French judge agrees with me

I wish I would have had this nice French judge in my libel cases against Gray, Hilton and others because this beautiful judge ruled that a French blogger had to pay damages to a restaurant, after posting a hugely negative blog title, which had great prominence in Google searches. The judge obviously thought that just the negative title was able to bring the restaurant into disrepute and put people off from going there.

This was an important point in my case in that I argued that people just do not have the time to follow up each headline and cannot read whole articles to find somewhere at the bottom the explanation for a sensational headline.

But this judge at least agrees with me that high ranking Google search results can do huge damage just from the headline. Kiss him. Caroline Doudet was ordered to amend a post about restaurant II Giardino.  Article link.

In Britain a person is expected to read each and every article they come across just to find out the facts, if they are attracted by a particular headline. It is quite impossible already to even have the time to read the small print on contracts or other important information as there is so much of it about.

Advertisements

Miliband sees my point on publishing

Labour has now experienced first-hand how publishers character assassinations can ruin someone’s public profile completely. Reason, political tendencies are being created by denouncing a person’s character using political rhetoric. BBC has produced several articles about this, see one link here. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-24361040

However it was Labour’s own strategy to use those denunciations whilst Brown and McBride worked together. Indeed David Osler, John Gray and others, used the tactics to smear me publicly and I lost a libel case due to the fact that high-profile publisher Iain Dale, started to collect funds and several friends of the defendants used a Conservative lawyer to produce mostly falsified evidence in court. The court was of course only too glad to accept the evidence because it helped to protect the British flagship publisher Der Spiegel.

But one of the defendant’s ally, namely Iain Dale is already falling victim to his own bad character. He recently assaulted a peaceful protester and got a caution. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-24285711

Justice Eady, the truth is still waiting

I have now suffered several, in my view botched judgements that I had to endure simply because in civil law I am not entitled to legal representation. The case involves an originally British publisher, Der Spiegel and an employee of a Spiegel subsidiary, Lloyds List, which now bought into Der Spiegel. Mr Osler is extremely left-wing and supports all sorts of left-wing groups from Anarchists to Communists. He works in Lloyds list especially on the pirate issue, e.g. Somalis hijacking British ships. Of course several British women have become victims of Somali terrorist activity recently.

Justice Eady found for Der Spiegel, found for Mr Osler and found for all the other defendants involved in the UK left-wing Labour movement. They were spurred on by a member of the Conservative Party who volunteered, without being forced to in any way, to defend Mr Osler, whose defence then benefitted the other attached defendants. British law was so pleased with the performance of Mr Dougans that he became Assistant Solicitor of the Year, that is how the British reward those who work in the best interst of their country. Mr Hilton of course was supported by the big and rich Gay Support Network as he is an admitted and known Homosexual. But still all the Britishness and Gayness doesn’t allow a court to find wrongly on the evidence.

So, yes I am a German immigrant, now in possession of a British passport and I dared to attack the former Axel Springer empire over one of their publications. Of course one needs to know that Springer was implanted on Germany after World War II to dismantle the Hitler propaganda machine.

Why was I picked on by Springer? It is not known.  Tthe reason why I was arrested can be seen from these documents here, which are from the German Prosecutor from the 70s and 80s. There are 3 documents, all of which are translated. It is more than clear from the documents that I was arrested in line with an investigation against a Wilhelm Boenninger whom I do not know and who, according to my research, is never named in connection with any Baader-Meinhof activities anywhere on the net. There are a vast number of Internet pages, which list known BM or RAF associates. That name is not there, neither is mine. I never met a man called Wilhelm Boenninger and assume it is a case of mistaken identity. See letter from 12 March 1980, Ref 8 Js 500/75. I then was compensated for false arrest and the false imprisonment suffered See letter from 16 March 1978, ref 4StR Es 158/77. Also enclosed and then I received a letter from the German authorities certifying that I was never, not even remotely under suspicion of RAF association. See the underlined word on the bottom of page 1, letter dated 10 April 1980 Ref 1BJs 93/77.

Yet Mr Justice Eady felt fit to belief the palaver of Mr Osler, who argued that all arrests in the 70s in Germany must have to do with the Baader-Meinhof Group. The British publication machinery, including the BBC spread rumours that in Germany up to 35% of the population were in active support of the Baader-Meinhof group, which is a statistic that is very hard to belief. It is false and mere rubbish. You must imagine that if 35% of the population were in support of something then every 3rd or 4th person you would meet in the street would be involved into a criminal gang and actively supporting them. That is practically unthinkable and cannot be supported in any rational argument.  Apparently there is no broadly conducted survey that could support such a statistic, a survey that would have been conducted in Germany itself, asking ordinary German citizens and not just the demonstrating student minority that is so readily portrait on UK websites.

It simply pleases the British mentality to think that the Germans were broadly in support of Baader-Meinhof but that is the reason for Justice Eady’s judgment against me. The fact is that not anywhere in any official paperwork available from 1975 – 1980, not anywhere is there any mention of any political orientation. There is no way that anybody could come along and reasonably argue that any arrest that took place in Germany in the 70s, must have taken place because of Baader-Meinhof activities. Especially also not as at that time Germany did not know a Terrorism clause within Criminal law. A terrorism clause was added in late 1976. It was Der Spiegel that couched my arrest in an article about Baader-Meinhof and Eady J cleared Der Spiegel of publication  in the UK  during my case against Der Spiegel when later he accepted doctored evidence from Osler that it had been published. This is an obvious miscarriage of justice.

Osler seems to be the babe of the court. He works for Lloyds List the subsidiary of Der Spiegel and in particular mostly on the Somali Pirate issues. Several women were kidnapped by Somali pirates recently. Judith Tebbutt, a disabled women, was snatched, her wheelchair left behind, her husband murdered.

The Paragraph 129 as it was in use then was so wide, that anybody would be arrested within it, including Travellers, religious sects like the The Church of Scientology and all would be accused of potentially wanting to throw over the German state and be potential terrorists, there was no actual proof needed for such an accusation. That was the climate under which arrests took place in Germany in 1975. It would be unthinkable today that this could happen with the Human Rights Act in place. It was plain and simply state persecution that allowed the imprisonment of indiscriminate amounts of people so that the state could weed out undesirables and collect information from people. Thousands fell victim to this.

There is no way, that I was ever assumed to be in touch with the RAF or Baader-Meinhof, there is no proof that the state even sought it was possible. The letters proof it, one even says, that I was never, not even remotely under such suspicion.

Not only did Eady J support the dismissal of my case because he thought it was an abuse of process because the difference between a compensated criminal arrest and compensated Baader-Meinhof arrest is too small, he actively supported in his judgement the notion that my arrest must have been for left-wing activities, for which there is no proof available at all. Not in any letter from the German authorities is this actually supported. I protested about this rigorously during the draft-judgement state but Justice Eady knows that without that left-wing element, his judgement cannot stand, and so he put it in just to make it work.

Justice Eady decided to please Der Spiegel, to please the left-wing Lloyds List employee. Why? Probably its a racist and sexist motivated judgement, that might also have religious grounds. What the British have established to be an anti Hitler propaganda tool, has turned into a pro-British propaganda tool and bends facts to please the British instead. Mr Osler later posted on Mr Gray’s blog, that I was defeated just like the Germans in World War II and the police promptly allocated a crime number for that posting but refrains to prosecute because the fine they could achieve would not exceed £50.

Of course I think sexism plays a big role. I am a single women, not associated with the typically important English male or even female (that if I was a Lesbian, which I am not). Many nasty posts have been produced during the course of the court case, mainly from men with revolting comments, that even one female high court judge remarked upon and then Mr Osler dropped his claim for costs. Unfortunately distasteful sexual comments were all over the Internet on this case.

Unfortunately for me, the whole justice system in Europe is now so impenetrable, that the single judges in the European Court of Human Rights also just tick off applications by unrepresented applicants as not being admissible, like they do in 95% of the cases. They cherry pick cases to hear and mine was not there.

The truth on my cases is still outstanding and I feel I am a victim of a miscarriage of justice.  It is my opinion and I have Freedom of Expression.

One recent reader comments that the court must have been listening to the case for so long to cash in on the payments from the state, which covered the costs for my applications because they need the money. That does not please the British Tax Payer.

I still belief and think I am correct in doing so, that there is a considerable difference in a general arrest and an arrest with specific suspicions of supporting and sympathising with a mayor terrorist group, who solely work from an illegal underground network. That is what the posts implied. Even in Germany the authorities did put such specific accusations in their arrest warrants, but not in mine, which was jointly with one other person, who also never was associated with known terrorists. I am glad to have been cleared of BM involvement, even with the British judgements, yet I was still made to loose the cases.

I shall add links to this shortly and further docs to download as proof

Hi, it is back on

You may have noticed that I took my blog off for a little while because I gotten threatening letters again from the lawyer because of my lost libel cases. Suddenly they remembered that I still owe them money. But having read an article last night to which I was alerted from a Facebook Friend, I think the legal action against me now has to be seen in a historic light. Please read the new page about the Rothchilds and I put that indirectly in the legal context of my cases. In such a way, that I wondered why the court found it so important to defend the Freedom of Speech of people who report wrongly and who work for a mainstream publisher. I wondered why one of the most prominent judges found it important to issue judgements that still falsify the context of my case. Because I was never arrested for left-wing activities, there is not a shred of proof for that assumption in Mr Justice Eady’s judgement.

I have provided many original German documents and none of them put me in any left-wing context.

I wondered why a Conservative Lawyer works for free to defend a left-wing radical and there is the connection, it is the bigger picture that is being defended here. Read on my new page who owns all the mayor publishing houses that tell us what to think day after day and make conclusions about the importance of Left-wing and Right-wing politics and politics in general. If you read the new page you will see that politics is merely a smoke screen that hides the more important factors away from us and is merely intended to keep us busy so that we do not think about the real facts that are important. Of course it is now also quite obvious that the ECHR only takes on cases that suit their political power-play and refuse all others including mine.

What is important now is to prevent any political or other upheavals that could disturb our quality of life. Prevent any future political movements that could bring harm to our population or criminal activities that disturb our peace. Because we little people are sick of suffering for the benefit of some powerful players.

I am a Londoner Mr Gray

Having read the latest post of Mr Gray about me, my mind immediately began to spin. I think it happens to all of us, that if we read something our minds start associations both emotional, intellectual and irrational. With that post of Mr Gray my mind started to get unfortunately and worrying irrational thoughts, which I am hoping others do not get too. It is most regrettable that Mr Gray should have chosen to portray the most unfortunate rock band in the history of Britain to express his delight of his win before the High Court. We all know that the particular member of the Sex pistols ended up stabbing his own girl friend and then killed himself or died a drugs-related death. How unconstructive that dialogue is that Mr Gray opened there. He describes the video as video recording of the defendant Osler at the Royal Courts of Justice.

I am disturbed about this element of death and wonder what is going on in Mr Gray’s mind.

Of course it is never easy to deal with the loss of not one but several civil court proceedings as I have to do but glee is not the best way to deal with it, even not as the winner of the proceedings, at least that is my view.

Probably the court did think it necessary to discuss that matter through thoroughly and I went all the way along with it and in the end, even though I lost, the court was not very harsh and encouraged the defendants to enforce the costs strictly against me but built me a few bridges in recommending that the defendants don’t do anything to get their money because there is no point in doing so.

However since Mr Gray introduced the self-destructive element into the discussion by using Sid Vicious as his spokes-man, and that’s why I am getting slightly worried and start to think about John F Kennedy who came to Berlin saying, Ich bin a Berliner and he ended up getting murdered by some mad-man. Just as I came to London and I am feeling as  Londoner but hope that I do not suffer the same fate as Mr Kennedy.

I do not regret having brought those court cases still and still think they were necessary to clear my name because the court judgements that were handed down had a sober effect on people in that they explained the many questions that were opened by Mr Gray’s original postings and smoothed people’s fears that were aroused through the meanings that could be read between the lines of Mr Gray’s post.

I, have always taken great pride in my status as a Londoner and worked very hard to make my surrounding environment as nice as possible and spent many voluntary hours of doing so. That is well documented in the many letters I have written to the local authority and others to try and stem anti-social behaviour and crime in my area to the extend that I am now chair of the Tower Hamlets Neighbourhood Watch Association and I worked closely with the police and members of the local authority to establish this voluntary body within Tower Hamlets after the council has abolished support for Neighbourhood Watches ca 10 years ago.

I have turned my back on politics because I do not like the bitterness of it, how fierce party members trash each other in trying to get to the top of the pile and get votes and glory. I have never gotten any glory for my voluntary work, the opposite is the case. I have always been severely criticised by people like Mr Gray who have nothing better to do than spread trivialities around themselves and hand out disturbing comments in some respects, like on this occasion using the most unfortunately public figure in British life, like Sid Vicious for his purposes.

Persons like Sid Vicious are the reason why I spend so many hours, days, month, years to combat drug dealing and anti-social behaviour because drug use leads to death and self-destruction. The police knows it, the council knows it and the drug dealers in mya rea know it because I am one of the most prolific anti-drug campaigners in my area. I have gotten a lot of support over the years and think I managed to do some good and all I am trying to achieve is get rid of mental and physical destruction that is the poison of communal happiness.

Of course I have never gotten the glory of being nominated by any party for election, that is because I am not one of those political sheep but have my own way of building relationship and bring communities forward. It is most regrettable that costs have occurred to the tax payer during my libel actions but that has happened in my instances of totally regular government activity that money has been wasted on schemes or money has been spent that probably had some good effect but has not materialised immediately.

I think some judges have openly shown some sympathy because of the grossly tasteless nature of some posts about me and in the end, when an application was made to actually investigate my finances and I was forced to disclose the last 10 years of my personal accounts to the court, on application of Mr Dougans, the court could not find anything wrong with my accounts, which of course is something I am proud of. In fact the vice-president of the Queen’s Bench recommended no action being taken against me to get the costs. The court found that I have been quite responsible with my finances and had not ridden roughshod with my money as so many others do. They dismissed the application to interfere in my financial affairs. Well of course it is always nicer to be rich and successful financially but we all have found out lately, unfortunately that this is not an easy feat.

Well, it is one of those cases, we all seen in the past where officially the law is on one side but emotionally people can understand and sympathise with what is actually going on.

It seems quite odd to me that Mr Gray’s posting coincides with the publication of an article in East End Life, where they announce the meeting of the Tower Hamlets Neighbourhood Watch Association’s public meeting next week, so that Mr Gray now has to time his posting to properly ridicule me again, to make it even more difficult for me to bring the Neighbourhood Watch Association forward. It has been the jest of public policy in Tower Hamlets to get rid of Neighbourhood Watch by supporting it as little as possible. Tower Hamlets is one of the few boroughs in the whole of the UK where the council does not support Neighbourhood Watch. It  is one of my biggest goals in life to re-establish neighbourhood watch. Getting rid of crime has always been my biggest dream in life because I do not like personal destruction, I like to live in a harmonious community and I am sure most of us do like to live in a nice area with nice people.

I am not bitter at all, it is just unfortunate that I did not get more positive official feedback but that is probably just my lot that I am one of those people who tirelessly work for the public good but who never get any tap on the shoulder or public praise, I just end up spending many hours and days and the little bit of money I got, doing voluntary work with often little sleep and all I ever get in public is criticism and ridicule. That just happens to some people but that doesn’t put me of from working for the community because I like to live in peace and I do not like crime and anti-social behaviour and so I do everything possible to achieve a better life for us all.

I think it is also very unfortunate that political squabbling led to this very unfortunate court case and that is another reason why I turned my back on politics because if we are all honest, wanting to live in a nice neighbourhood, where we can enjoy ourselves is something we all want regardless of political aims. At least that is what we all should want. It is often political glee and anxiety that leads to character trashing of the other side’s representatives often with very tasteless public exultations.

Now I am starting to think have it your way Mr Gray and with this latest expression of your feelings, I think you made it quite clear to people that you think Britishness is being free to kill your girlfriend and yourself with too much drug use. You are of course free to do that here in the UK. And come to think  of it the public are entitled to know what you really think about life.

One of Mr Gray’s harshest criticism against me was that I left the Labour Party and he idealizes the CCCP young pioneers in his post. I did not know what CCCP meant but when I searched it on the Internet the first search result talked about Hitler youth. But what Mr Gray put on show was his herd mentality, which is something he always held against me, the fact that I do not have it and that little discussion has now surprisingly brought me some support from someone at the BBC who wrote an article about it.

It is deeply worrying how many radical elements Mr Gray has in some of his posts.

I have raised 5 children and now have also 5 grandchildren and I dearly love to give them a good future. Though my lost court cases mean that unfortunately I cannot leave them any money but at least I can try to make sure that they can grow up in a country with as much going for them as they can achieve through honesty and hard work. That is all that is left to me to do as a German immigrant in Britain today.  Apparently non of my kids ever even looked at drugs, they do not like them, they do not take them and they work and live quite ordinary but respectable lives. It is well known to my local police and the local council how much I was always on the side of the law and how much I care for my environment. I also put considerable amounts of my own money into my voluntary efforts.

I have been getting training as Community Crime Fighter under Gordon Brown who came to the Rich Mix Centre one day to support the scheme but not Neighbourhood Watches who are the central communal crime-fighting force throughout the UK and I will not let it happen that this is being dismantled by the likes of Mr Gray, even though I belief that this is what he really wants to achieve with his actions. He tries to discredit a member of the Neighbourhood Watch movement to ridicule it and make it untenable for people to support it.  Why else would he time his posting to coincide with the first meeting of the Tower Hamlets Neighbourhood Watch Association THNWA, of which I am chair at the moment and I am the most eager driving force behind it and he knows it.

We are all human and there are many who have not 100% status by being rich, famous and successful but there are many ordinary people like myself that are committed to lawfulness. It has been quite seriously established in the last 5 years, that there is nothing I have ever done wrong or against the law and that is really what counts that whatever we do, we have to do it within the law and that was always one of my most important principles, which I intend to keep.  That is what disturbs me about politics these days, is that voters are asked to look for that perfect human being, that has no blemishes in their lives to represent them when we then see them before the courts to find they fiddled their expenses.

Lets all sober up and continue to strive for the best possible life we can get and as long as we all do the best we can I think that is the most we can expect. My voluntary activities include all and I hope that people from all political directions agree with me that wanting to improve our quality of life means that we must repel anti-social behavior and crime and that is something we can all work together on. But of course if people do not want me to work on that goal, then I just have to make do with what I can do, and that is just look after my own family and read books. I shall see.  It is obvious that nobody wants to employ me.

Of course I cannot regret having come to London and become a British citizen because I had my children here and started to built my family. Of cousre had I never come to London I would not have had to suffer the many years of ridicule because of my German origin. But life goes on and I am happy with having gotten my kids and I am concerned about their future. I think most people with children can follow my sentiments.  Does Mr Gray have any children? Does Mr Hilton have any children? No, not to my knowledge. So it seems to put this all into perspective, the radical postings of 2 Labour Party activists who have no personal future to protect beyond their own existence.

The court did find it necessary to thorouughly examine the issues that these cases have brought and if they would have thought it not worth to look at the cases they could have stopped them very quickly if they had wanted but they chose not to do so.

I might add to this posting later on but now have a school-run.

Does the Wikileaks sour American-UK relationship?

I am just wondering whether the US government has good reason to be cross with the UK because the UK in fact bailed Assange to allow him to continue publishing US military secrets.

The principle itself is highly volatile. The question arises what to do if any person publishes military secrets or other Highly Classified information on the open media. Assange thinks he has the right to inform. But, ask yourself, what is the point in having any secrets if anybody can just publish them?

I think the Americans have good reason to be cross with the UK for allowing Assange out on bail and therefore allowing him to continue to publish his stuff. I think there should  be an international treaty that allows the arrest of persons who breach Secrets Acts wherever that may occur. The UK always had a tendency to support Communists, strangely enough and whilst the UK sends a military contingency to Afghanistan to fight the Taleban, the UK simultaneously supports a publisher of State Secrets, such Secrets that endanger the very military forces deployed.

The UK legal and political system has entered a state of schizophrenia, which is very hard to digest for anyone.

I understand the US have pin pointed an American soldier who passed on confidential material to Wikileaks and he is now held by the US military to stand trial before a military tribunal. I just think it should be enshrined in law that any person that breaches the safety of military troops that are part of NATO or any similar military pact,  should be stopped from publishing state secrets.

The UK courts seem to have this crazy idea that it is OK for anyone to publish anything and that this is proper freedom os speech and expression. The UK really cannot distinguish between endangering government forces, which is not in the interest of public safety and freedom to express an opinion.

Leanne Minick plunged from her towerblock bedroom window in Tower Hamlets

I want to extend my most sincere condolences to this family who lost an 8-year old daughter after she fell from her 8th floor bedroom window in a property owned by Old Ford Housing Association.

There are a number of housing management related concerns that I immediately find important to discuss.

As a long-standing social tenant in Tower Hamlets I spent years on trying to improve housing related issues through individual conplaints that were then taken up by the local housing officer and the results of which could have an improving impact on housing management through the whole of Tower Hamlets because social housing then was handled throughout the borough by Tower Hamlets council who owned and managed all the social housing properties throughout this borough.

Since social housing was split up onto housing associations and social housing landlords the situation has drastically changed. I am now restricted to acting within Tower Hamlets Homes because whatever I achieve within Tower Hamlets Homes, in one of their panels stays within Tower Hamlets Homes.

You can see in the about-me section of this site how I, and a group of local residents complaint about the change in housing organisation to no avail.

I distinctly remember having asked at one of the very recent meetings, this year in fact, how well calls to the housing centre are logged because I am not happy about this and that is one of the most disturbing features of the story about that poor 8-year old child, that the neighbour told the East London Advertiser that the mother of the girl nailed the window shut because it was faulty and that the mother was then ordered by Old Ford Housing to remove the nails, as they posed a danger and that Leanne’s mother, Claire Sieberras tells the paper how often she complaint to Old Ford Housing without any result and that Old Ford Housing outright deny that such negotiations took place.

The police have now gotten involved and it must be evident if that window had ever been nailed shut or not and also through phone records whether calls had been made to Old Ford Housing. All we read is that Old Ford Housing made a statement saying that there are ‘no safety flaws’.  One cannot disregard the comments of  Leanne’s mother, her family or the neighbour because Old Ford Housing’s official story is that they have no evidence of any concerns logged with them.

To continue with the housing maintenance threat at the beginning of this post, when we had the old, Tower Hamlets wide housing management system, the local housing office had a duty to log all callers with a hard copy, visitors book, into which housing officers duly registered each and every visitor, that came to the office and they wrote into this very evident visitors book, when and why callers came to the office, so that it was not possible to deny that complaints had been made.

It was with this in mind that I raised a query with Tower Hamlets Homes to ask how calls are logged now because it is one of the most outstanding features of complaints that people ring up, and get hung up on and nobody knows why they called. Electronic call handling in itself and the logging of those calls is not fool proof if whole strains of calls can be removed from a database because there is no system of numbering those calls consecutively.

However so far not too much importance has been placed into my concerns. The fact is that most people when they are speaking to housing officers they do not care whether they have obtained proof of their conversations, they just trust the officer to do their job.

I know for certain that Mr John Gray, my opponent in a libel matter works for Old Ford Housing. He used to be a senior housing officer for Tower Hamlets Council and then moved to Old Ford Housing shortly after I had complained to Tower Hamlets Council that a senior housing officer is writing material about a tenant under his care.  Old Ford Housing has attracted a few complaints that were featured in the local paper over the last 2 years. Mr Gray of course is known for his view on portraying machine gun wielding heroes on his webblog, he is a councillor in Newham now and a known union activist.

It is not exactly the best calling card for a local housing officer, or indeed the housing association he works for, who is in charge of residents that such mentality is prevalent in him. It is certainly not often happening that such incidents as this death of an 8-year old is happening under such controversial circumstances. That a mother should tell of countless contacts with a landlord over a faulty window and the landlord completely denies that such contacts took place, that windows were nailed shut and nails ordered to be removed, but the landlord completely denies that such incidences took place as well.

I have never heard Mr Gray or any other unionist take up my fears over call logging on housing issues, about the accountability on logging repairs requests. It is very, very sad and of great concern that such issues are an apparent feature in the death of an 8-year old child.  This child should not have died and be alive and happy among us and I miss promises by social housing landlords to improve the call logging of both personal contacts with housing officers and phone calls that are made with a fool proof system.

The Tower Hamlets website for example has a complaints procedure whereby each complaint is allocated a consecutive number when it is made on the site but only 15% of Tower Hamlets residents have computers and many still prefer personal contact or are encouraged to make phone contact with the landlord. I have no knowledge of how Old Ford Housing’s procedures are but think that if a family had reported a problem and such reports being affirmed by the local community, then the landlord Old Housing cannot simply deny those calls for help. Old Ford Housing says they have a clear record sheet, they deny such reports took place. There should be an investigation by Old Ford Housing into why it is possible that staff had not made any records of those complaints and the result of that investigation should be made available to the public.

Old Ford Housing should have promised such an investigation publicly. Yet this lack of desire to be publicly accountable and having to justify their procedures, is quite common among service providers in Tower Hamlets.

avoiding left-wing radicalisation

I think I did a splendid job in the way that I handled the left-wing extremism propaganda about me that was spurted about by Lead Councillor Francis in 2007, who wanted to brand me an extremist. In fact I think that I had joined the Respect Party for a short while helped to lead to their demise because my public denunciation of that party afterwards helped people to turn away from it. I openly encouraged that people join the Conservative Party at that time.

What in fact happened is that certain members of the Labour Party tried to create a left-wing icon, the left-over from the German Baader-Meinhof terrorist days that joined the Respect Party were their headlines and that of course fired up the radical elements in the community who probably already rubbed their hands at the prospect of more left-wing extremism in the community.

It was irresponsible from Osler and John Gray how they reported about me, in blogs they promised to re-publish should I lose my appeal. I am writing this now to counter-act any eventual re-publication. What Osler and Gray should have told people that the law in Germany in 1975 was not as the law is today in England under the current Human Rights legislation. Arrests that took place in Germany in 1975 would be against the law today and illegal internment.

Especially as I have been working with the local police since years and actually once appeared as a prosecution witness for them, then founded a Neighbourhood Watch and got support from the police for it, must make it clear to anyone that the police are hardly likely to work with individuals that pose a threat to law and order and/or have a dodgy past. I think that is what John Gray and David Osler tried to imply and I am still on the case so to speak.

I think it was correct to take the local problem as it was and avert more damage as had already been done by the publications of Osler, Gray, Hilton and in effect also Councillor Francis with his letters to the East London Advertiser.

I find it always really concerning that the Labour party manage to warn of others who are left-wing yet they themselves encouraged Respect members to join their ranks. In fact Mr Biggs himself stood up in defence of Mr Galloway during the Mayoral elections for London when I was busy drumming up support for Boris Johnson. Boris Johnson won, despite all the Labour lies.

I think any responsible resident cannot ignore the threat that left-wing extremism poses to the community and just ignoring it is just not enough. During the last general elections I had scores of Respect members knocking on my door, begging for a vote, when again I turned away and supported the Conservative Party.

I have never been left-wing or extremist in my life, yet there are some who wish to purport that impression, yet I always tell others not to fall for the lies. I think we have come to a good consensus in Tower Hamlets that we need a peaceful coexistence of all residents and have seen off the threat from the EDL and Islamist extremists. The Respect party got wiped from the map and we saw an increase of Muslims in the mainstream parties, especially the Conservatives, Liberal Democrats and Labour.

I think we can all say well done to ourselves and our neighbours and hope that we can keep up the good work for the betterment of our communities.

I continue to work as Neighbourhood Watch coordinator, and the local Safer Neighbourhood Police  and sit on the Police and Community Safety Board in Tower Hamlets and we had a splendid meeting only last week with the wonderful input of the Young Mayor of Tower Hamlets.

I have always supported good relations with the local police and in fact once supported a case they brought against a local prowler as prosecution witness. When do these warmongers like Osler, Gray and others finally realise that there is no point telling people of 35-year-old closed matters, when the very people who are in the forefront in the fight of terrorism and crime have a closed working relationship with me on a voluntary basis and they should know of any important issues. It would have been much more useful had Mr Gray and Osler and Hilton encouraged support for my local Safer Neighbourhood Work instead of trying to focus in on some old and forgotten stuff that has long been shredded by the German authorities and buried.

The flirtation with left-wing radicalism that some left-wingers propagate under the mantle of public interest does more harm than good and we have to try and avert the damage done by irresponsible publications such as they come from Mr Osler and Mr Gray.

My learned friends!

My confidence is rising, even though I am not on a Mission from God, I have seen the light. I am now looking forward to the appeal procedure because I feel I have some very good arguments in support of my case. May any judge find what they feel fit to find, it is their decision in the end, that is the decision that sticks with them forever. It is a free world, isn’t it just.

Just a secret, my Reverend tells me each and every week to do God’s work in the coming week. Ah. So I shall.

The bad character of English law

I think the interim judgment of Medical Justice v SSHD shows the bad character of English law. How foreigners that do not speak the English language properly are deprived of Access to Justice and my own experience in that field shows they are given papers to sign that they cannot read or not understand the meaning. of. I think we all agree that immigration is a problem, that too many immigrants are not good but what I would never want to tolerate is if immigrants are exploited because they do not speak the language properly. And even if they speak the language sometimes when we are under stress our language fails us. People are protected against the under the Human Rights article, “No Justice without law”

This is exactly what happened in my case and how it has been applied in Stadlen J’s judgment. This article in the New Statesman online is the culmination of Bad Taste and shows how the English amuse themselves with unsuspecting foreigners who do not understand the English language properly at times and especially not when under stress.

You go to another country, you want to buy something in a shop, you think you ask for a bar of soap and instead you say without realising: “You have got ugly green spots on your face”. You then do not understand why you are getting punched in the face. That is what happened to me in my legal cases in comparison. Yet this article in the New Statesman shows how the British mercilessly exploit the misgivings of immigrant’s language problems for their own ends.  It is further very disappointing that Stadlen J fed the frenzy of the Labour Party supporters of Mr Gray and Hilton and emphasized the mistake to hold it against me without sufficient sympathy.

It was on 9 July 2010 for the first time that Stadlen J told me how the court perceives the case in that they look at 2 meanings in comparison to each other, which are:

(1) being arrested on suspicion of being a member of Baader-Meinhof, the terrorist group that carried out bombings, robberies and murder (the meaning on which she is seeking vindication by means of this claim for libel), and

(2) being accused of being a member of a criminal gang with the aim to commit terrorist offences (a statement which the Claimant herself adopts as the position).

Master Rose then gave the parties the opportunity to apply to have the case struck out by August 2008. Nobody applied. Yet the New Statesman, rather foolishly helps the “Defendants” to conceal the fact that they did not apply by August 2008 and instead falsely proclaims that the English libel laws are at fault. I think that reporter needs sacking, what an idiot. Of course Mary Honeyball, Labour MEP, promotes the same kind of rubbish, that is intended to falsify the readers’ impression of what the case is about and tries to blame the libel laws instead of putting the correct picture. More Labour lies then, nothing new.

Furthermore the definition I gave was given, not knowing how it is understood in English law, I was under severe stress and did not know the meaning myself. It was a language problem.  It was a problem of having to research legal matters of how they were in Germany in 1975 and compare it to today’s English laws and Human Rights laws and I did not understand that at the time neither. It was a very specialised subject, that should allow under the Limitation Act and the Defamation Act a prolonged period. What the judge does is take what I wrote on the spur of a moment and says that emphasizes the nature of the case.

Master Rose did his best to make something of the case and gave lots of orders to supply further statements to the meanings. And I said to Stadlen J I cannot understand how the court can ignore that fact and does not pay attention to the work Master Rose did in this respect. I think it is rather nasty towards Master Rose, who is  a very sweet and traditional English gentleman. There is nothing wrong with Master Rose’s meaning of the case (1), there is however something wrong in the way I made a comment(2), it is simply mistaken. Take into consideration that I am also very short-sighted.

Basically the definition as you can see it above puts the matter into a completely wrong light. I have made a language mistake and the court did not make me aware of this, that just shows how people who have problems with language are exploited in this country.

I tried my best to explain the situation to Stadlen J, worked feverishly all weekend between 9 and 12 July 2010 and Stadlen J, who is a stickler for the rules, and doesn’t think that litigants in person, whether they speak the language properly or not, should be given any credit on that account, refused to accept my submissions. He mocked me for not being able to present my case as well as it would be presented with a barrister. What’s even worst the Labour party spectators enjoyed themselves on that point. Well, that is broadly the case I shall make in my permission to appeal application.  I think it’s basically rotten to the core that an English court doesn’t give people the benefit of the doubt, when I do my best to work for the Home Office, free of charge, have never broken the law and because I had been put under severe stress by the publications, and ended up with a mental block because of it, the English court holds that against me as well. That in my view shows the bad character of English law, how a number of English gentlemen can amuse themselves with something like that over 2 years, is rather simplistic isn’t it just.

I am not quite sure how that harshness in my case fits in with Stadlen J’s description in the Daily Mail where he is portrait as modelling himself on his mother, who was a fearless champion of the underdog.  I  quote the whole paragraph at the end of that long article  “The tales of hardship clearly hit the mark with Mr Justice Stadlen. Made a judge in 2007, as a barrister he earned in excess of £1million-a-year. The son of a classical musician, he has spoken of how his mother, ‘a fearless champion of the underdog’, has been the most influential person in his life”.

Well that underdog doesn’t extend to immigrants that’s for sure.

Further correction. The statement as quoted in (2) above was not even in the claim or the pleadings, I’m not sure where Dougans got it from ( I have to go through the judgment properly) but it is used to be held against me, when I think it can only be evidence of what I wrote at a time under stress and not be used as bad character evidence against me.

Previous Older Entries

Blog Stats

  • 52,762 hits