The Common Man has emerged from his enforced hibernation into the Walter Mitty world of Eric Edmonds.
Desperate to hide his complicity in the attempt to get rid of UKIP leader Nigel Farage, he now resorts to telling outright lies. On his blog, he states
'The statement from the Common Man blog that "Mr Young voted in favour of the expulsion of both Mr Abbott and Mr Edmonds." is a lie.'
Except that it isn't, and Mr Young unquestionably voted in favour of the expulsion of both Mr Abbott and Mr Edmonds. No-one has ever questioned the results of the votes which were published on the internet by UKIP, and the 11-0 vote in favour of his expulsion is a clear indication that Mr Young thought that he should go.
Is that enough for Mr Edmonds? No. He then suggests that every single signatory to the letter he was a cosignatory to is completely clear of BNP links. As the Common Mans many regular readers know, a good chortle is always welcome, and Mr Edmonds rarely fails to disappoint. Mr Haslam was a prime mover in the proposal of an electoral pact between UKIP and the BNP, while Mr Abbott was a donor to the BNP and has changed his story so many times he probably cant remember what the truth is. He started by saying he'd given money to AFBNP organiser Mr Cotterill as a 'fellow ex-pat in need', and then (when he realised that the donation was a matter of public record and had been caught out in a lie) said that Mr Cotterill had mislead him over the donation. He then changed his story again and again and again and the Common Man understands that the current fairy tale is two donations to the AFBNP and a further two payments to Mr Cotterill, but that is subject to change in the event of future revelations. Quite how much he gave at the BNP Trafalgar Club fundraising dinner he attended is a matter of speculation.
So when Mr Edmonds says "If you have evidence to support your outrageous accusation that I, or any of the other signatories, have BNP links then you are honour bound to publish it." what he really means is apart from AFBNP donation records and his own personal complicity in a BNP attempt to remove UKIPs leadership.
The end result is that those things which Mr Edmonds claims to be lies are actually true. And as 'any fule no', defending a reputation requires a reputation worth defending in the first place.
Why did you leave the Bank of England again, Mr Edmonds?