In the video he claims to have been a undercover cop till October 2010, the text contradicts this, can we believe any of it apart from that fact he has got a really bad hair cut?

Oh what a heartbreaking story- save some air on the planet and finish yourself you pathetic piece of shit.

Not to say he hasn't unintentionally revealed how he was working later than he claims, but he may jus hav e got his years wrong - he says he was told he had 3 weeks to pull out in September 2009, which comes to October 2009, so he may have just meant to say that. Elsewhere he has G20 in London taking place a year earlier than it did - not that the daft mail journos picked up on it.

Or - he has slipped up and was still working a year later than he claims elsewhere. WHich is always possible as the rest is full of lies, or half-truths, some designed to fit well with the established james Bond fantasy pic the Mail is painting - the "menacing' circle of accusers, the pathetic cliches about his ex-partner. Max Clifford, or someone, is advising to sell the populist angle, "I told them there wasn't gonna be violence at G20, they killed someone, they didn't listen...".

But if he was still a cop in summer 2010 why the need to take his real passport on this trip?

Well the articles in The Mail aren't that bad. Perhaps for people who know the ins and outs they're a bit pointless, but otherwise they contain some interesting information.

"otherwise they contain some interesting information"

Much of which ISN'T TRUE.