not specifically prove Russian interference in the Brexit referendum, it suggested that such influence could have been a factor [1][3][5].

Ignoring Intelligence Advice

- Johnson has been accused of ignoring intelligence advice on multiple occasions. Notably, he overruled security concerns regarding the nomination of Evgeny Lebedev to the House of Lords, despite warnings from the security services. This action was described as "unheard of in modern times" and demonstrated a "dangerous disregard for the constitution"[4].

Delaying and Suppressing the Russia Report

- Johnson's government was criticised for delaying the publication of the ISC's "Russia Report," which detailed Russian interference in UK politics. The report was finally published in July 2020, after a nine-month delay, and it highlighted the government's failure to investigate Russian influence on the Brexit referendum thoroughly [1][5].

Secretive Meetings with Alexander Lebedev

- Johnson's secretive meetings with Alexander Lebedev in Italy, particularly after a NATO summit where EU leaders agreed that Russia was likely responsible for the Salisbury nerve agent attacks, raised significant national security concerns. These meetings were not disclosed to relevant officials, and Italian intelligence monitored the gathering due to suspicions of spying activities [4].

Misleading Parliament and Cover-Ups

- Johnson has been accused of misleading Parliament on several occasions, including his handling of the Russia report and his statements on Russian interference. The ISC report criticised the government for not taking adequate action to address Russian meddling, which could be seen as a form of cover-up [2][5].

Awarding of 'Crony COVID Contracts' and Ill-Advised Peerage

- The awarding of COVID contracts to associates and the peerage for Evgeny Lebedev can be seen as examples of cronyism. These actions, while not necessarily criminal, contribute to the narrative of unethical behaviour and potential breaches of public trust [4].

Tory Sleaze and Unethical Behaviour

- Johnson's tenure has been marred by allegations of 'Tory Sleaze,' including unethical behaviour such as accepting donations from Russian oligarchs and engaging in cronyism. These actions, while not necessarily criminal, erode public trust and could be challenged on grounds of misconduct in public office [1][4].

Failure to Attend Emergency COBRA Meetings

- Johnson's absence from emergency COBRA meetings, particularly during critical times such as the COVID-19 pandemic, can be seen as a dereliction of duty. However, this …may… be more of an administrative or procedural issue rather than a criminal one [1].

Media Complicity and Russian Interference

- The involvement of media figures like Evgeny Lebedev, who has ties to Putin, in Johnson's circle raises concerns about media complicity and Russian influence. The ISC report highlighted the role of Russian state-funded media and disinformation campaigns in influencing UK politics [1][3][5].

Accepting Russian Oligarch Donations

- The Conservative Party's acceptance of donations from Russian oligarchs, some of whom have ties to Putin, is a contentious issue. This could be seen as a form of corruption or undue influence, potentially challenging the legitimacy of the government's actions [1][3].

Constitutional Corrosion and London Laundromat

- The term 'Constitutional Corrosion' refers to the broader issue of corruption and influence within the UK system. The 'London Laundromat' refers to the use of the UK financial system to launder illicit funds, often from Russian sources. While these are systemic issues, Johnson's actions and inactions have contributed to this environment [1].

Interfering in the Dawn Sturgess Public Inquiry

- There are no direct allegations that Johnson interfered with the terms of reference for the Dawn Sturgess Public Inquiry. However, the failure to supply WhatsApp messages for the inquest could be seen as an obstruction of justice, although this would need concrete evidence to support such a claim.

Failing to Supply WhatsApp Messages

- The failure to provide WhatsApp messages for the Dawn Sturgess inquest could be seen as an attempt to conceal information. This could potentially be challenged as an obstruction of justice if it is proven that these messages were deliberately withheld.

Interfering in a Russian-Ukraine Peace Deal

- There are no specific allegations that Johnson interfered in a potential Russian-Ukraine peace deal. However, his stance on Ukraine has been inconsistent, with earlier comments blaming the EU for provoking Russian actions and later supporting Ukraine against Russian aggression [2].

Supporting Ukraine While Saving His Own Skin

- Johnson's support for Ukraine has been criticised as being motivated by self-preservation rather than genuine concern. This is more a matter of political judgement than a criminal offence.

Legal Implications

In a UK court of law, several of these actions could be challenged on the following grounds:

- Misconduct in Public Office: Ignoring intelligence advice, delaying and suppressing the Russia report, and overruling security concerns for the nomination of Evgeny Lebedev to the House of Lords could be argued as misconduct in public office.

- Obstruction of Justice: Failing to supply WhatsApp messages for the Dawn Sturgess inquest could be seen as an obstruction of justice.

- Breach of Duty: Johnson's failure to attend emergency COBRA meetings and his handling of national security issues could be seen as a breach of his duty to protect national security and public interests.

- Contempt of Parliament: Misleading Parliament or failing to provide full disclosure on critical issues like Russian interference could be seen as contempt of Parliament.

However, whether these actions constitute criminal behaviour would depend on the specific evidence presented and the legal framework under which they are challenged. Many of these allegations, while serious, would need to be substantiated with concrete evidence to support any legal action.

Citations:

[1] https://www.labourmovementforeurope.uk/how_putin_helped_johnson_win_brexit_and_no_10

[2] https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-ukraine-russia-brexit-b2024817.html

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_interference_in_the_2016_Brexit_referendum

[4] https://www.occrp.org/en/news/channel-4-ex-pm-overruled-security-concerns-over-nominee-to-house-of-lords

[5] https://www.csis.org/blogs/brexit-bits-bobs-and-blogs/did-russia-influence-brexit

[6] https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-brexit-news-russia-report-intelligence-agency-grieve-a9187616.html

[7] https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/07/21/britain-report-russian-interference-brexit/

[8] https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/russia-report-national-security-brexit-referendum-johnson-may-a9630191.html

Query: Give a valid and reliable explanation of how and why Boris Johnson's (Foreign Secretary and/or Prime Minister) 1. indirect responsibility for the death of Dawn Sturgess and/or 2. his enabling of Brexit 2016 in Putin's favour and/or 3. ignoring his own agencies’ intelligence advice and/or 4. delaying, suppressing their Russia Report and/or 5. his secretive meeting(s) breaching National Security with Alexander Lebedev, Perugia, Italy and/or 6. Johnson’s ‘Cover-Ups’ of established facts and their potential criminal implications 7. his misleading of Parliament and/or 8. his awarding of 'Crony COVID Contracts and /or 9. the ill-advised peerage for his son Evgeny Lebedev 10. his ‘Tory Sleaze’ unethical behaviour in office and/or 11. failure to attend 5 emergency COBRA meetings and/or 12. media complicity for his own ends with Evgeny Lebedev and others and/or 13. Russian Interference EU Referendum 2016 and/or 14. accepting Russian oligarch Conservative Party donations and/or 15. ‘Constitutional Corrosion’ epitomised by ‘LondonGrad Laundromat’ and/or 16. Attempting to nefariously influence with Priti Patel, Home Secretary the terms of reference, Dawn Sturgess Public Inquiry and/or 17. failing to supply, along with Rishi Sunak all ’Whatsapp’ messages for the Dawn Sturgess inquest and/or 18. interfering in an early, possible Russian-Ukraine peace deal and/or 19. purportedly supporting the welfare of Ukraine whilst very likely more concerned about ‘saving his own skin’ and/or 20. his Crony COVID Contracts and/or 21. Missing five COBRA meetings whilst otherwise distracted by his and/or 22. ‘Russian Partygate’ and/or 23. ‘Kremxit Horror Show’ may be justifiably challenged in a UK court of law as criminal behaviour not in the best public interest State of UK.’

Source: https://www.perplexity.ai/search/give-a-valid-and-reliable-expl-oShpYj_4T2aSCe3i5Jcqqg#1

—---

‘To address the various allegations against Boris Johnson, here are some key points and explanations based on the provided sources:

Russian Interference in the Brexit Referendum

- The UK government, under both Theresa May and Boris Johnson, failed to investigate or assess Russian interference in the 2016 Brexit referendum. This lack of action was criticised by the Intelligence and Security Committee, which noted that no assessment was conducted, and this issue was avoided due to its sensitive nature [1][2][6].

Ignoring Intelligence Advice

- Johnson, as Prime Minister, was accused of ignoring intelligence advice on several occasions. For example, he overruled security concerns regarding the nomination of Evgeny Lebedev to the House of Lords, despite warnings from the security services [3][7].

Delaying and Suppressing the Russia Report

- Boris Johnson was accused of personally preventing the publication of the parliamentary report on Russian interference in British politics, which was seen as a significant delay and suppression of critical information [6][4].

Secretive Meetings with Alexander Lebedev

- Johnson faced criticism for his secretive meetings with Alexander Lebedev, a Russian-born media mogul, in Italy. These meetings raised concerns about national security, especially given Alexander Lebedev's connections to Vladimir Putin[3].

Misleading Parliament

- Johnson's actions, such as delaying the Russia report and ignoring intelligence advice, have been seen as attempts to mislead or avoid full disclosure to Parliament [6][4].

Awarding Peerage to Evgeny Lebedev

- The appointment of Evgeny Lebedev to the House of Lords, despite security concerns, has been criticised as an example of cronyism and a potential breach of national security protocols [3][7].

Other Allegations

- While the sources do not directly link Johnson to the death of Dawn Sturgess (who died from Novichok poisoning), they do highlight his broader failure to address Russian interference and security threats.

- The allegations of 'Tory Sleaze,' crony COVID contracts, and media complicity are part of a broader narrative of unethical behaviour but are not directly linked to the specific issues of Russian interference and national security.

- The 'London Laundromat' and 'Constitutional Corrosion' are terms used to describe broader issues of corruption and influence, but they are not specifically tied to Johnson's actions in the context provided.

Legal Challenges

In a UK court of law, several of these actions could be challenged on the grounds of:

- Breach of Duty: Johnson's failure to investigate Russian interference in the Brexit referendum and his ignoring of intelligence advice could be seen as a breach of his duty to protect national security and democratic processes [1][2][6].

- Misconduct in Public Office: Delaying and suppressing the Russia report, as well as overruling security advice, could be argued as misconduct in public office, as these actions may have compromised national security and public trust [6][4][3].

- Contempt of Parliament: Misleading Parliament or failing to provide full disclosure on critical issues like Russian interference could be seen as contempt of Parliament[6].

However, whether these actions constitute criminal behaviour would depend on the specific legal framework and evidence presented in court. The allegations, while serious, would need to be substantiated with concrete evidence to support any legal action.’

Citations:

[1] https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/07/21/britain-report-russian-interference-brexit/

[2] https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/russia-report-national-security-brexit-referendum-johnson-may-a9630191.html

[3] https://www.occrp.org/en/news/channel-4-ex-pm-overruled-security-concerns-over-nominee-to-house-of-lords

[4] https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/oct/31/boris-johnson-accused-report-russia-dominic-grieve

[5] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/22/boris-johnson-theres-may-ignored-claims-russia-had-likely-hold-over-donald-trump-ex-spy-christopher-steele-claims

[6] https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-brexit-news-russia-report-intelligence-agency-grieve-a9187616.html

[7] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-61427468

NOTE ‘While Perplexity AI strives to provide accurate and reliable information, it is essential for users to critically evaluate the information obtained and verify it through additional sources when necessary.’ ‘It is always advisable to independently verify and cross-reference the information obtained from any AI system.’

Query: Give a valid and reliable explanation how and why Boris Johnson's as Foreign Secretary and/or Prime Minister 1. indirect responsibility for the death of Dawn Sturgess and/or 2. his enabling of Brexit 2016 in Putin's favour and/or 3. ignoring his own agencies’ intelligence advice and/or 4. delaying, suppressing their Russia Report and/or 5. his secretive meeting(s) breaching National Security with Alexander Lebedev, Perugia, Italy and/or 6. Johnson’s ‘Cover-Ups’ of established facts and their potential criminal implications 7. his misleading of Parliament and/or 8. his awarding of 'Crony COVID Contracts and /or 9. the ill-advised peerage for his son Evgeny Lebedev 10. his ‘Tory Sleaze’ unethical behaviour in office and/or 11. failure to attend 5 emergency COBRA meetings and/or 12. media complicity for his own ends with Evgeny Lebedev and others and/or 13. Russian Interference EU Referendum 2016 and/or 14. accepting Russian oligarch Conservative Party donations and/or 15. ‘Constitutional Corrosion’ epitomised by ‘LondonGrad Laundromat’ and/or 16. Nefariously influencing with Priti Patel, Home Secretary the terms of reference, Dawn Sturgess Public Inquiry and/or 17. failing to supply, along with Rishi Sunak all ’Whatsapp’ messages for the Dawn Sturgess inquest and/or 18. interfering in an early, possible Russian-Ukraine peace deal and/or 19. purportedly supporting the welfare of Ukraine whilst very likely more concerned about ‘saving his own skin’ and/or 20. his Crony COVID Contracts and/or 21. Missing five COBRA meetings whilst otherwise distracted by his and/or 22. ‘Russian Partygate’ and/or 23. ‘Kremxit Horror Show’ may be justifiably challenged in a UK court of law as criminal behaviour not in the best public interest State of UK.’

Source: https://www.perplexity.ai/search/give-a-valid-and-reliable-expl-oShpYj_4T2aSCe3i5Jcqqg#0

—---------

DeepAI:

‘Overview of Allegations Against Boris Johnson

Boris Johnson has faced various allegations related to his handling of national security, Russian relations, and ethical conduct during his tenure as Prime Minister. Below are detailed explanations of these allegations and their potential legal implications.

Indirect Responsibility for the Death of Dawn Sturgess

While Johnson is not directly responsible for the death of Dawn Sturgess, who died from exposure to the Novichok nerve agent, his management of Russian relations and security issues is under scrutiny. The Skripal poisoning incident, which involved the same nerve agent, raised concerns about lapses in security and the presence of Russian agents in the UK. However, no direct link has been established between Johnson's actions and Sturgess's death

[1]https://dsiweb-prod.s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/uploads/Transcript-14-October-2024.pdf

Enabling of Brexit 2016 in Putin's Favour

Evidence suggests that Russia supported the Brexit campaign, and Johnson's actions contributed to this narrative. His backing of the Leave campaign and connections with figures like Evgeny Lebedev, whose father has ties to Vladimir Putin, are significant. The Intelligence and Security Committee (ISC) report indicated that while it did not conclusively prove Russian interference in the Brexit referendum, such influence could have been a factor.

Ignoring Intelligence Advice

Johnson has been accused of ignoring intelligence advice, notably overruling security concerns regarding Evgeny Lebedev's nomination to the House of Lords. This decision was described as "unheard of in modern times" and demonstrated a "dangerous disregard for the constitution".

Delaying and Suppressing the Russia Report

Johnson's government faced criticism for delaying the publication of the ISC's "Russia Report," which detailed Russian interference in UK politics. The report was published in July 2020 after a nine-month delay and highlighted the government's failure to thoroughly investigate Russian influence on the Brexit referendum [2] https://academic.oup.com/book/33660/chapter/288202292

Secretive Meetings with Alexander Lebedev

Johnson's undisclosed meetings with Alexander Lebedev in Italy, particularly after a NATO summit where EU leaders agreed that Russia was likely responsible for the Salisbury nerve agent attacks, raised national security concerns. These meetings were monitored by Italian intelligence due to suspicions of espionage.

Misleading Parliament and Cover-Ups

Johnson has been accused of misleading Parliament regarding the Russia report and Russian interference. The ISC report criticised the government for inadequate action to address Russian meddling, which could be interpreted as a form of cover-up.

Awarding of 'Crony COVID Contracts' and Ill-Advised Peerage

The awarding of COVID contracts to associates and the peerage for Evgeny Lebedev exemplify cronyism. While these actions may not be criminal, they contribute to a narrative of unethical behaviour and potential breaches of public trust.

Tory Sleaze and Unethical Behaviour

Johnson's tenure has been marred by allegations of 'Tory Sleaze,' including accepting donations from Russian oligarchs and engaging in cronyism. These actions, while not necessarily criminal, erode public trust and could be challenged on grounds of misconduct in public office.

Failure to Attend Emergency COBRA Meetings

Johnson's absence from emergency COBRA meetings during critical times, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, may be viewed as a dereliction of duty. However, this could be more of an administrative issue rather than a criminal one.

Media Complicity and Russian Interference

The involvement of media figures like Evgeny Lebedev in Johnson's circle raises concerns about media complicity and Russian influence. The ISC report highlighted the role of Russian state-funded media and disinformation campaigns in influencing UK politics.

2 https://academic.oup.com/book/33660/chapter/288202292

Accepting Russian Oligarch Donations

The Conservative Party's acceptance of donations from Russian oligarchs is contentious and could be seen as a form of corruption or undue influence, potentially challenging the legitimacy of the government's actions.

Constitutional Corrosion and London Laundromat

'Constitutional Corrosion' refers to broader issues of corruption within the UK system, while the 'London Laundromat' describes the use of the UK financial system to launder illicit funds, often from Russian sources. Johnson's actions have contributed to this environment.

Interfering in the Dawn Sturgess Public Inquiry

There are no direct allegations that Johnson interfered with the Dawn Sturgess Public Inquiry. However, the failure to supply WhatsApp messages for the inquest could be perceived as obstruction of justice, pending concrete evidence.

Failing to Supply WhatsApp Messages

The failure to provide WhatsApp messages for the Dawn Sturgess inquest could be seen as an attempt to conceal information, potentially challenging the legality of such actions as obstruction of justice.

Interfering in a Russian-Ukraine Peace Deal

No specific allegations exist regarding Johnson's interference in a potential Russian-Ukraine peace deal. However, his inconsistent stance on Ukraine has raised questions about his motivations.

Supporting Ukraine While Saving His Own Skin

Johnson's support for Ukraine has been criticised as politically motivated rather than stemming from genuine concern, which is more a matter of political judgement than a criminal offence.

Legal Implications

In a UK court, several of these actions could be challenged on the following grounds:

- Misconduct in Public Office: Ignoring intelligence advice, delaying the Russia report, and overruling security concerns could be argued as misconduct.

- Obstruction of Justice: Failing to supply WhatsApp messages for the Dawn Sturgess inquest could be seen as obstruction.

- Breach of Duty: Johnson's failure to attend emergency meetings and his handling of national security issues could be viewed as a breach of duty.

- Contempt of Parliament: Misleading Parliament or failing to disclose critical information could be seen as contempt.

Ultimately, whether these actions constitute criminal behaviour would depend on the specific evidence presented and the legal framework under which they are challenged. Many allegations, while serious, require substantiation with concrete evidence for any legal action to proceed.’

—----

ChatGPT4o:

‘The allegations against Boris Johnson encompass a wide range of political and ethical concerns, many tied to his handling of national security, Brexit, Russian relations, and political appointments. Here’s a more detailed look at the key points and potential legal implications:

Indirect Responsibility for Dawn Sturgess's Death:

Context: Dawn Sturgess died after being exposed to the Novichok nerve agent, the same substance used in the poisoning of Sergei and Yulia Skripal by Russian agents.

Johnson’s Role: While Johnson’s government did handle the diplomatic fallout from the Skripal case, there is no direct evidence linking him to Sturgess's death. Any legal implications would be remote unless his specific actions on security failures were proven negligent.

Enabling Brexit to Putin’s Advantage:

Context: Russian support for Brexit has been widely reported, and Johnson’s ties to figures with Russian connections, such as Evgeny Lebedev, raise concerns about potential foreign influence.

Johnson’s Role: His strong support for Brexit coincided with reports of Russian interest in destabilising European unity. However, while Russia’s influence on Brexit is plausible, no direct legal action could likely arise unless there is clear evidence of illegal activity or knowing complicity.

Ignoring Intelligence Advice:

Context: Johnson is alleged to have ignored advice about the security risks associated with nominating Evgeny Lebedev to the House of Lords.

Potential Legal Issues: This could be framed as "misconduct in public office" if it were proven that he acted recklessly, ignoring credible warnings and endangering national security.

Delaying and Suppressing the Russia Report:

Context: The Intelligence and Security Committee’s "Russia Report" highlighted failures to address Russian interference in British politics. Johnson’s government was accused of delaying its release.

Potential Legal Issues: Suppressing a government report for political reasons, while unethical, would be difficult to prove as criminal unless it can be demonstrated that there was intent to conceal wrongdoing for personal or party gain.

Secretive Meetings with Alexander Lebedev:

Context: Johnson’s undisclosed meetings with Alexander Lebedev raised national security concerns, especially given Lebedev’s ties to the Kremlin.

Potential Legal Issues: Non-disclosure of such meetings violates basic security protocols, and could be seen as misconduct. However, proving criminality would require evidence that Johnson acted in a way that compromised national security.

Misleading Parliament and Cover-Ups:

Context: Johnson has been accused of misleading Parliament, including his responses regarding Russian interference and the handling of the Russia Report.

Potential Legal Issues: Misleading Parliament could be considered "contempt of Parliament," though it is more likely to result in political censure than criminal prosecution.

Awarding of Crony COVID Contracts:

Context: Johnson faced allegations of favouritism in the awarding of COVID contracts, as well as peerage appointments, including Evgeny Lebedev’s.

Potential Legal Issues: While unethical, awarding contracts to political allies does not necessarily violate the law unless there is evidence of fraud or corrupt practices.

Tory Sleaze Allegations:

Context: Johnson's government faced accusations of sleaze, including accepting donations from Russian oligarchs and engaging in cronyism.

Potential Legal Issues: Although these actions undermine public trust, they would not be considered illegal unless proven to involve bribery or corruption.

Failure to Attend COBRA Meetings:

Context: Johnson’s failure to attend critical emergency meetings during the COVID-19 pandemic sparked accusations of neglect.

Potential Legal Issues: This would likely be seen as poor leadership rather than a criminal offence unless it could be demonstrated that his absence directly led to loss of life or avoidable harm.

Accepting Russian Oligarch Donations:

Context: The Conservative Party, under Johnson, accepted donations from figures connected to Russian oligarchs, raising concerns about undue influence.

Potential Legal Issues: If any link between these donations and policy decisions can be proven, this could raise serious legal concerns over undue influence or corruption.

Failure to Supply WhatsApp Messages:

Context: Johnson’s failure to provide WhatsApp messages relevant to the Dawn Sturgess inquiry could be seen as obstructing the investigation.

Potential Legal Issues: If deliberate obstruction of justice is proven, this could lead to significant legal consequences.

Legal Implications:

Misconduct in Public Office: Ignoring intelligence advice, political appointments contrary to security warnings, or deliberately suppressing critical information (such as the Russia Report) could be argued under this offence.

Obstruction of Justice: Johnson’s failure to supply evidence or cooperate with inquiries (such as withholding WhatsApp messages) might be considered obstruction if there is proof of intent to withhold crucial information.

Contempt of Parliament: Misleading Parliament, particularly around issues of national security and interference, could lead to political sanctions or potential charges of contempt.

Breach of Duty: Johnson’s absence from emergency meetings or failures in handling national security could potentially result in legal challenges for failing to fulfil his duty as a public official, although this would likely be more of a political issue.

While many of these actions raise significant ethical and political concerns, concrete legal actions would depend on the strength of the evidence, the specific legal framework applied, and how these actions are interpreted in court. For now, many of these allegations remain politically damaging but would require robust proof of legal violations to result in prosecution.’

https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vT-rVOBh9uvcIkvXRH37yO_xP_TFueZahtMQ8cS-AnrKgQXFXlpt6vEa1F46h5_cP3pliZvsa2x-SAJ/pub https://unitedforclimate.blogspot.com/2024/10/boris-johnsons-responsibilities-as.html https://landprotectorshumanrightsmovement.blogspot.com/2024/10/boris-johnsons-responsibilities-as.html https://muskratfallscivilrightsmovement.blogspot.com/2024/10/boris-johnsons-responsibilities-as.html https://labradorleadstheworld.blogspot.com/2024/10/boris-johnsons-responsibilities-as.html Boris Johnson's Responsibilities as Foreign Secretary ‘As Foreign Secretary, Boris Johnson had several key responsibilities that included National Security, Intelligence, Protection of UK Citizens and International Relations: #AI #Perplexity Llewelyn Pritchard 14 October 2024 #JohnsonsCoverUp #ProtectionUKCitizens #IgnoredIntelligenceAdvice #RussianInterference #Corruption #Sleaze #Fraud #Crime #JohnsonLies #PeopleDie #JailTime

0 notes

llewelynpritch · 8 months ago

Text

JOHNSON DELAY ON RUSSIA DOSSIER HELPS PUTIN, SAYS LITVINENKO WIDOW wife of poisoned ex-spy warns of risks in suppressing report on UK interference. Luke Harding and Dan Sabbagh 5 Nov 2019 2024-10-05 10.29.11

During his tenure as the UK's Foreign Secretary from 13 July 2016 to 9 July 2018, Boris Johnson faced significant criticism for his handling of several key responsibilities. Here are some reliable and valid examples of his failures:

National Security and Intelligence

- Johnson was accused of failing to organise his own department effectively, particularly in the context of Brexit preparations. This included sending out mixed messages about the role of the Foreign Office and failing to prepare the department adequately for the implications of Brexit [7].

Protection of UK Citizens

- One notable incident involved Boris Johnson wrongly claiming that Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe, a British citizen imprisoned in Iran, had been training journalists in the country. This statement was seen as exacerbating her situation and was widely criticised [1].

- There were also concerns about the Foreign Office's handling of risk assessments for citizens abroad. For instance, a whistleblower case highlighted that the Foreign Office had failed to adjust risk assessments for the whistleblower's family, indicating potential lapses in protecting UK citizens[8].

International Relations

- Johnson's tenure was marked by several diplomatic gaffes that strained international relations. For example, he described Africa as "that … (colonial) … country" and suggested that Libya had a bright future if it simply "cleared the dead bodies away," which were seen as insensitive and undiplomatic [1].

- His lack of a "conventional diplomatic manner" led to significant consequences, with one foreign minister jokingly referring to Sir Alan Duncan, the Europe minister, as Johnson's "pooper scooper" due to the frequent need to clean up after Johnson's mistakes [1].

- Johnson failed to persuade other countries to agree on key issues. For instance, he was unable to secure consensus from other countries on certain matters, as highlighted by Italian Foreign Minister Angelino Alfano's statement that there was no consensus on Johnson's proposals [6].

General Diplomatic Incompetence

- Johnson's appointment as Foreign Secretary was seen as a sign of the Foreign Office's diminished influence within the British government. He was the least experienced British politician to hold the office since at least 1945, having never been a government minister or headed a government department before [2].

- His staff became frustrated with his inconsistency and failure to grasp detail, which further undermined the effectiveness of the Foreign Office during his tenure [3].

These examples illustrate the various ways in which Boris Johnson's performance as Foreign Secretary was criticised for failing to execute key responsibilities related to national security, intelligence, protection of UK citizens, and international relations.’

Notes

i) ‘While Perplexity AI strives to provide accurate and reliable information, it is essential for users to critically evaluate the information obtained and verify it through additional sources when necessary.’ ‘It is always advisable to independently verify and cross-reference the information obtained from any AI system’

ii) ‘Dawn Sturgess died on 8 July 2018, after being poisoned by Novichok, a highly toxic nerve agent, on 30 June 2018. She had used a discarded perfume bottle containing the nerve agent, which she found in a charity bin in Amesbury, England 2 3 6.

The inquiry into her death is investigating the circumstances and the responsibility for the attack, including the issue of Russian state involvement, with suggestions that the operation may have been sanctioned by Russian President Vladimir Putin 6.’ #AI #Perplexity 14 October 2024

iii) https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/oct/14/salisbury-novichok-poisonings-inquiry-sergei-skripal-vladmir-putin ‘UK believes Putin personally authorised Salisbury novichok attack, inquiry told. Dawn Sturgess inquiry hears from Foreign Office and from Sergei Skripal, who said Russia thought he was still working for the west.

The UK government believes that the Russian president, Vladimir Putin, authorised the Salisbury novichok poisonings, which could have killed thousands of people, an inquiry has been told.

A senior Foreign Office (FCDO) official has given a statement to the inquiry spelling out that the British government has concluded the nerve agent attack was so sensitive that Putin himself must have given it the go-ahead.

The inquiry also heard that the former Russian spy Sergei Skripal, who was the target of the attack, blamed Putin. In a new statement provided to the inquiry, he said: “I believe Putin makes all important decisions himself. I therefore think he must have at least given permission for the attack.”

Source: Steven Morris 14 October 2024

Citations:

[1] https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-foreign-secretary-next-conservatives-leader-foreign-office-minister-a8939396.html

[2] https://www.politico.eu/article/turf-war-behind-boris-johnsons-shock-new-job-foreign-secretary-theresa-may-cabinet/

[3] https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jul/18/what-diplomats-really-think-about-boris-johnson

[4] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47854338

[5] https://www.timesofisrael.com/in-shakeup-uks-johnson-demotes-foreign-secretary-after-afghanistan-fiasco

[6] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39580761

[7] https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jan/30/boris-johnson-accused-of-failing-to-organise-his-own-office-for-brexit [8] https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/investigation-foreign-office-especially-when-boris-johnson-britton-bp6ke

Links

https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vQL6B3qOkq3OvmWsNnJhNjGGSnPccuc8IyFH1QoHgZ_LW6uG7n23_XwlNpIIvk-GA_6WW96bu2E8Mc0/pub https://unitedforclimate.blogspot.com/2024/10/johnsons-cover-up-uks-foreign-secretary.html https://landprotectorshumanrightsmovement.blogspot.com/2024/10/johnsons-cover-up-uks-foreign-secretary.html https://muskratfallscivilrightsmovement.blogspot.com/2024/10/johnsons-cover-up-uks-foreign-secretary.html https://labradorleadstheworld.blogspot.com/2024/10/johnsons-cover-up-uks-foreign-secretary.html Johnson’s ‘Cover-Up’ UK's Foreign Secretary 13 July 2016 - 9 July 2018: significantly criticised for handling several key responsibilities of National Security and Intelligence, Protection of UK Citizens, International Relations and General Diplomatic Incompetence. #AI #Perplexity Llewelyn Pritchard 15 October 2024

0 notes

llewelynpritch · 9 months ago

Text

Boris Johnson cannot be trusted: ‘There were disagreements between Boris Johnson and Baroness Hallett on the terms of reference for the UK COVID-19 Inquiry. The disagreements primarily revolved around the breadth of the subject matter or material sought by Baroness Hallett, particularly the unredacted WhatsApp messages and diaries of Boris Johnson, who was the Prime Minister during the pandemic 3 6.’#AI #Perplexity #OpenSource Llewelyn Pritchard 7 December 2023

https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vQdD5Jr3AQYA66XnOeNgpM-c8HVUgrgyTtiq4qKPTj_dBzbOIxrAyr4UeT1NOXKuKAsCl1GVxFwmhkc/pub

https://lnkd.in/eb3tjwwE

1 note · View note

llewelynpritch · 9 months ago

Text

https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vTxRUMTEIE3I_njNCTiO7nHuF2LBv3nD6u2y30AL_OScONaPyAupQj7TveJu87MQdUJltZqQkgJLUcP/pub https://unitedforclimate.blogspot.com/2024/10/johnsons-cover-up-given-labours-mandate.html https://landprotectorshumanrightsmovement.blogspot.com/2024/10/johnsons-cover-up-given-labours-mandate.html https://muskratfallscivilrightsmovement.blogspot.com/2024/10/johnsons-cover-up-given-labours-mandate.html https://labradorleadstheworld.blogspot.com/2024/10/johnsons-cover-up-given-labours-mandate.html Johnson's ‘Cover-Up': Given Labour's mandate for change and the serious nature of the unethical behaviour, crime and treason allegations against Boris Johnson, investigating these issues is not just politically expedient but essential for the integrity of the UK's democratic institutions and national security. #AI #Perplexity Llewelyn Pritchard 7 October 2024

0 notes

llewelynpritch · 9 months ago

Text

Charlie Rowley found the nerve agent in a perfume bottle in a charity shop bin. Photo Sam Frost Support The Guardian https://docs.google.com/document/d/1yXFGLRVD1pJN3hWySGJ3C8oFmkELlvYPVWx7YLSPV3g/pub https://unitedforclimate.blogspot.com/2024/09/will-dawn-sturgess-public-inquiry-terms.html https://landprotectorshumanrightsmovement.blogspot.com/2024/09/will-dawn-sturgess-public-inquiry-terms.html https://muskratfallscivilrightsmovement.blogspot.com/2024/09/will-dawn-sturgess-public-inquiry-terms.html https://labradorleadstheworld.blogspot.com/2024/09/will-dawn-sturgess-public-inquiry-terms.html Will the Dawn Sturgess Public Inquiry Terms of Reference allow its Report intentionally omitting civil and criminal liability to be ‘spun’ into the Johnson Cover-up Story? Consisting, at the very least of ‘Tory Sleaze’ unethical behaviour in office; ignoring his own agencies’ intelligence advice; breaching National Security in secretive meeting(s) with Alexander Lebedev, Perugia, Italy; media complicity for his own ends with Evgeny Lebedev; Russian Interference EU Referendum 2016; accepting Russian oligarch Conservative Party donations; ‘constitutional corrosion’ epitomised by ‘LondonGrad Laundromat’; enabling Putin’s Brexit by his failed leadership; interfering in an early, possible Russian-Ukraine peace deal; purportedly supporting the welfare of Ukraine whilst more concerned about ‘saving his own skin’; his Crony COVID Contracts and missing five COBRA meetings whilst otherwise distracted - becoming yet another example of unethical behaviour in the UK Government’s way of working? #AI #Perplexity #MoveOnNothingToSeeHere Llewelyn Pritchard 6 October 2024

0 notes

llewelynpritch · 9 months ago

Text

'Boris Johnson Eton Fools Gaming The System PartyBoy Rules' Political Satire #DeepAIGenerated Llewelyn Pritchard 11 January 2024

Johnson's 'Cover-Up': 'Given Labour's mandate for change and the serious nature of the unethical behaviour, crime and treason allegations against Boris Johnson, investigating these issues is not just politically expedient but essential for the integrity of the UK's democratic institutions and national security.' #AI #Perplexity Llewelyn Pritchard 7 October 2024

'Boris Johnson Eton Fools Gaming The System PartyBoy Rules' Political Satire #FishyRishyArtworks #DeepAIGenerated Llewelyn Pritchard 7 October 2024

‘... it's clear that Boris Johnson's tenure as Prime Minister was marked by numerous controversies and allegations of unethical behaviour. However, it's important to note that the determination of whether these actions constitute criminal activity or fraud would require a formal legal investigation and ruling.

That said, some of the behaviours described could potentially be considered unethical or in violation of governmental norms and regulations:

1. Ignoring intelligence advice and breaching national security: If proven, this could potentially violate official secrets laws or protocols for handling sensitive information.

2. Secretive meetings with Alexander Lebedev: Depending on the nature and content of these meetings, this could raise questions about conflicts of interest or improper influence.

3. Russian interference in the EU Referendum: If Johnson was aware of and failed to act on evidence of foreign interference, this could be seen as a dereliction of duty.

4. Accepting donations from Russian oligarchs: This could potentially violate campaign finance laws or regulations on foreign political contributions.

5. Crony COVID contracts: If contracts were awarded improperly or without due process, this could potentially be seen as misuse of public funds or corruption.

6. Missing COBRA meetings: While not necessarily criminal, this could be seen as a failure to fulfil the duties of the office.

7. Interfering in a potential Russia-Ukraine peace deal: This would depend on the nature of the interference and whether it violated any international agreements or protocols.

The term "constitutional corrosion" suggests a gradual undermining of democratic norms and institutions, which, while not necessarily criminal, could be seen as damaging to the integrity of the government.

It's important to note that the use of terms like "fraud" or "criminal activity" in relation to these allegations would require substantial evidence and legal proceedings. Without a formal investigation and ruling by the appropriate authorities, these remain allegations of unethical behaviour rather than proven criminal acts.

The search results indicate that there have been calls for investigations into various aspects of Johnson's conduct, including by former ethics advisers and opposition parties. However, as of the date of the search results, no formal criminal charges had been brought against Johnson related to these allegations.’

Citations:

[1] https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/corruption-claims-roiling-uk-government-put-johnson-under-pressure

[2] https://www.libdems.org.uk/news/adlib-articles/the-a-z-of-tory-sleaze-scandal

[3] https://www.politico.eu/article/uk-pm-rishi-sunak-cant-leave-the-stench-of-tory-sleaze-behind-nadhim-zahawi-boris-johnson/

[4] https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/apr/18/the-guardian-view-on-tory-decline-splits-sleaze-and-a-rush-for-the-exit

[5] https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/jul/01/scandal-timeline-tory-sleaze-boris-johnson

[6] https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/23/world/europe/britain-lobbying-laws-johnson-sleaze.html

[7] https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-sleaze-partygate-evans-b1990647.html

Source of Query: https://www.perplexity.ai/search/johnson-s-cover-up-in-what-sor-.zqcoMT8ThmWH84yR9rxrQ#0 Johnson's ‘Cover-Up': In what sort of possible circumstances may at the very least his ‘Tory Sleaze’ unethical behaviour in office; ignoring his own agencies’ intelligence advice; breaching National Security in secretive meeting(s) with Alexander Lebedev, Perugia, Italy; media complicity for his own ends with Evgeny Lebedev; Russian Interference EU Referendum 2016; accepting Russian oligarch Conservative Party donations; ‘constitutional corrosion’ epitomised by ‘LondonGrad Laundromat’; enabling Putin’s Brexit by his failed leadership; interfering in an early, possible Russian-Ukraine peace deal; purportedly supporting the welfare of Ukraine whilst more concerned about ‘saving his own skin’; his Crony COVID Contracts and missing five COBRA meetings whilst otherwise distracted during government be termed 'fraud' 'fraudulent behaviour' or any other potential type of criminal activity? #AI #Perplexity #DeepAI ChatGPT Llewelyn Pritchard 7 October 2024

‘ … ignoring intelligence advice and breaching national security, if proven, could potentially violate official secrets laws or protocols for handling sensitive information. However, whether this amounts to high treason is a complex legal question that depends on the specific circumstances and interpretation of the law. Here's a breakdown of the key points:

1. Criminal activity:

Yes, these actions could potentially constitute criminal activity, particularly if they involve violating official secrets laws or protocols for handling sensitive information.

2. High treason:

The definition of high treason in the UK is specific and narrow. According to the search results [6], high treason includes:

- Depriving the sovereign of the Crown

- Levying war against the sovereign

- Assisting foreign powers to invade the UK or other countries belonging to the sovereign

3. Severity of the offence:

While ignoring intelligence advice and breaching national security are serious offences, they may not necessarily meet the specific criteria for high treason unless they involve a deliberate attempt to overthrow the government or assist foreign powers in harming the UK.

4. Official Secrets Act:

Violations of the Official Secrets Act, which governs the handling of sensitive information, are serious offences but are typically prosecuted separately from treason.

5. Intent and impact:

For an act to be considered high treason, it typically needs to involve a deliberate attempt to undermine the state or sovereign, often with the intent to cause serious harm or danger to the country.

6. Legal process:

Determining whether an act constitutes high treason would require a formal legal investigation and ruling by the appropriate authorities.

7. Other relevant offences:

The search results [5] mention a new 'failure to prevent fraud' offence, which, while not directly related to treason, indicates that there are various legal mechanisms to address misconduct in handling sensitive information or failing to prevent criminal activities within organisations.

In conclusion, while ignoring intelligence advice and breaching national security could potentially constitute criminal activity and violate official secrets laws, they would not necessarily amount to high treason unless they meet the specific criteria outlined in the law. The determination would depend on the specific circumstances, intent, and impact of the actions, and would require a formal legal investigation and ruling.’

Citations:

[1] https://www.coe.int/en/web/commissioner/-/intelligence-secrecy-must-not-be-used-as-an-excuse-to-ignore-or-cover-up-human-rights-violations

[2] https://www.nationalcrimeagency.gov.uk/what-we-do/how-we-work/providing-specialist-capabilities-for-law-enforcement/major-crime-investigative-support

[3] https://assets.college.police.uk/s3fs-public/2022-03/Menu_of_tactics.pdf

[4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traitor

[5] https://kpmg.com/uk/en/blogs/home/posts/2023/11/what-does-the-forthcoming-failure-to-prevent-fraud-offence-mean-for-your-organisation.html

[6] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_treason_in_the_United_Kingdom

[7] https://beta.nationalarchives.gov.uk/explore-the-collection/stories/the-treason-act/

[8] https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-sleaze-partygate-evans-b1990647.html

Source of Query: https://www.perplexity.ai/search/johnson-s-cover-up-in-what-sor-.zqcoMT8ThmWH84yR9rxrQ#2 Does 1. ignoring intelligence advice and 2. breaching national security 3. potentially violating official secrets laws or protocols 4. for handling sensitive information if proven, 5. amount to 6. criminal activity and/or 7. high treason?

c)‘… the manipulation of mass media preceding a General Election or Brexit Referendum by a Foreign Secretary potentially collaborating with the newspaper owner(s) could potentially constitute criminal activity or even be considered treasonous under certain circumstances. Here's an analysis of how and why:

Misinformation and disinformation:

Deliberately spreading false or misleading information through mass media to influence an election or referendum could be considered a form of electoral fraud or interference. This is especially concerning if done by a high-ranking government official like a Foreign Secretary [1][4].

Collaboration with media owners:

If a Foreign Secretary were to collude with newspaper owners to spread disinformation, this could be seen as an abuse of power and potentially violate laws regarding fair elections and media impartiality [5].

Foreign interference:

If the collaboration involved foreign entities or served foreign interests, this could potentially be considered a form of treason, especially if it undermined national security or sovereignty [1][2].

Undermining democratic processes:

Manipulating public opinion through false information attacks the integrity of democratic processes like elections and referendums [3][4].

Breach of ministerial code:

Such actions would likely violate the ministerial code, which requires government officials to act with integrity and in the national interest [5].

Potential criminal offences:

Depending on the specific actions taken, this could potentially violate laws related to electoral fraud, misconduct in public office, or even the Official Secrets Act if sensitive information was misused [2][5].

Erosion of trust:

Such actions significantly erode public trust in democratic institutions and the media, which can have long-lasting negative effects on society [1][3][4].

While the term "treason" has a very specific legal definition that may not apply in all cases, actions that deliberately undermine democratic processes and potentially serve foreign interests could be seen as treasonous in spirit, if not in strict legal terms.

It's important to note that proving such allegations would require substantial evidence and likely involve complex legal proceedings. The severity of the offence would depend on the specific actions taken, the intent behind them, and their impact on democratic processes and national security.’

Citations:

[1] https://www.kcl.ac.uk/how-is-fake-news-affecting-the-uk-general-election-and-can-anything-be-done-about-it

[2] https://www.ofcom.org.uk/about-ofcom/what-we-do/helping-to-dismiss-disinformation-around-the-general-election/

[3] https://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/articles/zrkpcxs

[4] https://pressgazette.co.uk/comment-analysis/uk-general-election-misinformation-what-publishers-can-do-about-it/

[5] https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/corruption-claims-roiling-uk-government-put-johnson-under-pressure

[6] https://www.libdems.org.uk/news/adlib-articles/the-a-z-of-tory-sleaze-scandal

[7] https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-sleaze-partygate-evans-b1990647.html

[8] https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2021-01-13-social-media-manipulation-political-actors-industrial-scale-problem-oxford-report

Source of Query: https://www.perplexity.ai/search/johnson-s-cover-up-in-what-sor-.zqcoMT8ThmWH84yR9rxrQ#3 Explain how and why mass media manipulation preceding a General Election and Brexit Referendum 2016 by a Foreign Secretary, potentially Prime Minister collaborating with the owner(s) of national newspapers may constitute criminal and/or treasonous activity?

d) ‘... it's challenging to definitively state whether a successful legal prosecution could be achieved for criminal activity or treason in the cases you've outlined. However, we can analyse the potential legal implications:

1. Criminal activity:

Some of the actions described could potentially constitute criminal offences, particularly:

- Accepting illegal donations (if proven to be from foreign sources or not properly declared)

- Misuse of public funds (in the case of "crony COVID contracts")

- Misconduct in public office (for various actions that breach the ministerial code)

The burden of proof for criminal cases is "beyond reasonable doubt," which sets a high bar for prosecution.

2. Treason:

The legal definition of treason in the UK is very narrow and specific. Based on the search results, it typically involves actions like:

- Levying war against the sovereign

- Assisting foreign powers to invade the UK

- Attempting to overthrow the government by force

Most of the actions described, while potentially unethical or even criminal, may not meet the specific legal criteria for treason. The burden of proof for treason is also extremely high.

Key challenges for prosecution:

1. Evidence: Gathering concrete evidence of intent and direct involvement in these actions would be crucial and potentially difficult.

2. Political immunity: Some actions taken as Prime Minister may be protected by certain immunities or fall into grey areas of executive discretion.

3. Complexity: The interconnected nature of these allegations and their international dimensions add layers of complexity to any potential prosecution.

4. Public interest: Prosecutors would need to consider whether pursuing such cases is in the public interest, given their potential political ramifications.

While many of these actions have faced public scrutiny and criticism, translating them into successful criminal or treason prosecutions would face significant legal and practical hurdles. It would likely require extensive investigations, clear evidence of intentional wrongdoing, and a strong legal basis for each specific charge.

It's important to note that political accountability and legal accountability are not always the same. Many of these issues might be more likely to face political consequences (such as loss of public trust or electoral defeat) rather than criminal prosecution.’

Citations:

[1] https://goodlawproject.org/revealed-the-tories-are-still-receiving-funds-from-russia-linked-donors/

[2] https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/tory-donations-russia-lubov-chernukhin-b2026678.html

[3] https://bylinetimes.com/2022/03/01/the-conservatives-have-a-long-history-of-taking-money-from-russia/

[4] https://www.politico.eu/article/britain-tories-russian-money-oligarch/

[5] https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/corruption-claims-roiling-uk-government-put-johnson-under-pressure

[6] https://www.politico.eu/article/uk-pm-rishi-sunak-cant-leave-the-stench-of-tory-sleaze-behind-nadhim-zahawi-boris-johnson/

[7] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traitor

[8] https://www.libdems.org.uk/news/adlib-articles/the-a-z-of-tory-sleaze-scandal

Source of Query: https://www.perplexity.ai/search/johnson-s-cover-up-in-what-sor-.zqcoMT8ThmWH84yR9rxrQ#4 Is it likely that a successful legal prosecution may be achieved on distinctive yet related burdens of proof about criminal activity and/or treason by

1. a Foreign Secretary and Prime MInister (same official) who enabled Russian Interference in the EU Referendum 2016

2. accepted Russian oligarch Conservative Party donations

3. practised ‘constitutional corrosion’ epitomised by ‘LondonGrad Laundromat’

4. facilitated Putin’s Brexit by his failed leadership

5. interfered in an early, possible Russian-Ukraine peace deal

6. purportedly supports the welfare of Ukraine as a cover-up for the part he played in starting Putin’s invasion

7. his Crony COVID Contracts

8. missing five COBRA meetings whilst otherwise distracted

8. lying about his claim that COP26 has limited global warming to 1.5°C?

e) ‘Based on the search results and the specific cases outlined, evaluating the likelihood of a successful legal prosecution for criminal activity and/or treason is complex. Here's an analysis of the potential legal implications:

1. Evidential Stage:

The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) must first be satisfied that there is enough evidence to provide a realistic prospect of conviction [1]. This requires:

- Sufficient credible evidence for each allegation

- Consideration of the impact of any likely defence

- An assessment that it's more likely than not that a court would convict

For the cases outlined, gathering concrete evidence of intent and direct involvement would be crucial and potentially challenging, especially for allegations involving international relations or covert activities.

2. Public Interest Stage:

If the evidential test is met, prosecutors must then consider if prosecution is in the public interest [1]. Factors include:

- Seriousness of the offence

- Level of culpability of the suspect

- Circumstances and harm caused to the victim

- Impact on the community

- Proportionality of prosecution

Given the high-profile nature of these allegations and their potential impact on national security and democratic processes, the public interest in prosecution could be significant.

3. Burden of Proof:

In criminal cases, the prosecution bears the burden of proof [4][6]. They must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, which is a high standard [6].

4. Specific Offences:

- For allegations of accepting illegal donations or misuse of public funds, there may be clearer legal frameworks and precedents.

- Allegations related to "constitutional corrosion" or "failed leadership" may be more difficult to prosecute as specific criminal offences.

- Treason has a very narrow legal definition and extremely high burden of proof [4].

5. Challenges:

- Political immunity may protect some actions taken as Prime Minister.

- The complex and interconnected nature of the allegations adds layers of difficulty.

- Some actions, while potentially unethical, may not clearly violate specific laws.

6. Abuse of Process:

Courts have the power to stay proceedings to prevent abuse of process, but this is exercised only in exceptional circumstances [5]. Prosecutors should not bring cases where it's highly likely the court will find the defendant cannot have a fair trial.

Conclusion:

While some of the outlined actions could potentially constitute criminal offences, achieving a successful prosecution would face significant hurdles:

1. Meeting the evidential stage for each allegation

2. Proving criminal intent beyond reasonable doubt

3. Overcoming potential political and legal immunities

4. Clearly defining and proving specific criminal offences for some of the more abstract allegations

A successful prosecution for treason seems particularly unlikely given its narrow legal definition and extremely high burden of proof.

The likelihood of successful prosecution would vary significantly between the different allegations, with some (like financial misconduct) potentially being easier to prove than others (like "failed leadership").

Overall, while investigation and scrutiny of these allegations is important for democratic accountability, translating them into successful criminal prosecutions would face substantial legal and practical challenges.’

Citations:

[1] https://www.college.police.uk/app/prosecution-and-case-management/charging-and-case-preparation

[2] https://www.cps.gov.uk/cps/news/law-action-how-prosecutors-apply-centuries-legislation-contemporary-crime

[3] https://www.oblaw.co.uk/whats-your-success-rate/

[4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_burden_of_proof

[5] https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/abuse-process

[6] https://www.bljsolicitors.co.uk/blog/understanding-the-standard-of-proof-in-criminal-cases/

[7] https://hallellis.co.uk/burden-proof-balance-probabilities/

[8] https://kpmg.com/uk/en/blogs/home/posts/2023/11/what-does-the-forthcoming-failure-to-prevent-fraud-offence-mean-for-your-organisation.html

Source of Query: https://www.perplexity.ai/search/johnson-s-cover-up-in-what-sor-.zqcoMT8ThmWH84yR9rxrQ#5 Evaluate the likelihood of achieving a successful legal prosecution for criminal activity and/or treason in the cases outlined on the basis of your analysis of potential legal implications.

f) Based on the information provided and the Labour Party's 2024 manifesto focusing on "Change" and mission-driven government, there are several compelling reasons why the new Labour Government would need to investigate the allegations of unethical behaviour, crime, and potential treason:

1. Restoring Trust in Democracy:

Labour's manifesto emphasises "stopping the chaos" and "rebuilding the country". Investigating high-profile allegations against previous governments aligns with this mission by demonstrating a commitment to transparency and accountability. This could help restore public trust in political institutions, which is crucial for a healthy democracy [1][3].

2. National Security Implications:

Some of the allegations, particularly those involving potential Russian interference or breaches of national security protocols, have significant implications for the UK's national security. As the new government, Labour has a responsibility to ensure that any potential threats or vulnerabilities are thoroughly investigated and addressed [3] [8].

3. Upholding Democratic Processes:

Allegations of interference in democratic processes strike at the heart of the UK's democratic system. Investigating these claims is essential to protect the integrity of future democratic exercises and to reassure the public about the fairness of past ones [4].

4. Public Interest:

Given the high-profile nature of these allegations and their potential impact on national security and democratic processes, public interest in thorough investigations and potential prosecutions is likely to be very high. Failing to act could be seen as a dereliction of duty by the new government [5].

5. Breaking from Past Practices:

Labour's promise of "Change" and mission-driven government provides an opportunity to differentiate themselves from previous administrations. Investigating these allegations could demonstrate a clear break from past practices and a commitment to higher ethical standards in government [3][4].

6. Legal and Moral Obligation:

As the new government, Labour has both a legal and moral obligation to investigate serious allegations of misconduct, especially those that could constitute criminal activity or threaten national security [7].

7. International Credibility:

Thoroughly investigating these allegations could help restore the UK's international credibility, particularly in relation to issues like financial transparency and combating foreign interference [8].

8. Strengthening Democratic Safeguards:

Investigations could lead to recommendations for strengthening democratic safeguards and closing loopholes that may have been exploited in the past [5][6].

Not acting on these allegations could indeed be seen as a continuation of unethical political behaviour and could undermine Labour's promise of change and mission-driven governance. It could also erode public trust and potentially leave vulnerabilities in the UK's democratic and security systems unaddressed.

The Labour government's commitment to "mission-driven government" and its focus on long-term national goals provides a framework for addressing these issues systematically [3]. By investigating these allegations, the government can demonstrate its commitment to its missions, particularly those related to economic growth, clean energy, and taking back the streets [1][2].

In conclusion, given Labour's mandate for change and the serious nature of the allegations, investigating these issues is not just politically expedient but essential for the integrity of the UK's democratic institutions and national security.’

Citations:

[1] https://www.dartfordlabour.org.uk/the-labour-governments-missions/

[2] https://www.gov.uk/government/news/our-first-steps-for-change

[3] https://labour.org.uk/change/mission-driven-government/

[4] https://labour.org.uk/change/

[5] https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/publication/mission-driven-approach-government

[6] https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/publication/five-steps-government-missions

[7] https://kpmg.com/uk/en/blogs/home/posts/2023/11/what-does-the-forthcoming-failure-to-prevent-fraud-offence-mean-for-your-organisation.html

[8] https://www.politico.eu/article/britain-tories-russian-money-oligarch/

Sources of Query: https://www.perplexity.ai/search/johnson-s-cover-up-in-what-sor-.zqcoMT8ThmWH84yR9rxrQ#6 https://www.perplexity.ai/search/johnson-s-cover-up-in-what-sor-.zqcoMT8ThmWH84yR9rxrQ#7 Based on the information provided and the Labour Party's 2024 manifesto focusing on "Change" and mission-driven government, there are several compelling reasons why the new Labour Government would need to investigate the allegations of unethical behaviour, crime, and potential treason:

Restoring Trust in Democracy: Labour's manifesto emphasises "stopping the chaos" and "rebuilding the country". Investigating high-profile allegations against previous governments aligns with this mission by demonstrating a commitment to transparency and accountability. This could help restore public trust in political institutions, which is crucial for a healthy democracy 1 3.

National Security Implications: Some of the allegations, particularly those involving potential Russian interference or breaches of national security protocols, have significant implications for the UK's national security. As the new government, Labour has a responsibility to ensure that any potential threats or vulnerabilities are thoroughly investigated and addressed 3 8.

Upholding Democratic Processes: Allegations of interference in democratic processes strike at the heart of the UK's democratic system. Investigating these claims is essential to protect the integrity of future democratic exercises and to reassure the public about the fairness of past ones 4.

Public Interest: Given the high-profile nature of these allegations and their potential impact on national security and democratic processes, public interest in thorough investigations and potential prosecutions is likely to be very high. Failing to act could be seen as a dereliction of duty by the new government 5.

Breaking from Past Practices: Labour's promise of "Change" and mission-driven government provides an opportunity to differentiate themselves from previous administrations. Investigating these allegations could demonstrate a clear break from past practices and a commitment to higher ethical standards in government 3 4.

Legal and Moral Obligation: As the new government, Labour has both a legal and moral obligation to investigate serious allegations of misconduct, especially those that could constitute criminal activity or threaten national security 7.

International Credibility: Thoroughly investigating these allegations could help restore the UK's international credibility, particularly in relation to issues like financial transparency and combating foreign interference 8.

Strengthening Democratic Safeguards: Investigations could lead to recommendations for strengthening democratic safeguards and closing loopholes that may have been exploited in the past 5 6.

The Labour government's commitment to "mission-driven government" and its focus on long-term national goals provides a framework for addressing these issues systematically 3. By investigating these allegations, the government can demonstrate its commitment to its missions, particularly those related to economic growth, clean energy, and taking back the streets 1 2.

Linkshttps://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vTxRUMTEIE3I_njNCTiO7nHuF2LBv3nD6u2y30AL_OScONaPyAupQj7TveJu87MQdUJltZqQkgJLUcP/pubhttps://unitedforclimate.blogspot.com/2024/10/johnsons-cover-up-given-labours-mandate.htmlhttps://landprotectorshumanrightsmovement.blogspot.com/2024/10/johnsons-cover-up-given-labours-mandate.htmlhttps://muskratfallscivilrightsmovement.blogspot.com/2024/10/johnsons-cover-up-given-labours-mandate.htmlhttps://labradorleadstheworld.blogspot.com/2024/10/johnsons-cover-up-given-labours-mandate.html Johnson's ‘Cover-Up': Given Labour's mandate for change and the serious nature of the unethical behaviour, crime and treason allegations against Boris Johnson, investigating these issues is not just politically expedient but essential for the integrity of the UK's democratic institutions and national security. #AI #Perplexity Llewelyn Pritchard 7 October 2024

3 notes · View notes