EXCEPTIONAL and extreme cases of maladministration and mismanagement?

22 Comments

How do you compare injustice, fraud, failures of ‘the system’ and explain the width of the gap between the Rule of Law (and correctness) and the Rule of Money (and corruption)?

Victims Unite started in August 2010 by publishing individual cases that were begun on Enforcement of Bank of England Act 1694. Since then I

  • accompanied some 50 general and another 50 or so cases in family courts
  • posted 474 articles
  • and 815 followers are reading regularly about ‘us’, the victims turning into starfighters, campaigners, online activists and McKenzie Friends and ‘them’, the ‘public service’ organisations ranging from police, prison, courts, the House of Commons and House of Lords to the Government in Downing Street.

13 08 31 statsToday, the 250,000 mark of visitors will be passed. And I am sorry to say that the only thing that has improved is my ability to ‘see through’ what’s happening more and more:

  • public officials commit white collar crimes
  • they deny and lie
  • they cover each other
  • they commit more crimes to cover up.

No matter which ‘case’ comes before courts, no matter which story I try to publish, no matter who tries to get justice and compensation, it’s never a level playing field, for there is always one individual that is being victimised by many officials who are ‘just doing their job’.  More

THE PEOPLE PROCESSING Industry: Dishonest Money in, Victimised Victims Out

10 Comments

13 08 11 The Slog

Take Power, Be Heard!

I can’t help it: I’m a systems analyst. I don’t just view ‘subroutines’ in a system of programs. I look at the complete deck of cards. At the time of my ‘formative years’, we were dealing with punched cards at CERN in Geneva!

Living in London since 1981 has exposed me not only to our system of creating dishonest money from thin air and charging interest for it, but also to very sad systems of people who are paid with this dishonest money to victimise innocent victims.

The degree of victimisation is such that it is surprising that not more is commonly known. Of course, victims are gagged and intimidated with threats of imprisonment. They are also likely to feel ashamed and think it’s their own fault rather the one of ‘the system’.

But whatever ‘the systems’ are, whether Prison, Police, Courts, Lawyers, other Professionals, Parliament, Government, Whitehall, House of Lords, The City – it is likely to be an institution that benefits from its Royal Charter. They process us, the people, and turn us from ‘victim’ into ‘super victim’ – IF you let them! It may be a long and slow process to wake up to the fact that it doesn’t have to be that way. Joining the blogosphere helps! Uniting with other victims is vital! Becoming McKenzie Friend is ‘learning by doing’. More

MENTAL CAPACITY Act under Scrutiny: open for Evidence from You!

11 Comments

Great minds think alike: yesterday we were complaining to John Hemming MP about the failures and abuse of the Mental Capacity Act in our meeting on Secrecy as the cloak for Criminality? John Hemming comments on his blog on 24 June 2013 and links to an article he wrote for The Independent.

At the same time the House of Lords Select Committee on the Mental Capacity Act 2005 has published a Call for Evidence and the UK Human Rights Blog writes about it here.

Please send your ‘well documented cases’ to holmentalcapacityco@parliament.uk before 2 September 2013.

In my observation, this is what things boil down to in the broad spectrum of ‘white collar crimes’:

  1. the secrecy of family courts is meant to ‘protect’; but the reality is that it is used to steal children, even though there may be cases where parents are not fit to parent; but what the care system does AGAINST children and parents by far outweighs what it does FOR them
  2. to declare somebody not to have ‘mental capacity’ is meant to ‘protect’ the person by letting somebody else make decisions on their behalf; but in reality it is used by the Official Solicitor and his legal colleagues to steal assets. More

HUMAN RIGHTS, Bills, Legislation, Justice, Security, Assange or True Civilisation and One Law: DO NO HARM

9 Comments

Protestors at iraq kickbacks inquiry

Everybody tries to make a difference in our ‘interesting’ times, everybody as best as they can, given their circumstances and familiarity with communication media. Over the last two days I received distinctly ‘interesting’ information:

“Apparent power thrives on secrets. The world of men is structured force.”

Here’s Tony Gosling‘s email about the Justice and Security Bill:

Yesterday Andrew Tyrie MP was mentioned in the Observer:- http://www.911forum.org.uk/board/viewtopic.php?p=163751#163751 http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/feb/17/justice-security-bill-secret-courts The justice and security bill is a chilling affront to British justice Secret courts should have no place within our judicial system.

Previously:- http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2013/jan/28/andrew-tyrie-secret-courts-bill Tory MP Andrew Tyrie attacks secret courts bill Backbencher warns that government is in danger of ‘closing down access to the truth’. More

TERRIFYING SECRET ‘Justice’ Bill glides unnoticed through Parliament

3 Comments

13 02 12 The TapThe disconnect between Parliament and ‘the public’ has never been greater.

But when the Secret ‘Justice’ Bill glides through Parliament and ‘the public’ prefers to be asleep, we can only hope that those few who notice, will share their news as effectively as The Tap - an interesting ‘collective’ contributing to a blog.

There is no such thing as ‘the system’. We are talking about people being paid for working

and

  • in HMG Government, i.e. Downing Street and Whitehall
  • in the City of Westminster with Parliament supposedly as the Highest Court of the Land
  • the State with its civil servants and employees in ‘authorities’ and ‘public institutions’
  • the Law (Judiciary) or Ministry of Justice
  • and the Law Enforcement (Police) – all necessary to turn Britain into a Police State.

‘The ‘public’ More

Mind the Gap: between Mainstream Media (paid) and Social Media (voluntary)

7 Comments

The section of St. Joseph Street in the colleg...

The section of St. Joseph Street in the college is co-named Marshall McLuhan Way. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

If you have come across Marshall McLuhan, you will have come across his statement The Medium is the Message. What he meant was that the form of the medium ‘embeds’ itself in the message.

What is the the key difference between Mainstream Media (MSM) and Social Media (SM)? The fact that the MSM are controlled by their owners, shareholders and editors, i.e. employees are ‘professionals’ who have to ‘follow the rules’ or else they lose their job and pension.

Social media are shaped by ‘amateurs’ who are driven by passion and their desire to express their ideas, beliefs and the information they have come across. Money and ‘career’ do not play the essential role. Everybody can become their own journalist and broadcaster. We don’t need the MSM any more to get heard! We can listen to each other!

Having organised the Forum for Stable Currencies since 1998 at the House of Lords, I was acutely aware of the mainstream media shying away from these ‘complex’ issues. Hence I decided to ‘move online’, hoping to make more of a difference. For what is there to do:

The McAlpine farce makes it painfully clear that the Rule of Money has replaced the Rule of Law: More

Your Chance to Complain to the Commission on Banking Standards!

3 Comments

The Palace of Westminster seen from east. Vict...

The Palace of Westminster seen from east. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Andrew Tyrie MP is not only the Chairman of the Treasury Select Committee, but also now of the Commission on Banking Standards. In French, I would say ‘ça tombe bien’: ‘it falls well’.

I don’t have to distinguish between the lack of Enforcement of the Bank of England Act 1694 and the dishonesty of our money system as the CAUSE and their EFFECTS: white collar crimes and their victims, or as Maurice Kirk puts it: blanket immunity to civil servants and professions who seriously break the law.

Please, do consider making your complaint. I know it seems hardly worth doing. I know “they” pay only lip service and your contribution will only make history by being published. But let’s do it anyway, just to satisfy our own conscience:
“You’ve gotta dance like there’s nobody watching,
Love like you’ll never be hurt,
Sing like there’s nobody listening,
And live like it’s heaven on earth.”

Here’s the link and the full text:

More

THANK YOU to all 120,001 Visitors for the 2nd birthday of Victims Unite!

7 Comments

Victims Unite 120,001As long as we can’t either win individual cases or make progress in terms of changing “the system”, I can hardly feel pleased. However, I follow the following guidelines:

  1. Publicity is the very soul of justice. It is the surest of all guards against improbity. It keeps the judge himself, while trying, under trial.
  2. As long as the mainstream media don’t cover enough of our problems, we must ‘compensate’ with internet media.
  3. Just as mainstream media ‘boast’ with ratings and circulation figures, so bloggers are happy with good numbers of visits to their sites.

Victims Unite was started on 2nd August 2010, after Room 14 – a Foundation for Change in April 2009 (2,589 visitors) and Enforcement of Bank of England Act 1694 in June 2009 (30,936 visitors). Since then, More

The People demand the return of full Sovereignty

2 Comments

This is an excellent letter from Albert Burgess in 15 Parliament Road whose website is called “A Case for Treason”.

He previously received a letter with page 1 and page 2 from Ms Vagg which sounds ‘ever so proper’ once again, fudging the issue, as they always do, these people who ‘only doing their job’…

Eileen Vagg                          Albert Burgess
Cabinet Office                     15 Parliament Road
4th Floor South                 Thame
1 Horse Guards Road       South Oxfordshire
London                                  OX9 3TE
SW1A 2HQ                            15-10-2011

Ref House of Lords Reform

Dear Ms Vagg
It never ceases to amaze me just how much those who govern us, and those who work for those who govern us, do not know or understand the English Constitution or Common Law.

So let me remind you, you are not answerable to the deputy prime minister an office unknown until Margaret Thatcher invented it for Willy Whitelaw a traitor of the worst kind. As he was a prime mover and shaker of Heaths when he sold this Kingdom to the EEC for £60,000. You are answerable to the law as it is written, and to the people who employ you. That is not the government of the day but the great British tax payer, who are getting increasingly annoyed at government which sees itself as above the law and answerable to no one. History tells us that when that situation occurs governments and Kings are removed, generally, painfully.

You talk about parliamentary sovereignty, meaning I have no doubt the sovereignty of the House of Commons, which they erroneously claim on the grounds they are the elected chamber. It might interest you to know that King George III carried out a 20 year fight with the commons as to where sovereignty lay, with the House of Commons or the King. It was determined that sovereignty lay with the King. So Her Majesty is Sovereign not the commons, who are largely elected because most of them are inveterate liars, not to mention thieves. Who seem to feel they can steal our money with impunity.

Our constitution is both ancient and very good, indeed as so many countries around the world have modelled their constitution on ours, one may conclude our constitution is as perfect as it can get. In spite of your belief that parliament is all powerful and can do anything it likes, things like the Great Charter of 1215 and the Bill of Rights 1689 which incorporates the Declaration of rights 1689. Can not be repealed by parliament because they are binding contracts between the King and his subjects, and are outside the remit of parliament. Habeas Corpus goes back to that truly Great King, King Alfred, and as such it is the custom and practice of England. As such it is beyond the reach of parliament.

Custom is any law which has been in use from times of greatest antiquity with the approval of the people; all custom is beyond the reach of parliament, because it has become the custom and practice of England. Chief Justice Sir Edward Coke 1628 ruled that any law which was older than 1199 was the custom of England this sets greatest antiquity as any law more than 400 years old. So those ancient laws of Provisors 1351, and Praemunire1351 both ostensibly repealed in 1948 and 1967 are both still in force because they are beyond the reach of parliament by virtue of the fact they are the custom and practice of England. This is doubly true because they were repealed to allow the betrayal of this Kingdom to a foreign power the EEC/EU, and the attempted repeals were acts of High Treason in their own right.

Our constitution was built by our forefathers, as a result of having to deal with despotic government; as a result they built into the constitution checks and balances in the way parliament was constructed. According to Sir Mathew Hale arguably our greatest ever Judge, parliament is a tripartite agreement, the Commons originates law, the Lords amend it, pass it, or reject it, and the King gives it the Royal Assent or not. No one part can pass, amend, or repeal law. That is the way our parliament is constructed, it is constructed like that to protect us from despotic government. By preventing any one part being any more powerful than the other parts.

Not one of Her Majesty’s loyal subjects and I stress loyal subjects was ever asked if we wanted to change that, nor were Her Majesty’s predecessors subjects asked if they wanted to change that happy arrangement, nor were we asked if we wanted Nick Clegg or any one else in government to change that happy state of affairs. Had we been asked the answer would be a resounding NO! NO! NO! Or more probably other words to the same effect I will leave you to decide for your self which words I refer to.

In 1661 the commons started on a power grab, when they told the Lords they could not amend a money bill, look as you will? You will find nothing in our constitutional arraignments which authorises that. It was then and is now constitutionally illegal. In 1910 Asquith put a money bill forward the Lords believing wrongly that they could not amend it, rejected it. Asquith went to the Lords and told them he was putting forward a bill to restrict there ability to reject a bill, if they did not pass it he would put 500 new Peers into the house and they would vote for its abolition. Duress and or blackmail are serious crimes who ever or however they are presented by, in this case they constituted the major crime of sedition contrary to common law, because Asquith was subverting the constitutional make up of parliament, and at this level of sedition it becomes an Act of High Treason against the people, the very crime King Charles I was beheaded for. The subsequent parliament acts, and the 1999 House of Lords Act have been acts of sedition in there own right and consequently acts of High Treason. Baroness Ashton in the House of Lords speaking for the government said it was not possible to remove every Peer in a general bill. The 1999 act was is and always will be ultra vires. Translation it is illegal.

Not content with undermining the House of Lords, the commons set about usurping the Royal Prerogative, one of Asquith’s ministers told King George V on his ascending the Throne that he keeps all his prerogatives, but he may not use any of them unless he has the backing of a government minister, look as you will? You will find no constitutional authority for that statement, in fact the opposite is the case, and to usurp the Royal Prerogative is to commit High Treason. We even have a particular law to cover it the 1795 Treason Act makes it an act of High Treason to restrain the King. To prevent the King from exercising his Prerogative according to his conscience is to restrain the King and is an act of High Treason. Every government since is and has been guilty of this major crime.

The government has not now and never has had a mandate from Her Majesty’s subjects to undertake any changes to the constitutional arrangements of parliament as put in place by our forefathers. Nor have they ever had a mandate to sign any EU Treaties which transfer any powers to govern away from the Queen in parliament to the EU or any other foreign power. Nor do they have a mandate to impose EU laws and regulations on the United Kingdom, I recommend you read the Act of Supremacy 1559 and the Bill of Rights 1689 both these major constitutional laws forbid the governments actions with regard to the EU, you might also like to refer to 40 E.3.n.7.8 &c:3 these actions are acts of High Treason contrary to the English Constitution. It is my intention to see the whole lot hang for their ongoing treasons. If I were you I would get another job it has been a long time since this country has hung a woman, it would be a real shame to hang you for Conspiracy to commit High Treason. After a trial before a jury of your peers of course. Your letter is evidence of your conspiracy.

As a matter of fact the cognisance of the House of Lords extends to who sits in the house, the precedence’s for this are many which you should know if your knowledge of this subject were as good as it should be. Nothing originated by the commons can change that without committing treason.

You should also be aware that Her Majesty has the right to change death by hanging for High Treason to public execution by hanging drawing and quartering. This does not apply to women they are burnt at the stake. Personally it is my belief that removing Nick Clegg’s head can only improve his appearance. Though it would undoubtedly spoil the clean lines of London Bridge to display his head on a spike. You should not work on the assumption that no Jury would convict, and there is no shortage of volunteers for public executioner. We will have no problem finding loyal subjects of Her Majesty’s to fulfil either role. Love of Queen and country is far from dead in these islands.

Respectfully submitted

Albert Burgess

The Torture of an Abused Child’s Mother: How Police and Social Services of Doncaster Council collude to Torment Vicky Haigh

3 Comments

NEWS RELEASE

Vicky Haigh who is due to give birth in four days to her second child, sent a cri de cœur [1]by email on Saturday night after three Irish police offers banged on her door. Christopher Booker had reported in the Telegraph the same morning: The police hunt is on for Vicky Haigh, though she is not a ‘missing person’ [2]and writes that “wasting police time is a punishable offence”.

But Doncaster Council ignore punishable offences: their “head lawyer” who instigated proceedings against Vicky and her seven-year old daughter turned out to be a social worker. The subsequent solicitor seems to have issued “orders” without hearings having taken place.

Someone was commissioned by Ms Haigh to investigate why her daughter was taken away from her in November 2010 and given into the “care” of her father’s mother. She put together an extensive chronology of the case[4] for the Police to investigate and called all courts that were supposedly involved: Sheffield, Birmingham and London. But while there is a Sheffield case number, there are no records of any hearing in any court.

More

Older Entries

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,276 other followers