Wednesday the 8th of September 2010

10:48:40 PM

Chatter Abuse Surrounding Pretend Raid "Refusal to Prosecute"

Wednesday, 8th September 2010

1007 “I want to chuck him,” BS. Before “Don't you believe it.” General protest by BS/Bird against restraint of their interference.

“Join our strike,” last night by BS.

Para legal using surveillance; interference in everything;

1010 “I'll handle it,” said BS. “I want him out.” Personal vendetta since 11th May 1998.

1030 “No, I want him out,” BS.

1041 “He attacked me,” said BS. “Blow him up,” said SR.

1052 “He does it at night,” said a female. “You can't do that,” said another female. “I want him served,” said SR.

1055 “[I'll] check it out,” said a male. Another went on about “psychotic.”

1102 “I want an apology,” said BS. That would be an admission of guilt which does not exist and will never happen.

She's the abuser bent on retaliation and revenge trying to dress it in sanctity and self righteousness as she climbs the greasy pole of organised crime tenant management.

She's got a scholarship to go to school. What is she studying? Para legal? With surveillance whatever it is and extensive criminal activity carrying out torture 24/7/365 for 12+ years so far yet demanding an apology.

There have been representations of a “para legal” involved and further activity by apparent solicitors with the surveillance technology. This will bring the legal profession and legal justice system into extreme disrepute.

1115 “[If he colours it,] I'm pulling out,” said BS.

1155 . . . a woman said “At the end of the day, he should be pulled out.”

1201 “What are you looking for?” asked a male. A little later “[We/You] can't do that.”

1202 “Oh, he's sick obviously,” said KW male.

1203 “We can't pull him out. That's the difference,” said a KW male.

1214 “It's already in. Sorry about that,” said a KW male. “We'll why didn't you say so?” asked someone.

1216 “Promise me. You'll promise me this is what you'll do,” demanded a male.

1217 “Go to hell,” says SR. Oh, boy, his hatred boils over. He'll do whatever he wants and damn everyone else.

1219 “He must have known we're coming,” said someone after a female said “He must be up there.”

1228 “I want to smack him,” said BS. “She has an alibi,” said SR.

1231 “We're goin' to move him,” said a male KW. “Friendship doesn't count,” he added.

1402 BS using surveillance while lying, cheating & stealing 24/7/365 for 12 yrs has scholarship to study something somewhere. Huge UK educ hole

1417 Toxic Surveillance USSRs seek to advance based on deceit to gain stature faking allegations & stealing info; they do same for an education.

1448 “You be quiet now,” said a female KW. BS/Bird are never quiet. They make all the noise. I never make any noise at all. I'm too busy listening to document it. If I made any noise, I might not hear what is being said or done. Extensive documentation is proof that I do not make noise but listen quietly instead.

1457 “We want to get him around a table,” said female perhaps BS. No, no, no. I will never legitimise the abusive and viciously violent surveillance abusers who have been allowed to carry out this activity for 12 years 24/7/365 with the participation of 100s and involvement of numerous government departments. This will only be settled in the courts after the surveillance is stopped.

These people will always use surveillance to control and dominate everything.

There's a fundamental problem emerging involving addiction to surveillance technology by abusive personalities who use it to promote themselves at the expense of others and gain in terms of local management as is occurring here as well as gaining a scholarship for educational advancement.

All of this is founded on deceit and the fraudulent abuse of surveillance technology as I've experience for a 12+ years 24/7/365. Those using it are utterly addicted to it and cannot and will not give it up unless absolutely forced to do so. In this they reflect the abusive personalties we all know and understand relating to child and adult abuse. This is why I follow and note these abusers as they appear in news items.

The legislative challenge today is to effectively deal with this problem so that it can be handled properly under the democratic rule of law which those abusing surveillance technology seek to circumvent.

All of the detail I supply is essential to understanding the means by which this obsessive and cruel behaviour manifests itself and is sustained in a world where people cannot fundamentally assess the violent abusive personality properly as has been the case for 12 years here.

The mother of the abused children [BS] who has obsessively abused surveillance technology as a weapon for 12+ years 24/7/365 against me has managed to manipulate the system in such a way as to gain a tenant management power position by election and also managed to gain a scholarship to study somewhere at others expense. She has accomplished this by using surveillance technology to steal and use information for herself while destroying that source of information so that her crimes are not recognised.

There has to be a whole upheaval in the process of government and law making to allow for the fact that this abuse of surveillance technology can be used negatively in any context. It just happens to have been used in that manner against me for the past 12 years, and I have been fortunate enough to have had it disclosed to me by those who thought they were abusing me in the process.

This society will not be able to function in the future if this surveillance technology and its abuses are not brought under the control of the democratic rule of law including the ability of people to redress grievances by its abuse.

SR = Lt Harry “Ill Eagle” Bird USMC Ret a product of Top Secret America as recently described by the Washington Post.

News Items:

BBC News - Ian Tomlinson post-mortem examination report withheld http://bbc.in/95xtop by CPS, IPCC & coroner altho latter has reservations.

BBC News - Extradition law review 'to focus on US-UK treaty' http://bbc.in/dfXhYg Home Secy announced. Really needed to end imbalance.

BBC News - Connaught administration threatens thousands of jobs http://bbc.in/cf9Qgf Social housing. Is this iceberg's proverbial tip?

BBC News - Cable says Diamond appointment highlights bank worries http://bbc.in/cHmOCD Investment banker at the helm. Reread "Liar's Poker."

BBC News-Vince Cable to signal cuts to science funding http://bbc.in/9LaZHy Here goes UK down the tube: research = business. Enterprise Univ

BBC News - Universities UK report warns over two-tier system http://bbc.in/9fMYgF Univ for elite. Others pushed elsewhere. UK youth drain.

BBC News - Cameron misses PM's questions after father's stroke http://bbc.in/dbYxJ8 & heart complications in France. Brother & sister going.

BBC News - Cambridge knocks Harvard off top of university table http://bbc.in/d3BUEr UCL, Oxford & Imperial in top 10 too = 4. Rest all US.

BBC News - UK's top Afghanistan diplomat steps down http://bbc.in/98WBBK Critic departs immed effect; post not filled; on leave since June.

BBC News - Tony Blair cancels second book event amid protest fear http://bbc.in/9zEPYB Bye bye Tate Modern. Hello [where next?] Surveillance

BBC- Stephanomics: The case against Mr Osborne's austerity http://bbc.in/cYwbT6 Cannot feed fat of waste for fundamental abuse that destroys

BBC News - David Cameron's father Ian dies in hospital http://bbc.in/dbYxJ8 Huge tragic loss for him. Very sorry to see this happen.

View Entry

Wednesday the 2nd of April 2008

07:14:19 PM

Who killed Bruce Bailey? The head and hands of a woman found by children on a Scottish east coast beach begs the need for a universal DNA database once again for identification purposes.


Web Journal Wednesday 2nd April 2008
  • Who killed tenant organiser Bruce Bailey in June 1989? This gruesome discovery on a Scottich beach also reminds me of the discovery of the reverse body parts where the head and hands are missing to prevent identification. It is a murder that I believe resulted from a mob hit based upon mistaken identity.

1. Police find second hand on beach. On the east coast of Scotland two children found the gruesome remains on a beach of an apparent gangland slaying: the head of a woman in a plastic bag. The question that comes to my mind involves a universal DNA database to be able to identify such remains so that the police can begin immediate inquiries into all associated with the life of this dead person. Without such a universal database for identification purposes, learning the identity of this woman could be time consuming or even futile. Such an apparent murder needs as much information as fast as is possible to protect the public and track those who would apparently murder and dispose of a body like this.

BBC News Wednesday, 2 April 2008 11:32 UK

Police find second hand on beach

Police officers shield forensic officers on Arbroath beach in Angus, where the severed head of a woman has been found
Further forensic examinations will be carried out at the beach

A second hand has been discovered by officers searching a beach where a woman's head was found in a bag.

Two young sisters found the head while playing on Arbroath beach in Angus on Tuesday morning.

The discovery sparked a police search which led to the discovery of the first hand about 50 yards away.

Tayside Police revealed on Wednesday that a second hand had been found on the Seagate beachfront. A search of the area is due to resume after high tide.

. . .

However, Det Ch Insp McMillan said it could be several days before they had the test results which could shed further light on the inquiry.

The woman does not match the records of any local missing person and Tayside Police are liaising with every other UK force to try to identify her.

Police find second hand on beach

2. Who killed tenant organiser Bruce Bailey in June 1989?. I believe Bruce Bailey was killed by mistake in a murder intended for me. All of the pieces fit together. The great tragedy of this murder of an innocent bystander who happened to look like me and lived a short distance away was due, I believe, to the failures of those in responsible positions of government in the years leading up to this murder.

They failed to do their jobs properly thus allowing a reputed Mafioso landlord to flourish by dominating and controlling the community just as has been happening in North Kensington for the past decade. He sought to kill anyone who addressed his crimes that put the public at risk from safety and health hazards. He tried to reach out and kill me but failed. In the end he killed an innocent person but was still pursuing me as I saw later.

---------- Forwarded Message ----------

Subject: "Police find second hand on beach" There needs to be a DNA database to be able to identify everyone which can serve to help protect the public by quick and certain identification..
Date: Wednesday 02 April 2008 16:25
From: Gary D Chance
To: news24@bbc.co.uk

The horror of children finding a head in a plastic bag is unimaginable. This will stay with them all their lives.

It appears very much as if the parts that were found, head and two hands, might very well have been removed to stop identification.

While these might be more useful for identification, this really continues the argument for a national DNA database for everyone to be used only for identification purposes. It is important to identify the person involved so that any crime and criminals can be ascertained and sought as quickly as possible.

Once upon a time in June 1989 the remains of Bruce Bailey were found in the Bronx on Garrison Avenue. He was cut up in two large plastic bags with his head and hands missing. According to the newspaper, his wife was able to identify the remains by means of a mole or similar mark on his leg.

This is a case where DNA would have served a useful purpose. It was difficult to identify the remaining parts of his body with the head and hands removed to say nothing about how horrible it must have been for his wife.

I remember this quite well because Bruce Bailey was killed by mistake. I believe that I was supposed to be the victim of this gangland style slaying. He lived just down the street from where I did and looked just like me. Several people said so. I also spotted the guy stalking me later whom I believed was responsible for his death.

He was well known for working with impoverished tenants in New York City and was often seen in the Landlord and Tenant Court in Manhattan where I was also involved in proceedings against a reputed Mafia landlord.

One day as I approached the Clerk of the Court's desk, the woman said she thought I was Bruce Bailey. His leaflets for the Columbia Tenant's Union were placed around the public area of the Clerk's office.

At the time he disappeared and was later found murdered, a woman with whom I worked said that when she saw his picture on TV, she thought it was me at first.

He was so well known and respected for his decades of tenant work in Manhattan that a special service was held at the Cathedral of St John the Divine the Anglican/Episcopal cathedral near Columbia University at 112th Street and Amesterdam Avenue. His Columbia Tenants Union was not associated with Columbia University in any way. He was known at the Cathedral because his two children attended school there. His memorial service was well attended and featured some very well known people.

Just as an indication of how important he was considered, there was a special service for Jim Henson, creator of the Muppets, held at the Cathedral of St John the Divine following his untimely and tragic death as well.

The shock of these kinds of brutal murders where body parts turn up as occurred in this instance brings to light once again the need for identification based upon a universal DNA database. It would help to deter crime if those who carry out these gangland appearing murders understood that nothing they can do will disguise the identity of the person they murder.

It is extremely important for the police to identify a body and then launch a complete investigation as quickly as possible. Without a universal DNA database this process can take a long time. Where would one begin to search for dental records or what if there is no match for fingerprints?

There is a further aspect to the tragic death of Bruce Bailey who left a wife and two children which involves the failure of those in government to properly do their job when it comes to housing and landlord/tenant problems. Had that been done in my situation when I addressed problems for several years in a building where I lived on the upper eastside of Manhattan during the 1980s, Bruce Bailey would be alive today.

He was killed by the failure of those in positions of responsibility in government at its various City and State departments as well as the courts and elected officials. Had the problems I addressed been handled properly, the sequence of events which took place that led those who tried to kill me to instead murder Bruce Bailey by mistake would never have occurred.

Which leads me to the issue of my addressing serious problems so that the safety and health of the public are protected and preserved which I have been doing in North Kensington for over a decade. The steps taken against me to limit and eliminate my activity and my life by those connected with tenant management and various parts of the government including elected officials are once again a reflection of the same failures which have clearly led to the murder of innocent people in my past experience.

There needs to be a way to address such failures when they occur in order to get a job done properly so that the criminals do not dominate and control an environment as has been occurring in North Kensington for the past decade which has resulted in putting other people's lives at risk. It's quite easy to do a proper job. It takes an extreme effort and significant resources to fake it.

Perhaps a universal DNA database for identification purposes will help eliminate body parts turning up in various locations especially where children might find them.

0 Comment(s) / Post Comment

Sunday the 30th of March 2008

05:01:26 PM

I believe that representations of budget "control," i.e., decision making, to NHS patients reflects a "con" to limit budget expenditure while shifting government responsibility and accountability. Such "freedom" of choice is illusionary without funds.


Web Journal Sunday 30th March 2008
  • Personal NHS budgets considered. Proposals are now being developed to involve patients with chronic/wasting diseases to obtain "control" over treatment decision making following after pilot projects now in place for the elderly and disabled to "control" their social care decisions.
  • Seems to be a way to limit expenditure. Having experienced tenant management which was predicated on the same principle of "control" over expenditures, I believe that this process allows for budget reductions while shifting responsibility and accountability away from government. Serious abuses of power have been the result from tenant management to the detriment of tenants and residents. What are the implications for NHS health care? In my experience the NHS health care and tenant management abuses are related and intertwined.
  • Government is in touch - Smith. A Health Minister says the government is out of touch with the basic realities of the working family. The politically motivated Home Secretary pounces on national television to make a verbal counterclaim that the government is in touch. No evidence or facts here just a battle of words and beliefs bandied about at the highest level like know nothing adolescents.
  • With what is the government in touch? The government is truly out of touch if it cannot use surveillance technology 24/7 for almost a decade and get it right. The problem is that the government is deliberately out of touch supporting voters instead of standards thereby pandering to the criminals and antisocial types. Way to go Home Secretary.

1. Personal NHS budgets considered. While rolling out choice for hospital care, this Labour government is considering budget "control" for patients who have chronic/wasting diseases. Is this the best way to carry out health care, or is there a hidden agenda under the surface which will emerge after all the buzzwords like "freedom" and "choice" are used to gain acceptance?

BBC News Sunday, 30 March 2008 03:44 UK

Personal NHS budgets considered

Doctor generic
The government believes that patient choice improves quality

Patients with acute conditions like multiple sclerosis and diabetes could get control of their own NHS budgets to buy treatment, the government has said.

The Department of Health confirmed it was considering the plan, aimed at long-term sufferers in England.

A DoH statement insisted patients would not be given cash, and that no money would leave the NHS under the scheme.

Health Secretary Alan Johnson said: "We want choice for everyone within a world-class NHS."

'Driver of quality'

The government is already piloting schemes across the country to allow elderly and disabled people to control the way care budgets are spent.

Personal NHS budgets considered

2. Seems to be a way to limit expenditure. Any attempt by this Labour government to shift accountability and responsibility for decisions is a cause for alarm. There is now a proposal to shift chronic disease treatment decisions to the patient. I believe that the reality of this policy proposal is to limit costs for chronic disease treatment and shift accountability for such limiting decisions to the patient.

As can be seen in the above BBC News article, this Labour government is already running pilot schemes for "elderly and disabled people to control the way care budgets are spent." This raising big questions with me as regards to how these decisions are actually being made and what are the budget amounts? My direct experience with tenant management in Kensington & Chelsea during the past 12 years where such budget "control" was passed along to tenant management with inadequate budgets has led to unfortunate consequences.

Worst of all is the shifting of responsibility and accountability from the competent, educated, trained and experienced professional to those who have none of these and haven't a clue about what to do. Tenant management in Kensington & Chelsea is a prime example of this occurring resulting in the criminal taking over along with an abuse of power that beggar's believe with abuse from surveillance technology carried out on an indefinite basis against me for raising issues pertaining to serious problems, criminal and antisocial behaviour. I comment on this further in my Email to BBC News 24 about this matter a copy of which is provided below.

---------- Forwarded Message ----------

Subject: Personal Health Budgets: "seems to be a way to limit expenditure," said your presenter (Maxine Mawhinney?) in so many words. That's exactly it.
Date: Sunday 30 March 2008 11:40
From: Gary D Chance
To: news24@bbc.co.uk

Reeta Chakrabarti then made the statement which the government uses to "con" everyone into acceptance: it will provide choice to patients with chronic diseases.

If the budget is limited and capped, that choice will be meaningless. The money will not be available, and the decision to limit treatment to the less expensive and perhaps less effective treatments will be shifted to the patient thus obliterating the foundation of the NHS.

The government is trying to reduce expenditures on the long term, expensive chronic diseases by sugar coating the means to cut funding.

It will also stop dissent because individuals will not have the impact of a collective voice when a similar cut occurs at the institutional level.

I believe that the administration costs of individual budgets and care especially in light of "choice" will be prohibitively high further adding to the mistake. Resources will shift further from patient care to administration.

How will it be administered? By computer system? Who will be doing the administrative work? Look at the government's track record with respect to administration in all of its aspects. What happened at the Home Office? What is happening at Terminal 5? This kind of failure is an endemic disease in the UK.

The government comes up with ideas like this to cut expenditures by stealth under the gloss of "individual choice" then imposes it without regard to how it will work thereby shifting responsibility and accountability for the decisions to limit.

The government does not have to do the work and demands that the NHS management do the impossible followed by everyone complaining about the failures in the NHS. Middle management gets caught in the middle.

Individual budgets will also facilitate the kind of abuse which is being carried out against me and limit responsibility and accountability.

Individual budgets can be determined by people other than the patient in instances of dementia or falsely claimed dementia and mental illness.

When the NHS rolls out into the community using surveillance technology for remote diagnosis, control and surreptitious medication outside a hospital environment over many years as has occurred to me for a decade, that cost can be buried under individual care for trumped up chronic illnesses that are manufactured without the patient having any input or "choice" whatsoever into what is being done.

Also, surveillance technology abuse can create chronic illnesses, and individual budgets then relate to the abused person only further denying responsibility and accounting. Look for an increase in surveillance technology abuse with a high participation of the NHS in such abuse along with its personal injuries being managed under limited, personal budgets. Nice one that.

This government reflects the essence of deceit incarnate and cannot be trusted. Whatever happened to the concept of economies of scale the NHS was meant to provide that individual budgets destroy?

Now, you can see why Gordon Brown was a failure as Chancellor.

Naturally, this could be a back door entry to an individual insurance scheme administered by the NHS which would operate with lowered budget limits currently unheard of that would deprive patients of care especially free for all at the point of entry.

This could also be euthanasia by the back door which I am experiencing directly as well through the abuse from the [lethal use of] surveillance technology which is also a means to attack negative criticism and dissent as is happening at this moment while I write.

Why is it that we do not see straightforward patient care delivered by the NHS consistent with its current structure? Do individual budgets mean that patients can choose GPs at random and go directly to hospital consultants bypassing GPs? Will GPs be eliminated or significantly reduced? Is the government trying to take away the money it gave to GPs?

This government is actually destroying the NHS as it is currently structured.

Look what happened with tenant management in Kensington & Chelsea:

I want to point out the reality of tenant management in the Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea. Tenant management was formed in 1995 for the Lancaster West Estate (EMB) and then borough wide in 1996 [Tenant Management Organisation (TMO)]. It became a tool for under management, suppression of dissent and escaping Council responsibility and accountability.

Tenant management was a means whereby budgets could be limited under the guise that the tenants then had to make the difficult choice of selecting which essential projects had to be done weighing scarce resources against such decisions as roof repairs, waste disposal facilities or boiler replacement. All of these could not be done, and the "tenants" had to make the choices.

A responsible government management would have had to do all of them as top priority issues of safety and health. Tenant management shifted responsibility away from the Council and compromised safety and health.

If you think about it, this is much like the decision to target inflation (a "budgetary constraint") for the Bank of England then falsely claiming that the Bank of England is "independent" and free to meet that target.

What really happened with respect to tenant management at the Lancaster West Estate was the construction of 38 business units at a cost of over £1 million taking several years to accomplish including draining time and attention away from residential management priorities. The tenants and residents safety and health were put at risk.

Instead of addressing waste disposal or the delayed boiler replacement after the roof repair (which turned out to be like Terminal 5), those in power opted for their own corrupt self interest and built the 38 business units in the Lancaster West Estate disregarding the 900 residential units' needs that comprise 9% of the 10,000 social housing units in Kensington & Chelsea.

Meanwhile, the central heating system failed with it being left on throughout the summer with extreme damaging effects in the heat waves of early August 2003 and June of 2005 while the 38 business units were being constructed during these years and my correspondence ignored until I contacted BBC London in June 2005.

I was subjected to surveillance technology abuse throughout all of this. Surveillance technology was not used to identify the problems so that they could be solved. Surveillance technology was used to destroy the documentation and reporting of these problems.

Waste disposal facilities remain inadequate. Lately, it has come to light that there was vote rigging in the election of directors to the TMO. Tenant management had nothing to do with managing the properties on behalf of the tenants and residents. It was a means by which those who obtained power began abusing that power. I have a great deal to describe about this in specific terms with evidence.

This is what will happen with the so-called NHS individual budgets and why this government seeks to alter the NHS structure to escape responsibility and accountability while leaving the decision making process to the patient, an illusionary process at best, where no resources are provided.

This will result in those with chronic diseases being forced to choose between death and death. Which death by budget constrained medication will you choose?

What was that about the French health system?

3. Government is in touch - Smith. The government is in touch. No, it's not in touch. Like arguing about the existence of God in Ingmar Bergman's Wild Strawberries. The government is only in touch with its power and how to abuse it, and you plebes can just lump it. We know how to deal with your kind says the Home Secretary. We've got surveillance technology waiting for you. This is the reality of her message. You spout the party line or else.

BBC News24 Sunday, 30 March 2008 11:40 UK

Government is in touch - Smith

Jacqui Smith
The home secretary said it was important to listen to the people

Home Secretary Jacqui Smith has dismissed claims by a fellow minister that the government is out of touch.

Health Minister Ivan Lewis said that, after 11 years in power, Labour was often "silent on the daily realities".

Ms Smith told BBC One's Andrew Marr Show that she disagreed, though it was "fundamentally important that we listen to the British people".

She also defended the extension to 42 days of the length of time for which terror suspects can be held.

Government is in touch - Smith




4. With what is the government in touch?. What this government has actually done is to take the vigilante mob to a higher plane with the most sophisticated technology ever known at their disposal for a decade. It's not a question of not listening, but the government only hears what it wants to hear ignoring the truth. Listening to the mob and bully gang will not generate truth. When the government carries out unlawful activities surreptitiously, it has to deny what it is doing, but many people know otherwise.

All the Home Secretary replies here to a critical comment from a Health Minister trying to maintain the image that the government is in touch when it is the Home Office that is most out of touch and deliberately so. Anyone who uses totally invasive surveillance technology for a decade and doesn't know what is happening is out of touch. Anyone who uses totally invasive surveillance technology for a decade and keeps it going indefinitely is not performing a legitimate function. Anyone who uses surveillance technology for a decade in a most abusive manner is trying to create a reality that does not exist.

---------- Forwarded Message ----------

Subject: "Government is in touch - Smith" With a decade of totally invasive surveillance technology abuse carried out against me, she should know. The question is with what is the government in touch?
Date: Sunday 30 March 2008 14:25
From: Gary D Chance
To: news24@bbc.co.uk

This is a magnificent statement from the Home Secretary when one considers that this government has been intricately involved in the totally invasive surveillance technology used against me 24/7 for almost a decade.

The real question concerns exactly what does this government consider being in touch means?

In my direct experience for a decade this government has supported and sustained the criminal in the community by providing these antisocial personalities with the use of surveillance technology to carry out extensive antisocial and criminal behaviour particularly with respect to hiding their crimes and stopping the person who would report them.

Jacqui Smith says that the government needs to listen. That is a joke. I've been communicating the facts and truth to the government by every means possible for the better part of a decade, and no one but no has listened. I have a very long laundry list of such communication attempts including in person that were disregarded completely.

Not only have I been disregarded, but I have been and continue to be subject to attacks to discredit what I report. The problem is not in failing to listen but in failing to stop obvious and well known behaviour that is clearly outside the law and unacceptable by any standard in a civilised, democratic society.

The abuse by surveillance technology 24/7 for almost a decade carried out on a declared "indefinite" basis makes a mockery of all that this government and especially the Home Secretary and Secretary for Justice are supposed to represent and maintain. It destroys the foundation of law enforcement and the legal justice system which is made completely irrelevant by such abuse from surveillance technology.

This government is most definitely out of touch because it cannot get a grasp on reality in the community despite the extensive use of totally invasive surveillance technology for all these years. This government wants to believe what it has created for itself in order to support image management and is all too eager to accept whatever will help that process while disregarding the reality which actually exists in the community.

Antisocial behaviour and crime have become the standards in this community in my direct experience for more than a decade because the criminal has come to dominate and control the environment by abusing surveillance technology.

0 Comment(s) / Post Comment

Saturday the 29th of March 2008

11:59:59 PM

Organised crime as a landlord v tenant mangement. The latter is far worse as a gang of thugs because of government backing and surveillance technology abuse. What about Big Brother reality TV and organised crime films like Goodfellas?


Web Journal Saturday 29th March 2008

1. Mafia king on the straight and narrow. . There's no such thing. Although Goodfellas told it like it was, the film still glorified the violence especially for those who revel in such things. What is interesting about Henry Hill concerns the fact that he was at the centre of it all and turned them all in. That's what happens in the criminal mobs. The least likely one will betray the others to save his/her own skin. Who will it be here? Lt Harry Bird, BS or someone else?

BBC News Saturday, 29 March 2008, 00:07 GMT

Mafia king on the straight and narrow

By Heather Alexander
BBC News, New York

Henry Hill in New York street
Hill can now revisit old stomping grounds without fear of retribution

GoodFellas was the definitive mafia film - and it is the story of one man, Henry Hill, one of the only survivors of a ruthless gang of robbers and killers.

Hill walked the streets of New York as a king - an associate of the Lucchese crime family. He stole big, he spent big and took vast quantities of drugs.

Then he got caught and spent 30 years in the witness protection programme, telling the police all they needed to know to put his mafia bosses behind bars.

"I couldn't walk around this neighbourhood ten years ago," he says standing, smoking outside Junior's diner in Long Island City. "There'd be bullets flying all over the place."

Mafia king on the straight and narrow

2. Reality TV, Surveillance and Organised Crime. In the Email below I very briefly compare and contrast my experience in a tenant managed environment currently with that of a reputed Mafia owned and operated residential building during the 1980s on Manhattan's upper eastside. Tenant management is worse than organised crime because it is the government, supported and sustained by the government, has the ability to use surveillance technology to attack human activity and destroy life and worst of all wipes out the ability to address these problems legally and properly in the legal justice system as has occurred. Therefore, I write about what is happening exercising my freedom of expression as best I can.

There are a couple events from my 1980s experience which are relevant here that I left out of the Email below. Antisocial behaviour which led to the death of an 18-year-old youth when he was clubbed with a baseball bat on a New Year's Day at an arcade that was not supposed to be an arcade in one of the building's built and owned by this reputed Mafioso landlord. It's the same kind of antisocial behaviour permitted here in this environment 20 years later by tenant management that can easily lead to a similar murder. These events are not unfamiliar in the UK today.

The reputed Mafia landlord who built and owned the building in which I lived in the 1980s with all its false documentation created to skim rent and gain a tax abatement created a situation where the building was almost blown up. I believe that he tried to do just that and failed to cover up the reality of what he had done. He changed the fuel oil to the boiler to a natural gas source. The boiler was so designed to be able to take either fuel. But, he did not set the mixture correctly so that it burned with incomplete combustion with the smell of natural gas prevalent continuously inside and outside all around the building.

One Saturday night there was a huge explosion that shook the building. Those of us at home went out onto the street to see the damage that had been done; windows were smashed including some huge one's in a nearby high rise and manhole covers were blown out of the street some under parked automobiles. Fortunately, no one was injured. The fire department next door (engine and ladder companies) rolled out their equipment into the street and taped it all off. I believe that the accumulated natural gas from the building's boiler had finally been set off by something underground.

Within days the smell of natural gas returned to the building and outside all around the building. I called in the gas utility, Con Edison, who shut down the boiler and gas supply locking the latter when he found the incomplete combustion in the boiler. There was supposed to be a key in a glass case for emergency access to the boiler room next to the boiler room door or instructions where to find it. There were neither. The Con Edison employee was just about to get the fire department next door to smash open the boiler room door when the porter walked into the building and ran to get the key.

The gas was not turned on again until the boiler's settings were adjusted properly. Not long after that the landlord replaced the boiler without a permit, signs or certified plumber doing so. He tried to hide the evidence about what really happened. These examples of this kind of undermanagement that put the lives of people at risk go on and on for this particular landlord. I've found the same to be true for tenant management. It's a deliberate disregard in each instance. The reason why I address problems is to make certain that people's safety and health are protected as much as possible.

The great problem with this tenant managed environment is that the local criminals are allowed to use surveillance technology to destroy my collection of information and its reporting as best they can. This has gone on and on nonstop for almost the last decade 24/7. My efforts to address this activity in the legal justice system seven years ago this month were destroy by this abuse from these same people using the surveillance technology. For this reason tenant management is far worse than organised crime because it is the government doing this while they are supposed to be maintaining fundamental standards and preventing everything that has been happening to me.

"Henry Hill" and all this comrade thugs are alive and well in North Kensington a short distance from the BBC who turns a blind eye to it all.

---------- Forwarded Message ----------

Subject: Watching reality TV 24/7 365/6 is a possibility, e.g., Big Brother, Celeb Big Brother. Goodfellas (actually Wiseguys) and celebrating organised crime.
Date: Saturday 29 March 2008 13:10
From: Gary D Chance
To: news24@bbc.co.uk, e24@bbc.co.uk

I found your reporting and comments on these aspects of "entertainment" interesting. Here's why.

1. Reality TV

"Are reality shows killing TV?" Response: "They are likely to keep going along the lines as before but will change to disguise itself in the future."

In the meantime reality TV in its many manifestations is fascinating to people like crowds attracted to an accident. Have you ever seen a mindless crowd standing silently around an accident victim laying injured in the street? It's a sickening sight to see.

The great problem with reality TV like Big Brother is that it creates the disposition and exploits the psychological problem of people regarding the invasion of privacy and demented need to watch what another human being does all the time no matter what it is. Reality TV is a comment about the viewer. Why would anyone want to watch such drivel?

Reality TV is helping to create the surveillance society by establishing a standard that it is OK to observe people in their private lives 24/7.

I have been subjected to surveillance technology abuse 24/7 for almost a decade in the hands of those whom I reported for child abuse in early May 1998. In their revenge and retaliation against me they managed to get surveillance technology installed in mid-August 1998 which was put at their disposal.

Since that time hundreds of people have participated in watching me inside my own home continuously. This has included all those living around me and many others from the general public. "It's better than TV" was a comment at one point. All that is needed are some fabricated allegations and a sadistic disposition from those in positions of authority to allow surveillance technology to be used like this by those who were reported for crimes.

This continuous monitoring has consisted of abuse carried out second-by-second around the clock, 365/6 days a year for almost ten years against everything that I do no matter what it is. This reflects the essence of sadism on the part of all involved in this continuous abuse that has no other objective other than to derive pleasure from inflicting pain on others while completely dominating and controlling the life of another living being.

You will see that Big Brother reality TV also caters to this aspect of the base side of the human character as surfaces in the news from time to time.

Even the television programme House with Hugh Laurie has included the process whereby medical staff break into patients' homes to determine the truth. If people want to work for the fictional character Gregory House, they have to do this on his orders. A recent line by the hospital's administrator had her asking him "Have you even ever read an ethical guideline?"

Spying and criminal acts are thereby justified by the end which they serve. It is all too easy to pervert this process where the end justifies the means so that people manufacture false allegations to justify brutal and unlawful means. In House we are meant to consider the ethics of the outrageous acts that he carries out, but in Big Brother reality TV there is no such consideration.

What is missing: television's coverage of the reality of reality TV.

2. Goodfellas, Henry Hill and all glorified crime

I am quite concerned about what people take away from the organised crime films including Goodfellas and believe that there is as much an element of celebration of the criminal as there is horror of the brutality and destructive character that is depicted whether fiction or based upon fact.

It you've lived in an organised crime environment like New York, you will begin to appreciate the horror and destructiveness and repudiate any such celebration. Organised crime dominates and controls New York and just about every other major city in the US. No one can escape the impact of organised crime in New York or elsewhere. Thugs abound and are free to act as they please.

Thuggery permeates every aspect of life. Organised crime muscles in on everything legitimate and rule by means of fear because they simply kill people who oppose them as an example, and everyone else goes along.

There have been the sensational murders in the various restaurants. One was initially out in the open at the Columbus Day celebration in Columbus Circle with its famous retaliation at Umberto's Clam House. But, the local restaurants feature in mob hits too. People disappear, and no one sees anything. One of the top bosses was killed outside Spark's Steak House on the pavement.

These are the ones that make the news, but anyone in business who refuses to do what the mob tells them, e.g., take the ubiquitous mob controlled rubbish collection, disappears for good. Anyone owning a restaurant has to accept certain products from mob controlled businesses at a higher cost.

When they've collected or are making a lot of money, they turn to property and develop residential buildings in the community which are then subjected to substandard management and maintenance. No one dares complain. Organised crime owns the community no matter where that might be. Here's my direct experience on Manhattan's upper eastside in the 1980s.

I lived in a reputedly Mafioso owned building for about six years and found out that there were multiple layers of skimming from the rent that occurred. The documents filed with the City of New York were false along with flats rented to friends to re-rent unlawfully. The management was deliberately deficient and crime was high. The point was to turnover tenants to increase the rent to destabilise and destroy anyone or any group who chose to try to address the problems. This was explicitly forbidden by law, but organised crime could care less.

I contacted many organistions in government and elected officials at the City, State and Federal level. I pursued complaints through government departments. I had the local Crime Prevention Detective meet with the tenants. Later the Community Patrol Officer Programme (CPOP) was involved and checked the building daily. There were several attempts made against my life (window shot out; tried to run me down with a truck; tracked for pick up off the street) where the final one resulted in the gangland murder of someone who looked exactly like me.

I even went through the local courts (Landlord and Tenant Court and the Civil Court of the City of New York) and tried to get the problem into Federal court all to no avail. I had been defrauded of $6,000 [in two years] and was entitled to collected triple liability damages due to the fraud ($18,000) but was never able to do so [despite extensive efforts].

The New York City government lied about the law and fought me. My appeal to New York State was upheld. The head of the law firm representing the landlord got an "ex parte" order against me by lying. I took it upwards into appeal and got it stayed. I subsequently met with a Justice in his chambers and exposed this law firm head as a liar which resulted in his being instructed "no more 'ex parte' orders." He couldn't be trusted. The lower court judge overturned his own order.

Everything changed with respect to getting help and assistance during the 1980s. It was all made more difficult and people in positions of authority were stopped from doing what they had done before. The New York City Housing Department was so corrupt that it was taken over by New York State, but the same employees were brought along so that nothing really changed. The guy in charge of the Harassment Unit who had a spectacular reputation was caught on film by the FBI taking bribes from landlords to fix harassment cases.

The great problem with the organised crime films is that they do not portray the total impact of organised crime on every aspect and every person in the community no matter where it is. There is too much of celebration and sympathy toward organised crime which thrives on fear, intimidation and killing at the drop of a hat.

3. Big Brother reality TV is spawning organised crime in the community in the UK

My experience for the past decade in the Lancaster West Estate near the BBC in North Kensington has been far worse than my six years of living in an organised crime run building on Manhattan's upper eastside for six years in the 1980s where this reputed Mafioso went from one to twelve residential buildings which he constructed and owned in the community between 1980 and 1990.

It is worse now in London because it is the government who supports the criminals in this environment by giving them surveillance technology to silence anyone like me who would dare report serious problems. The result is that antisocial behaviour and crime continue and increase.

Those using the surveillance technology can observe everything that I do and attack me and what I report which has resulted in sustaining their surveillance based abuse for almost a decade.

This also sustains a corrupt tenant management in Kensington & Chelsea. By keeping me isolated, alienated and subjected to continuous abuse, tenant management preserves a false image that does not exist with respect to solving problems.

Recently, it came out that Board Directors of the TMO were elected by fraudulent voting. Two of those involved were on a disciplinary panel judging the person(s) who brought the fraudulent voting to light. Two directors including the one who exposed the voting fraud were dismissed as directors and TMO members.

This is a corrupt organisation trying to sustain its image by fraudulent voting of directors and wiping out those who bring the matter to light. This is exactly my experience from the last decade of tenant management. The criminals are cultivated who are only too willing to carry out crimes and attack those who report crimes, antisocial behaviour and management problems.

This is far, far worse than the organised crime that I experienced directly in New York in the 1980s because it is the government who has turned to the methods of organised crime only using surveillance technology as a lethal weapon to both protect itself and kill.

If people want to keep their jobs in the various government departments, they must behave in a criminal manner just like on "House" and go out into the community to totally invade a person's privacy and carry out unlawful and criminal acts that will destroy human activity and life.

4. This is the real impact of Big Brother and organised crime films on the community

There are those who are only too wiling to carry out unlawful and antisocial behaviour thereby creating that standard in the community.

This is what has happened which I've documented for the past decade.

What you are not considering when you review and report on reality TV and organised crime films and their film festivals on TV is the fact that there is a fundamental pandering to the basest of human characteristics which lead to this becoming the standard in the community.

This is not speculation. It has actually occurred in my direct experience for the past decade.

0 Comment(s) / Post Comment

Friday the 28th of March 2008

11:59:59 PM

Fire Brigade answers an apparent emergency call. The emergency services have been much abused by those using the surveillance technology against me during the past decade. This is a reminder to me of that abuse and general disregard of the public safety


Web Journal Friday 28th March 2008

1. London Fire Brigade's well lit presence. Well lit with side safety lighting the London Fire Brigade (also illuminated on the side of the truck) arrives for an apparent emergency call. Apparently, this was not too serious since they departed a few minutes later.

They have been abuse by Lt Harry Bird and BS in the past who feel no compunction against calling the London Fire Brigade as part of their continuous abuse to "Get him out" harassment. When someone is removed unwillingly by force from their home, a whole contingent of emergency services are required involving the police, ambulance services and Fire Brigade. Lt Harry Bird have called these individually to "get him out" in the past including the London Fire Brigade who had to tell him to stop until he was really ready to remove me from my home by physical force.

Many members of these emergency services have been exasperated by such false emergency calls in the past and expressed their anger upon arrival. During a Fire Brigade strike in the past, Lt Harry Bird called out the police with an emergency call involving me. He was told to stop such calls during the Fire Brigade strike because police services were stretched. He could not see this for himself which was quite obvious to everyone else except BS who supports this abuse of the emergency having called the police thousands of time herself for almost a decade.

I do not know why this apparent emergency call was made to the Fire Brigade, but it does reveal the continuous need for this emergency service which is critically important in protecting the lives of people. It's a shame that people like Lt Harry Bird and BS have such a general disregard for the public's safety that they have called the emergency services for no reason whatsoever throughout all these years thousands and thousands of times. They shout continuously "We've got to get him out" and "stop him" along with many variations on this theme when I am doing nothing except documenting and reporting what they and others do.

They exploit such emergency responses and often indicate that this is part of their abusive activity carried out with the lethal use of the surveillance technology.

Fire Brigade Truck 28.03.2008 at 2223
0 Comment(s) / Post Comment

Thursday the 27th of March 2008

11:59:59 PM

One year of surveillance sends 600 police officers to raid a whole North London street and 500 police officers in various raids across the country. What will a decade of surveillance bring in?


Web Journal Thursday 27th March 2008

1. Raid on street in crime crackdown. If one year of surveillance can turn out 600 police officers to take over one street in North London, I'm expecting 6,000 police officers to arrive here after ten years of surveillance this summer. There is no doubt that the surveillance technology use against me 24/7 for a decade is so important and collects so much valuable information that it cannot be stopped since it is so productive. I fully expected a direct proportion of officers responding to the ultimate raid as occurred here today when some 600 officers turned out after a year long surveillance effort.

Or, could it be that these surveillance types are so grossly incompetent that everyone is trying to hide that fact? This abuse of power is something spectacular to see. Here these people know they are carrying out surveillance against someone who is totally innocent. Well, I report criminal and antisocial behaviour. They don't want me to do that. Why is it then that so many police officers are involved in a crackdown on a whole North London street to stop crime while these people keep it going? Where are the wires getting crossed? Or, is it that corruption flourishes better and is sustained more easily in North Kensington just like the Isle of Jersey?

BBC NewsThursday, 27 March 2008, 18:58 GMT

Raid on street in crime crackdown

Hundreds of police in riot gear
Hundreds of police officers in riot gear flooded the road

Hundreds of police officers raided 19 premises on a London street as part of a crackdown on crime.

Some 600 officers sealed off part of Blackstock Road in north London to carry out the raid on Thursday.

Surveillance showed evidence of drug dealing, the sale of stolen goods and a trade in forged documents, police said.

Earlier, 500 officers raided 37 addresses across the country, as far north as Leeds. There have been more than 70 arrests in the two operations.

Blackstock Road, on the borders of the London boroughs of Islington, Haringey and Hackney, is a popular shopping street.

A Metropolitan Police spokesman said the massive operation, codenamed Mista, was an attempt to make a "clean sweep" of criminality in the area.

Raid on street in crime crackdown

0 Comment(s) / Post Comment

Wednesday the 26th of March 2008

11:59:59 PM

Prime Minister Gordon Brown plays fast and loose with facts at PMQs: the highest tax rates were not in the 1980s, and what interest rate was he talking about for 18% in 1990?


Web Journal Wednesday 26th March 2008
  • Point-by-point: Question time. The focus of attention from the loyal oppostion's leader David Cameron was economic. In an oft repeated reply to a broadside from the Prime Minister about his "arithmetic," David Cameron did his sums for us out loud noting that one Prime Minister plus one Chancellor creates economic problems.
  • I am continuously amazed that the Prime Minister. In the frenzy of defensive riposte Prime Minister Gordon Brown makes an important misstatement of fact about 1980s' tax rates during PMQ's which requires a public correction and apology from him.

1. Point-by-point: Question time. Although this recount of the important points from Prime Minister's Questions today does not specifically note the "sums" provided by David Cameron it was repeated in news broadcasts on BBC News24 as late as midnight. The dominance of the economic agenda is clearly seen here.

I also question Prime Minister Gordon Brown's assertion that interest rates were at 18% in the early 1990s during that period's painful squeeze. As can be seen in this chart, interest rates peaked at 15% in 1990. They were 17% in 1980. They have never been at 18% as measured by the Bank of England's base lending rate. Those interest rates in the market can be higher to which Gordon Brown might very well be referring. When talking about interest rates, it's necessary to specify which interest rate is being described.

As can also be seen in this chart, the Tories took over at a time when inflation was running away and had to be controlled. Interest rates had moved up to 14% when the Tories came into office and went up another 3% before coming down again during the 1980s. That inflationary management process using monetary policy control with respect to aggregates led to the initial rise in interest rates before they began their overall decline.

What can further be seen, however, is that overall there was a decline in interest rates consistent with inflation to a point in 1995 where the Bank of England interest rate base was at 5%. The second uptick during the Tory government occurred conincident with the government's trying to control sterling's exchange rate after joining the ERM (Exchange Rate Mechanism) in October 1990 which came undone in 1992, but interest rates had been falling up to this point in the early 1990s. These were two difficult recessionary periods reflecting the transistion from to old order to the new that the Tory government brought into existence during its 18 years in government.

BBC News Wednesday, 26 March 2008, 13:07 GMT

Point-by-point: Question time

The main points from prime minister's questions on Wednesday, 26 March, from 1200 GMT:

  • Prime Minister Gordon Brown welcomed President Sarkozy and his wife to the UK. He said he would be discussing joint action on illegal immigration and measures to tackle global financial instability.

  • Conservative leader David Cameron also welcomed the Sarkozys to the UK.

  • Mr Cameron used all six of his questions to attack Mr Brown's record on the economy. He used a Treasury Select Committee report to criticise his handling of the Northern Rock crisis, accusing the government of "dithering" compared to the swift action taken by the US government over the collapse of Bear Stearns. Mr Cameron said the Bank of England should be in charge of bank rescues rather than the Financial Services Authority, which he said was short of expertise in key areas.

  • Mr Brown said the Financial Services Authority had done a good job. He said it could do more - but every regulator around the world was facing similar problems. He accused Mr Cameron of having "no basic grasp of arithmetic" - a quote from Tory supporting novelist Frederick Forsyth.

  • Mr Cameron said it was "pathetic" for Mr Brown to read out quotes from novelists. He challenged Mr Brown to name one other major country that was responding to the downturn by putting up taxes. He said every other country had put away money in the good times except Britain and he called on Mr Brown to take responsibility for this.

  • Mr Brown said the government was cutting the basic rate of income tax to 20p and was "injecting more money into the economy this year". He said Britain had the lowest rate of inflation of the major countries and had unemployment at half the rate of other EU countries.

  • "I just wish he knew something about economics when he came to this house to tell us what to do," said Mr Brown, adding that all Mr Cameron could offer was "slogans not substance". He said the Tories had learned nothing since the 1990s.

  • Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg also focused on the economy - calling on Mr Brown to take action to prevent banks repossessing homes "at will". He said the situation was as bad as under the Tories in the first two years of the 1990s.

  • He asked: "is complacency the only thing he has to offer to thousands of British families who are frightened of losing their homes?"

  • Mr Brown said the economic situation was nothing like that under the Tories in the early 1990s when interest rates reached 18% and home repossessions were much higher. He hailed Labour's record on economic stability and low interest rates.

  • Point-by-point: Question time

    2. I am continuously amazed that the Prime Minister. When the Tory government led by Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher assumed power on 4th May 1979, one of its first actions was to abolish exchange controls which were gone completely in a few months time. The tax rates were also addressed in the very first budget and continued to be reduced throughout the 1980s as summarised in the added table to my Email below. This clearly shows that Prime Minister Gordon Brown was talking off the top of his head to suit his purposes in Parliament and got it flat wrong.

    While reducing income taxes, the Thatcher government increased VAT from 8% to 15%. These moves have been criticised as moving from direct to indirect taxation where taxes like VAT are regressive, i.e., they tax those on less income greater. There is also some criticism that the increase if VAT hit business and was inflationary. Inflation started to come down as a result of the monetary policy shift to managing the money supply (M4) instead of interest rates. The initial result was higher interest rates that did impact economic activity.

    This was the painful part of the inflation cure which, if left unchecked, would have toppled the UK over the brink into economic collapse, I believe. The switch in monetary policy to aggregate money supply management was most important. In effect this was decontrolling the price of money (interest rates) and controlling the supply of money so that excessive increases in money supply did not occur which was the foundation of inflation.

    This had long been the position of the monetarist and was also implemented by the US Federal Reserve in October 1979 shortly after Paul Volcker became its Chairman. The US was heading in the same economic direction as the UK toward disaster, and this was the cure although painful. The UK has already been there and does not need to go there again as this government has created. Gordon Brown needs to be held publicly accountable for what he has done, otherwise he will go on making these false statements repeatedly and getting away with them. The general public of today does not know what happened almost 30 years ago and depends upon those in government to get it right and tell it like it is.

    ---------- Forwarded Message ----------

    Subject: I am continuously amazed that the Prime Minister just makes up whatever he wants to say that has nothing to do with reality as he did today in PMQs.
    Date: Wednesday 26 March 2008 14:02
    From: Gary D Chance
    To: news24@bbc.co.uk, camerond@parliament.uk

    The Prime Minister said that the highest tax rates in this country occurred during the 1980s which was untrue. That was a time when they were being reduced by an effort that started in 1979 and took some time to turn this country around to prevent an economic collapse which would have occurred had not Margaret Thatcher become Prime Minister.

    The top tax rate during the James Callahan years was some 90 or 95%. I can't recall exactly which. There was no incentive to generate wealth and earn money for it was taxed away. How many tax exiles where there then who lived abroad to avoid the incredible tax rates in the UK? They started returning to the UK after Margaret Thatcher's government brought tax rates down.

    [Basic tax rate in 1979 was 33% which declined to 22% by 1999. Top tax on unearned income was 98% and 83% on earned income in 1979 which came down to 40% in 1999. Those who earned investment income had to pay a 15% surcharge bringing the top tax rate to 98%. At some point there was no incentive to earn any more money since it all went to the government.

    Fiscal years Lower rate Basic rate Higher rates
    1978–79 25 33 40–83
    1979–80 25 30 40–60
    1980–81 to 1985–86 30 40–60
    1986–87 29 40–60
    1987–88 27 40–60
    1988–89 to 1991–92 25 40
    1992–93 to 1995–96 20 25 40
    1996–97 20 24 40
    1997–98 to 1998–99 20 23 40
    1999–00 10 23 40
    "In 1980, the lower rate was abolished; in 1984, the investment income surcharge was abolished; and through the mid-1980s, the basic rate of tax was reduced. In 1988, the top rate of tax was cut to 40% and the basic rate to 25%, producing a very simple regime with three effective rates — zero up to the tax allowance, 25% over a range that covered almost 95% of taxpayers and 40% for a small group of those with high incomes."]

    What do you think the "brain drain" was all about? There was no point in the best earning money in this country reflecting their talent and ability when the government taxed it all away. I've noted recently in the news that the "brain drain" is increasing.

    Export controls on currency inhibited investment abroad and international activity. I seem to recall that there was a tax ["premium"] of about 40 to 50% on funds removed from this country so that this investment alternative was stifled. The idea was to prevent capital flight, but why was capital flying elsewhere? That was another exorbitant taxation that Margaret Thatcher's government brought to an end.

    Capital raising for medium and small businesses was almost nonexistent. There was virtually no corporate bond market. All that existed in the 1970s was an equity market for large companies, and they had to raise capital through rights issues [to existing shareholders]. The fixed interest market was limited to Gilts. The only recourse for enterprise activity debt financing was through borrowing from the banks and private placements for larger companies.

    There was no opportunity to generate and earn wealth because it was mostly confined and squelched by lack of opportunity from limited capital markets and taxation by the government. That was a Labour government in power before the Tories were elected to government in 1979, and it did nothing to change the "stagflation" it had created and sustained.

    It took a massive effort to turn the UK ship of state to rejuvenate the economy and reduce inflation through monetary and fiscal policies the latter of which relied upon tax cuts to put money back into the hands of the private sector for spending decisions instead of the government making those decisions.

    I find it outrageously beyond belief that Gordon Brown would stand up in the Commons and make such a statement which he must clearly know after his decade as Chancellor was false. He owes the country an apology.

    The Tories created a solid economic foundation through eighteen years of government with some very tough problems that needed to be solved which caused a necessary and unavoidable pain to the people of this country. It was those people who had experienced the terrible pain of the early 1980s who returned Margaret Thatcher's government to power in May 1983 to keep the policies going and ensure that this country flourished for all.

    This is exactly what happened overall until this Labour government took over in May 1997 and began spending like a drunken sailor borrowing imprudently and taxing by stealth until all the gains of the18 years of a Tory government have been lost. The big problem now is that there is no reserve or resiliency in the economy from which to draw which means that the economic decline will be long and hard.

    Gordon Brown has created this situation with his misguided policies such as taxing pension fund dividend income so that institutional investors changed their asset allocation decision away from equities to areas where tax free income could be earned. The necessary and effective balance in the capital markets was shifted to the detriment of everyone which ultimately had a profoundly negative economic impact.

    David Cameron was precisely correct with this riposte regarding the "maths" criticism when he pointed out that one Chancellor and one Prime Minister add up to . . . ["economic incompetence"].

    Once a disaster like this is triggered, there is nothing that can be done to correct it since it has been created from over a decade by government mismanagement. Why did Gordon Brown sell the Bank of England's gold? It was a short sighted decision to get a couple billion into the Treasury. Who now has any confidence in the paper printed by the Bank of England?

    As David Cameron also pointed out, no effort was made to pay down the borrowings to ensure fiscal stability and integrity especially after all that the Tory governments had done for 18 years to put the UK into a position of strength. Instead, this Labour government has become a borrow and spend government in its effort to maintain power. What's going to happen to the government's fiscal policy if interest rates do not come down?

    There has to be a way to point out the reality for each and every statement like this from the government especially when it occurs at PMQs. It sounds very much like Hillary Clinton's account of her arrival in Bosnia where she claimed that she came under the risk of sniper fire and ran to her car. Yesterday, we saw in the news videos about what really happened on that arrival date in 1996 with her daughter by her side, greeting the honour guard and listening to a child's poem. Where were the snipers? Was there a heckler in the crowd?

    Someone really needs to remind the British public what the economic conditions were really like in the 1970s with this country facing collapse. It took a Herculean effort and time to build credibility for changes to start with the belief that the policy changes really meant something and that the "Iron Lady" would make certain that they held. People had to believe that they were not a short-term political decisions made to keep power which had characterised the past.

    It was not until October/November 1981 before inflation and interest rates actually peaked and began their downward trend of the next two decades. That was a profound achievement which was accompanied by the fiscal policy changes from reducing taxation in this country so that people could earn and keep their earnings making their own spending decisions.

    It was necessary to convince the institutional investors of which I was one that the policies would be sustained so that investments could flow into the only source of debt financing which existed at that time: UK Gilts. The investor had to be convinced that inflation was coming down, and it was time to by fixed interest securities. In 1982 the UK long-dated Gilts were the highest returning assets in the world as an asset category with a total return (capital appreciation and interest together) of 50%.

    One of the penions funds for which I was responsible in the UK that the time was able to cease coporate and employee contributions due to the extraordinary increase in its assets which were 50% invested in long-dated UK Gilts. Equities did quite well too.

    This was a company that was been connected with the then decimated automotive industry whose employees had been cut in half from about 4500 to some 2200 with some plant closings. It needed the kind of corporate cash flow assistance that occurred from this pension fund decision which was directly related to the decisions made by the Tory government at that time.

    Those decisions remained firm and dependable which provided credibility for the government's policies and inspired confidence in the country at large as interest rates and inflation began a long term downward trend. It is critically important to make certain that this government and especially its current Prime Minister who was formerly its Chancellor does not twist the record out of shape as regards to what really happened. No one needs a MiniTruth.

    It is critically important not to repeat the mistakes of the past once again, but, sadly, those mistakes have been created anew and are now threatening this country with long term serious problems from a potential depression.

    0 Comment(s) / Post Comment

    Friday the 21st of March 2008

    07:46:47 PM

    Good Friday and the first day of Spring the Vernal equinox when the length of the day and night are equal as the earth's rotation and orbit places the sun crossing the plane of the earth's equator.


    Web Journal Friday 21st March 2008
    • Brown criticised over embryo bill.
    • Cardinal Keith O'Brien speaks out against embryonic research. This will do a great deal of good for humans. It only uses the cow's egg "shell" with all the DNA removed as a medium in which to grow human DNA. It is not a hybrid.
    • Neurological research is the real and immediate threat.
    • This is where the real malignant research is located impacting humans in the most extreme negative way with the development of surveillance technology. Why is there such outcry about this medical and scientific research?
    • US lawmaker demands Tibet inquiry.
    • Nancy Pelosi visits the Dalai Lama in Northern India as part of a preplanned trip supporting him and calling for human rights advocacy against Chinese abuses.
    • Will Nancy Pelosi demand similar inquiry for the US?.
    • But, why is it that Nancy Pelosi as the third person in line for the presidency in the event of a tragedy has not addressed the same kind of suppressive abuses carried out by the US government when she can effect such an inquiry in Congress?

    1. Brown criticised over embryo bill. Why criticise this scientific process when only a cow's egg externals are used to provide a growing means for human embryos? It is beneficial to humans and causes no damage to living people.

    BBC News Friday, 21 March 2008, 12:49 GMT

    Brown criticised over embryo bill

    Cardinal Keith O'Brien
    Cardinal O'Brien has written to Gordon Brown with his concerns

    The leader of the Catholic church in Scotland has urged Gordon Brown to rethink "monstrous" plans to allow hybrid human-animal embryos.

    Cardinal Keith O'Brien will use his Easter Sunday sermon to launch a scathing attack on over the government's controversial proposals.

    He will also call on the prime minister to allow Labour MPs a free vote on the issue at Westminster.

    Mr Brown has said the bill would improve research into many illnesses.

    Supporters of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill believe hybrid embryos could lead to cures for diseases including multiple sclerosis and Alzheimer's disease.

    Speaking at Prime Minister's Questions on Wednesday, Mr Brown said: "This is an important Bill that improves the facilities for research and is vital for dealing with life-threatening diseases."

    Brown criticised over embryo bill

    2. Neurological research is the real and immediate threat. Neurological surveillance technology abuse is the real malignancy in medical and scientific research. This destroys living people who are used as nonconsenting guinea pigs for this most atrocious medical and scientific research. This is truly the monstrosity which needs to be addressed.

    ---------- Forwarded Message ----------

    Subject: "Brown criticised over embryo bill" This is not the real and immediate threat to humans from medical and scientific research
    Date: Friday 21 March 2008 16:43
    From: Gary D Chance
    To: cardinal@staned.org.uk, news24@bbc.co.uk

    Cardinal Keith O'Brien

    Dear Cardinal O'Brien

    I like many others have noted your comments today. I do not agree with you about the issue, but I most certainly agree with you about your right to speak forth on this and any other matter of conscience that you feel is important for human beings.

    As a result, I want to bring to your attention an issue that is far more "monstrous" than the science of embryo research. That's the misdirection and misapplication of neurology as surveillance technology of the most invasive kind ever know along with its extreme abuse.

    This abuse has been carried out against me for over seven years 24/7 since February 2001. It fits into such a disposition to abuse surveillance technology which started against me in mid-August 1998 for having reported child abuse in an adjacent flat. The child abusing family were able to obtain the use of surveillance technology against me as a weapon of retaliation in order to cover up their crimes past and present.

    This escalating process was joined by agents of the US Government, US Marines (former/retired/active?) Colonel Vine and Lt Harry Bird in February 2001. I have become a nonconsenting human guinea pig for the experimental development of this surveillance technology. The escalations continued since I protested and communicated widely about what was happening to me which violated every standard of human and legal rights that have been developed in civilised society.

    The neurological science being used as surveillance technology is capable of monitoring and tracking brainwave electromagnetic radiation surrounding the head. Human sensory activity can be monitored accurately (feelings (pain), muscle movements, eyesight, hearing, smell) along with thoughts including images. Hearing can be fed back to the target as can images for memory probing at night during sleep. Feelings (pain) and muscle movement are also among the realm of neurological events that can be fed back for the purpose of torture.

    Surreptitious medication is another feedback process which can be undertaken in an attempt to debilitate and incapacitate the target. This can be done anywhere the target is located and is carried out by means of satellite communications.

    Imprisonment and terror, torture interrogation 24/7 are carried out against me by those whom I know and have known before and since I reported them for their child abuse. Others joining like Colonel Vine and Lt Harry Bird have become well known to me including the information about them and what they do since they verbalise all of it to make certain that their sadistic behaviour has maximum impact and psychological reward for themselves.

    This is being carried out indefinitely and is ultimately lethal. I am subjected to extensive verbal abuse including threats of violence and death continuously in an effort to shut down all human activity by creating grievous bodily harm and a general mental breakdown. This has not succeeded in almost a decade of this activity carried out 24/7 by the same people continuously.

    This is the real problem facing the UK and human civilisation at present. It is quite real and has been in use for many years. This is the biggest "monstrosity" which needs to be addressed. The medical experimentation it represents is like that of Dr Mengeles at Auschwitz only far, far worse.

    This is the real abuse of medical and scientific research which needs to be noted from the pulpit until it can be brought under democratic control. At least the issue of embryo research is out in the open with legislation required for its use. The neurological surveillance technology is being developed and used totally in secret with nonconsenting human guinea pigs. It's damages and potential damages to civilised society in the future present a far greater threat at present than does embryonic research.

    Yours sincerely

    Gary D Chance

    3. US lawmaker demands Tibet inquiry. Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the US House of Representatives, visits the Dalai Lama as part of a preplanned trip which occurs at the time of the sentiment explosion in Tibet and suppression by the Chinese. She is a human rights advocate and critic of the Chinese for their human rights abuses. This emerges once again as she supports the Dalai Lama deemed an arch criminal instigator by the Chinese.

    BBC News Friday, 21 March 2008, 10:31 GMT

    US lawmaker demands Tibet inquiry

    Nancy Pelosi meets the Dalai Lama
    Ms Pelosi - a fierce critic of Beijing - heads a congressional delegation

    A senior US lawmaker, Nancy Pelosi, has called for an independent investigation into China's claims that the Dalai Lama instigated the violence in Tibet.

    Ms Pelosi, Speaker of the US House of Representatives, also called on the international community to denounce Chinese rule in Tibet.

    She spoke out while holding talks in northern India with the Dalai Lama.

    The Chinese authorities are continuing to tighten security following days of protests by Tibetans.

    China says 16 people have been killed by rioters in Lhasa, the main city. The Tibetan government-in-exile - headed by the Dalai Lama, regarded by many Tibetans as their spiritual leader - says at least 99 people have died in the crackdown by Chinese troops.

    US lawmaker demands Tibet inquiry

    4. Will Nancy Pelosi demand similar inquiry for the US?. Speaker of the US House of Representatives and third in line for the Presidency should tragedy occur appears to be overlooking extreme human rights abuses carried out by the US government around the world. Here's a copy of an Email I sent to her:

    ---------- Forwarded Message ----------

    Subject: "US lawmaker demands Tibet inquiry" Your visit to the the Dalai Lama in Dharamsala, Northern India, is laudatory, but you are missing something far more important that is under your control.
    Date: Friday 21 March 2008 19:25
    From: Gary D Chance
    To: sf.nancy@mail.house.gov, news24@bbc.co.uk

    Nancy Pelosi
    Speaker of the House
    US Congress
    235 Cannon HOB
    Washington, DC 20515

    Dear Speaker Pelosi

    I was quite pleased to see you visiting the Dalai Lama which was broadcast on BBC News24 here all day with your comments about the legitimacy with respect to human rights.

    While the Chinese suppression can be seen in the open in a most physically brutal manner, the US government is carrying out supression of a much worse character throughout the world. I am one such victim of that suppression by the use of neurological surveillance technology for over seven years 24/7 from February 2001 just after George Bush was inaugurated as president.

    This neurological surveillance technology abuse is being carried out 24/7 by US Marines (former/retired/active) Colonel Vine, Lt Harry Bird and others. They cite among others George Bush, the White House and the DoD as authorities for what they are doing.

    This is an R&D project for this surveillance technology along with medical experimentation directed against an innocent and nonconsenting human guinea pig on an indefinite basis 24/7.

    I am tracked wherever I go and subject to this imprisonment and terror, torture interrogation 24/7 by the neurological surveillance technology that will eventually be lethal by virtue of its very nature.

    It's capabilities have reached unimaginable abilities which beggar belief, but they are all true. Those using this surveillance technology have been and are big blabber mouth sadists who have revealed all that they are doing as part of their pleasure from the torture process. I was thus able to verify my suspicions and conduct small tests throughout these seven years to verify the validity of what can be done with this surveillance technology.

    It is a first cousin to Tempest which was initially used five decades ago to intercept electromagnetic radiation emissions from small electronic devices such as encryption systems. The USS Oxford did this for NSA off the coast of Havana during the Cuban Missile Crisis. Before that in April 1961 Yuri Gagarin's space flight voice communications were monitored by intercepting from a satellite these electromagnetic radiation emission surrounding a telephone landline in the Soviet space centre. These facts are published in James Bamford's book "Body of Secrets."

    More recently Tempest has become best known for intercepting the emissions from computer monitor screens, but it goes way beyond that. Each and every electronic device in a computer can be monitored. Computers can be completely monitored and controlled from a remote location. So much of this activity has been carried out against me with verbal confirmation that I have been able to validate beyond any doubt that this activity takes place.

    The great problem is that this surveillance technology, all of which is related to the basic nature of Tempest, is quite well known in this environment by many people because of the big mouths of those using it and their need to show off. Many people have used this surveillance technology as well.

    I believe that you have the ability to control this abuse of this most sophisticated surveillance technology ever known to human civilisation. While you campaign for human rights in many arenas and most importantly with respect to Tibet and the dissent against China, you have a direct responsibility to address what the US government is carrying out worldwide as I am experiencing.

    This activity known to many in the general public makes a mockery of your efforts when the US government is so abusive of human and legal rights itself. You were heard saying in a BBC News24 report:

    "If freedom loving people throughout the world do not speak out . . . we have lost all moral authority to speak out on human rights anywhere in the world."

    I submit that the human rights abuses of the US government that I have been experiencing directly for over seven years 24/7 which are intended to be clandestine are as widespread but far more insidiously devastating because they are masked by secrecy, fabrication, intimidation, multiple lies, denials and the threat of death.

    I believe that you will find this surveillance technology is as much a threat to democracy in the US as it is a threat to my life in North Kensington, London, UK.

    I hope that you will address this abuse from the US government with all the zeal you have rightly addressed against China for their abuses.

    Sincerely yours

    Gary D Chance
    0 Comment(s) / Post Comment

    Thursday the 20th of March 2008

    07:59:58 PM

    An example of surveillance technology abuse contributing to antisocial behaviour, i.e., dumping rubbish on the floor creating higher costs along with a safety and health hazard.


    Web Journal Tuesday 18th March 2008

    1. Rubbish on floor by front door. People do not even put small bags down the rubbish chutes as is noted here near the front door. Why is that? There is a recycle Orange Bag on top slightly to the right. The Council passes these out without charge. Instead of using them for recyclables, this one is used for nonrecyclable rubbish. With crude oil prices hitting $111 per barrel this past week this kind of waste cannot go on for very long.

    The recycle Orange Bag programme is an excellent one where these Orange Bags are distributed free to to be filled with recyclables and left outside flat doors on Saturday morning for pickup. Under normal usage passing these out free cannot last due to cost, but not using them for recyclables is unconscionable in terms of the need to recycle to save resources which here ignores that and adds to the cost of the recycling programme. The free society in every respect is coming to an end, and here is a key reason why.

    All the tenants have to pay for those who put their rubbish on the floor since the cleaners come around and have to spend the time to put this rubbish down the chutes. This is a serious problem because their is quite an accumulation of rubbish during the night. It also feeds the vermin. I suspect that the actual cost in terms of extra employee resources required to put this rubbish down the chutes for others day and night is quite significant.

    The cost for doing so is added to everyone's rent in the form of a service charge for contract cleaning. My cost for such service starting 7th April 2008 will be £3.60 per week. That's £187 per year part of which pays for someone else to pick up this rubbish that some dump on the floor. If I address this problem it is to reduce the cost to all tenants for this added burden with respect to contract cleaners as well as address the safety and health problem that leaving rubbish on the floor like this creates.

    Believe it or not this is another thing about which those using the surveillance technology attack me while I photograph and report this problem as occurred today. It reflects the indiscriminate need on their part to attack for attack's sake. They are not concerned with the content of what I am doing, but they attack whatever I do no matter what it is in order to create a negative image. This helps sustain this antisocial behaviour of dumping rubbish on the floor like this because those using the surveillance technology support and sustain those who dump rubbish like this.

    When the Council dumps the Orange Bags on the ground overnight outside on Saturdays to Sunday mornings until they are picked up due to a lack of recycle Blue Bins, this also contributes to the sense that it is OK to dump rubbish on the ground or floor. Someone will come along and eventually collect it and/or put it down the rubbish chute even if it stays there overnight feeding vermin and spreading microbes. I am also attacked for filming this process of dumping the Orange Bags on the ground overnight by those using the surveillance technology since it also serves their objective of creating a distorted, misrepresented and negative image about me.

    Further, those using the surveillance technology dump their rubbish in this manner and want to continue to do so without someone noting what they are doing and reporting it. That is another small but not insignificant reason to use the surveillance technology against me. It fits into their overall pattern of harassment against me trying to characterise my addressing such problems as somehow wrong. This is why I make this information available to the general public in order to communicate to all in the least expensive manner possible this characteristic to expose the kind of personality who wishes to sustain and support antisocial behaviour no matter what it is.

    This may sound like petty activity on their part, but it fits into a larger pattern of constant abuse where everything I do is attacked no matter what it is. For them it is significant. They have no restraint or control and respond with an attack against everything. For me it is significant to address the cost implications of this antisocial behaviour along with its safety and health hazards especially in a world where infections like MRSA which are most difficult to treat and, therefore, common now in the community are spread by such exposures of and contact with rubbish like this. Of course, vermin spread diseases too.

    Those using the surveillance technology are about as far removed from responsibility as it is possible to get, yet they try to paint a different picture hoping no one will actually take a close look at what they are saying and doing. They seek to dominate and control by a constant barrage of bullying abuse and this is just one part of that overall activity. Meanwhile, people's lives are put at a higher risk for which they pay a higher cost. Ain't freedom grand?

    2nd floor rubbish chute 20.03.2008 1248
    0 Comment(s) / Post Comment

    Sunday the 16th of March 2008

    11:59:59 PM

    Local Control: consider the tone and content of two letters: one from the TMO Chair and one from a suspended director who seeks to challenge that suspension in Tuesday night's TMO Extraordinary General Meeting.


    Web Journal Sunday 16th March 2008
    • TMO Chair cheerleader letter received 03.03.2008. A couple days after receiving the "official" notification for the TMO Emergency General Meeting to be held on Tuesday, 18.03.2008, I received this rah, rah chanting letter from the TMO Chair.
    • Suspended TMO director responds to the charges. He addressed board election rigging and the rigging of the elections for directors which apparently put him into the bad graces of the power elite among the TMO Board of Directors so that they pulled out the figurative knives which he addresses by a rebuttal letter sent out to the TMO members at the eleventh hour.

    1. TMO Chair cheerleader letter received 03.03.2008. On Monday, 3rd March 2008, I received a letter from the Kensington & Chelsea Tenant Management Organisation (TMO) Chair, Juilet Rawlings, in support of the dismissal of the two directors from the board and their dismissal as members of the TMO. I did not like receiving this letter. Its mere receipt had the appearance of a gang of bullies trying to thump this pair into oblivion. The letter read like that too. The have really rolled out the heavy weights to stomp on these two TMO directors including the Leader of the Council as I noted yesterday. The letter with only a date of February 2008 (no day was included) consists of a series of one sentence paragraphs as follows:

    "Let's get on with the job" it opens in bold face type. What job is that I asked myself thinking about what I've experienced for the past 12 years as discussed in this web journal and my web site.

    "Your TMO has a lot to get on with in the next year or two." I continued to read this as I note that my balcony has been in a state of disrepair since the first week of June 1998 almost ten years ago. Oh, there was something done in October 2006, but that was never completed. The 84 tiles were not put back onto the balcony floor although it was covered in concrete over a sealant base. What exactly is this TMO to get on with in the next year or two? I do not consider this to be "my" TMO. Is this a con?

    "We have to improve the service to tenants and leaseholders, while at the same time meeting tough financial targets." I haven't noted that the TMO has done much in the past 12 years except send out glossy magazines and brochures about Fun Days and, "gee whiz," just how great "they" were doing. Then they post a £200,000 deficit at the end of their last fiscal year.

    "The TMO needs everyone pulling on the same end of the rope." Which end of the rope is that? Is that the end where everyone has found surveillance technology abuse carried out against one person for daring to report child abuse and tenant management failures?

    "But we're being distracted because two of our board members refuse to abide by the Board's majority decisions." I am interested in finding out what those miscreants have done to incur this wrath from the other board members. What precisely have they done in not abiding by the "majority decisions?" Why have they refused to be a part of the bully mob that uses surveillance technology as a weapon 24/7 against someone it does not like for almost a decade? What is the distraction, and why are they being distracted?

    "They have refused to undergo a Criminal Records check to verify they don't have a criminal past. This is important because Board members have contact with vulnerable people, including the elderly." Oh, really? Does the TMO Chair mean that such contact involving 24/7 surveillance technology abuse of the most extreme kind causing grievous bodily harm while attempting murder is not really contact, and that it is OK to make a person vulnerable with the use of surveillance technology in order to carry out sadistic abuse? Elderly, huh? This has been done to me during the past decade from the ages of 55 to 65, and everyone is still going to strong with the most extreme abuse. Has the Criminal Records check agreed to by board members stopped this kind of behaviour?

    "The pair have been suspended from the Board but frankly while this carries on the Board can't do its work properly." Is this blackmail? Is the TMO Chair telling the tenants and residents of the 10,000 social housing units in Kensington & Chelsea that the Board of Directors is refusing to work and carry on as it has done before until the matter is settled in their favour? I don't see any difference. The surveillance technology abuse continues and nothing is getting done about the serious antisocial problems I keep addressing. Is the TMO Chair and the TMO Board of Directors threatening to continue to do nothing and spend more money with no effect as they have been doing for years? Are they using antisocial behaviour as a weapon to sustain their power?

    "That's why there is an Extraordinary General Meeting." In a letter dated 13th February 2008 included with a mailing whose cover letter by the Company Secretary does not have a date which I received on 1st March 2008 (just two days before receiving this letter from the TMO Chair) there is the statement "Supporters of Mr and Mr have called an Extraordinary General Meeting (EGM) to question their expulsion." This statement was signed by 19 members of the TMO Board of Directors including its Chair. The fact that TMO Board Chair claims that no work can be done properly by the Board is a red herring. Those suspended have every right to challenge their suspension in this manner, and the TMO Board of Directors through its Chair cannot misconstrue and blackmail people into submitting to their wishes in this correspondence as is being done.

    The rest of the letter continues in one-line sentences like a pep rally chant repeating the same thing over and over which is called psychic driving (emphasis and capitals not added):

    "We are asking members to vote YES to four resolutions outlined in voting papers sent by the independent Electoral Reform Society."

    "19 of 21 members of the Board support the resolutions. The two that don't are the two that are suspended."

    "Please ensure you vote either by postal ballot or at the Extraordinary General Meeting on 18 March."

    "Please support the Board by voting YES."

    "Your vote and your voice is vital. Please don't waste them."

    "Say"

    "YES"

    "And support your TMO Board."

    "Say"

    "YES"

    "To the four resolutions on the EGM voting paper."

    I kid you not. This is exactly how the letter from the TMO Board Chair ended with this ranting rah, rah chant for voting for the Board and its four resolutions to dump these two directors. There was nothing of substance in this letter to convince me about what they had done. All it said was that 19 board members had ganged up on these other two and suspended them. Don't waste your vote. Support the Board. This is not really "your" Board although 14 are elected by TMO members and the other five are Councillors appointed by the Council. These people are out for themselves.

    This sounds like a cheerleader chant at a sports game yelling for their team. The way I've entered it above is exactly the way it appeared in the letter. There is no closing or signature to the letter. Just this repetitive chant. Who wants this lot as a Board of Directors for 10,000 social housing units in Kensington & Chelsea? Where is the responsibility displayed in this letter that is essentially blackmail and changing nonsense? I think the whole lot should be disbanded with the Council taking over the management of its social housing stock once again.

    This sounds like Lt Harry Bird and BS who continuously engage in nonsense abuse and psychic driving with false allegations 24/7. They have been commenting continuously while I have writtenthe above.

    2. Suspended TMO director responds to the charges. After everyone went after these two suspended directors pending the Extraordinary General Meeting (EGM) on Tuesday next, 18th March 2008, including the initial alarm bell from the Company Secretary received 6th February 2008 and the official mailing received almost a month later on 1st March 2008 followed by the TMO Chair's cheerleader chant of a letter received 3rd March 2008 and than the Leader of the Council's letter received 14th March 2008, there finally arrived a letter by one of those suspended directors forwarded by means of a cover letter from the TMO Company Secretary which was received by me on Saturday, 15th March 2008, This was an eye opener. No wonder they delayed it.

    The letter from this so-called miscreant director was dated 7th March 2008. It should have been forwarded immediately but was not. It's arrival is only three days before the EGM while everyone else (except the Leader of the Council) got in their punches a couple weeks before this. What about those of us who are denied participation by being subjected to surveillance technology abuse 24/7 for almost a decade who have to vote by post and must send in our votes in time to get them counted?

    1. This so-called miscreant uncovered and had proof of vote rigging for the TMO Board of Directors. No wonder they want to get rid of him. No wonder they want to maintain their own power and control. They cannot have someone in their midst who would insist upon proper voting standards so that director elections were fair and represented the real will of the TMO members instead of the power and control of the few who count the votes. I believe that what he uncovered is criminal and that those involved should be sacked forthwith. They cannot be trusted to uphold the trust and confidence placed in them by the TMO members, can they?

    There were apparently two kinds of voting "irregularities." One involved internal board voting and the other voting for directors. With respect to the latter, this suspended director was part of an audit concerning this most serious of allegations. They were brought to the attention of an MP, and those who were interviewed for these "irregularities" were the TMO Chair, its Chief Executive, the Company Secretary and himself. As a result the TMO board elections are outsourced to the Electoral Reform Service (ERS) and are no longer run in house. Who can say how long this was occurring or what the board might look like had there been fair and honest elections of directors?

    The other point regarding elections or voting within the board itself are somewhat complicated and seem to involve a convoluted system of addressing this problem. He said that he had proof that the TMO cheat at elections to a group. He had evidence. Although there was an enquiry, he was not included. The determination in his absence was made that only mistakes occurred not any wrong doing. Apparently, somewhere along the line he was given a final warning without any preceding warnings.

    This director goes on to say that he was advised by the Chair to appeal the final warning. There was to be a "special disciplinary appeals panel" set up in which, he says, he was supposed to "have some input into its composition." The TMO Chair also admitted to him, he says, "that when she issued the warning she did not really know what she was doing as their was no due process."

    The appeal process went ahead, he describes, with the panel including "at least two board members who were involved in the cheating allegations." He did not attend this panel appeal hearing and was found guilty. I think his absence was a mistake, but evidently he judged this panel to be a kangaroo court especially since at least two of its members were alleged voting cheaters. Who could have confidence in anything like that?

    Apparently, there were four other miscreants who had received final warnings. He writes that all four were named although only two offences were noted. These were a sexual offence and a racial remark. The other two offences for the other two people were not disclosed he says. It sounds very much like there are some serious problems at the TMO.

    After this first most critical point, this suspended director goes on to address the other allegations against him in nine further points:

    2. Discussing confidential TMO business outside Board Meetings.

    I maintain that there can be no confidentiality about TMO proceedings of any kind since this is not a competitive enterprise and its supposed objective is to serve the best interest of the social housing tenants and residents along with the community. There is no justification for hiding anything.

    3. Compromising the TMO and the impartiality of those working for it.

    4. Undertaking actions to bring the company into disrepute.

    5. Voting against a board resolution and encouraging others to do likewise contrary to collective responsibility.

    6. Continuing to refuse to do a CRB [Criminal Records Bureau] check.

    He replies: "This is not true." "I have not refused to do a CRB check." "I have just not done one yet." He goes on to cite instances where several staff have come forward to describe that they have not been checked. He says that this has come from "people who regularly come into contact and enter the homes of vulnerable residents."

    7. Failing to treat Board members with respect acting in an intimidating and domineering and aggressive fashion and expressing adverse views as to the competence of some Board members.

    He replies "but as to the competence of some Board Members is being questioned I would have to say the incompetence and arrogance of some of the elected board members beggars belief."

    8. Bullying staff of the TMO and undermining their authority.

    He claims to have a letter of apology from one such witness against him who evidently falsely claimed to have been "threatened and intimated." This letter resulted from a complaint he made about this false allegation.

    9. Acting contrary to the interests of the TMO at meetings of the Senior Citizens Forum in September and October and not treating TMO officers with respect.

    He claims that this is "so untrue as to be outrageous." He states that he intends these allegations are to be investigated by the Council.

    10. Acting in a threatening and intimidating manner towards a number of elderly or vulnerable residents, particularly when seeking votes on Board elections in June.

    He says that this is "again completely outrageous." While running against four other candidates, he received more than twice the votes of his nearest opponent. He states that "bullying and intimidation" are no way to win votes. And, he goes to state "I certainly have the confidence that the TMO members have trust n me and will always support me. They know that I support them."

    In his concluding remarks he states "I feel that when mistakes are made and things go wrong a veil of secrecy is not the answer." He concludes with ". . . now we have a proper elections process I am in no doubt that we will not have to rely on spin and statistics."

    All of this will have to be worked out in Tuesday night's TMO EGM, but information has been scarce with regard to facts. If members are to vote meaningfully on the issues raised, they must be fully informed at the earliest possible date. This has not occurred. TMO appears to be quite mismanaged and subject to maladministration which puts into question its existence as an ongoing organisation.

    0 Comment(s) / Post Comment

    Saturday the 15th of March 2008

    11:59:59 PM

    Tenant management assesses next year water rates at £5.17 per week for me alone. How much am I paying for the rerouting of my water supply from another water tank nearby? I was refused separate metering a decade ago when Thames Water offered free meters.


    Web Journal Saturday 15th March 2008
    • Minister criticises water costs. Those with unmetered water costs and small households are most likely subsidising unmetered others who use large amounts of water.
    • Water costs £268 per year for one person. I will be paying £5.17 per week for water for one person an increase of 5.7% starting next month. I was refused free Thames Water meters by tenant management a decade despite two requests.
    • Sewage costs are part of the water rates. Sewage collection and analysis of all my sewage effluent commenced in December 1999 and went on for years. It might still be occurring for all I know. Who has paid for all of this extraordinary diversion of sewage and its analysis?

    1. Minister criticises water costs.

    BBC News Saturday, 15 March 2008, 08:26 GMT

    Minister criticises water costs

    A water meter
    People are being urged to install water meters to save money

    Environment Minister Phil Woolas has said small households are paying too much for their water, and are subsidising customers with meters.

    Water bills are set to rise by about 6% across England and Wales.

    Water regulator Ofwat says water meters could be a solution for some customers to help them cut costs.

    The government is to review water supplies and charges, which may mean compulsory meters where water is in scarce supply.

    Minister criticises water costs

    2. Water costs £268 per year for one person. My water bill is quite extraordinary. The amount charged is determined by the Tenant Management Organisation (TMO) perhaps in conjunction with the Lancaster West Estate Management Board (EMB). Water metering is centralised and the costs are allocated to individual flats by some means which I can see as being clearly unfair. A recent letter from the TMO informed me that my weekly charge for water will rise from this year's £4.88 per week to £5.17 per week next year.

    I was refused permission to have Thames Water install a free water meter offered a decade ago because of this central metering system. There is no real reason why this could not have been done. Heating and hot water are charged separately which means that my actual water charge is more than the £5.17 per week for next year. My heating and hot water will be £8.77 per week for the next year commencing on 7th April, but I do not know how much of this is hot water.

    Each flat in the Lancaster West Estate has separate hot and cold water tanks. There is no reason why Thames Water could not have been allowed to install a free water meter on the cold water tank. In fact, they could do it now at a cost, but the question is who would pay. Certainly not me since I've been refused permission to do this in writing (twice) by tenant management when the water meter was free.

    My flat's cold water could be metered so I pay for usage only. Then I and any others who are metered could be eliminated from the central charging process by netting the costs I pay against the overall costs. In fact, this would be an incentive for everyone to get a meter and would have been a splendid idea for tenant management to accomplish when Thames Water was offering them free.

    Maybe tenant management would have seen a further complication about which I was unaware and which they have tried to hide from me: my cold water has come from another source for an extended number of years. It has come from a cold water tank located in the flat below. I have noted when this started and verified this rerouting of my cold water. There are several signs of this occurring including the fact that the cold water tank does not fill when I fill the bathtub.

    This was done to surreptitiously medicate me starting at least from May 2001. There are indications that this might have started earlier than this date, but clearly surreptitious medication was in full operation as of May 2001. This was confirmed on several occasions by medical health professionals including Richard Evans MD from the St Charles Hospital Acute Psychiatric Clinic. He was exasperated when I switched to bottled water in May 2001 due to the fact that I was being surreptitiously medicated from my cold water rerouted from another tank nearby. He yelled "I can't help it if he won't drink the water" when someone, BS I believe it was, complained "He's not drugged."

    On another occasion a male with Richard Evans MD both of whom were using the surveillance technology against me enquired about the precise kind of medication he was using against me. Richard Evans MD did not want to give away the specific name of the medication and only indicated a general category for the medication after a couple questions. On another occasion I was urged to "drink the water but not too much" by another male present with a group of health professionals in the flat below using the surveillance technology.

    It is, of course, unlawful to medicate without consent outside a hospital environment for obvious reasons. There is no record or knowledge of exactly how much medication I absorb. It could be too little or too much. Anyone who does this kind of thing is following in the footsteps of Dr Shipman who killed hundreds of his patients by giving them an overdoes of diamorphine. As a matter of fact, one such person administering the surreptitious medication indicated on more than one occasion that morphine was being used.

    My question is just how much plumbing cost has tenant management incurred by rerouting my cold water intake pipes from another source and how much has it cost on an ongoing basis to run such a system for surreptitious medication? Are they trying to recover those costs through the allocation of water rates to me?

    ---------- Forwarded Message ----------

    Subject: "Minister criticises water costs," and it's entirely justified.
    Date: Saturday 15 March 2008 12:42
    From: Gary D Chance
    To: news24@bbc.co.uk, woolasp@parliament.uk, enquiries@ofwat.gsi.gov.uk, helpline@defra.gsi.gov.uk

    My weekly water charge will rise from £4.88 to £5.16 effective 7th April 2008 which is a 5.7% increase.

    Paying over £5.00 a week for water for one person when I have always made every effort to conserve water and use very little is outrageous. This means I will be paying £268 per year for water for one person's usage.

    It is unbelievable. I live in the Lancaster West Estate in North Kensington part of the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea, and the water charge is set by the Tenant Management Organisation (TMO).

    Over a decade ago Thames Water was offering free water meters. Since I live on an Estate, I had to ask permission to allow them to install a water meter and was refused. I kept getting these free water meter offers from Thames Water and even asked a second time but was refused then too.

    It's not that Thames Water has not made an effort to get water meters out to its customers. The problem has rested with the Lancaster West Estate Management Board (EMB) and TMO. These are two tenant management creations by the Kensington and Chelsea Council which have failed miserably.

    The reason cited for the refusal by tenant management was the fact that the water was centrally metered and could not be done for individual flats. This should not have been a problem.

    Each flat has its own hot and cold water tanks. Meters could be attached to each for individual flat usage at the intake point on each tank. That would mean two meters per flat, but then they would have paid for themselves in short order.

    I was told at the time by the then Estate Officer that they were making money from the water charges which was the real reason tenant management would not allow water meters to be installed.

    Now there is a big mess with respect to water charging which could have been avoided many years ago. The meters are no longer freely offered by Thames Water. The costs of the allocation of water usage has gone serious askew. I am most certainly paying for someone else's water usage and perhaps even still lining the pockets of tenant management.

    This matter needs a thorough investigation and review as is proposed and the sooner the better. Ofwat has said on your broadcast report that water meters were a solution.

    You went on to note that individual water meters may not be "practicable" in multiple dwelling buildings. I believe that this can be done at a reasonable cost with Estates like the Lancaster West Estate with its 900 or so units (some 9% of the 10,000 social housing units in the Royal Borough).

    Who's going to reimburse me for all these years of water overcharge?

    3. Sewage costs are part of the water rates. The following comments about sewage sampling carried out in the flat below for all my sewage effluent from the toilet, bathtub and kitchen are excerpted from a fax sent to the police on 21st December 1999. Does my water rates include the costs for this extraordinary diversion for sewage from my flat which has been going on for years?

    Sewage Water Sampling Police Notification 21st December 1999:

    "It was very obvious to me on Sunday morning (19.12.99) when I commenced cleaning and doing the laundry that the drains had been tampered with because the outflow was very slow. I do not use anything that could possibly stop a drain. In fact the drainage from the kitchen water appeared in the bathtub as I cleaned each of these rooms thoroughly. I tried some limescale remover to "unblock" them since this was all I had. There seemed to be a little improvement but not much. I was getting a very strong smell of the drain pipe back into each room indicating to me that it was "open". This should not occur at all. Although I have noted "water sampling" being done when I use water, it was not confirmed for me until last night.

    "When I took a bath yesterday evening (20.19.99), there was a man present who was talking with a matronly sounding older woman in the Walkway. Her voice again sounded like the one I have heard quite frequently nearby talking with those in flat XXXX. I believe that she is significantly connected with the [Lancaster West Estate Management Board (EMB)] and might even be its former [Chair]. The male told her explicitly "We're going to take a water sample" which he did as I finished my bath. There was much noise below of thuds and thumps in the wall water pipe shaft area below the toilet. When I began draining the bathtub, his connection to the drain pipe below and the filling of a vessel was obvious. The draining of the tub took a long time.

    "This process was repeated this morning by two people (a man and a woman) and a child. The child asked the man's name. He responded twice very clearly "Anthony". While taking my bath I heard water running in the pipes from another source and the simultaneous noises of something being screwed ["on/off"] as if to a connector device again in the wall water pipe shaft below the toilet area in the bathroom. My worry in this instance is if this could be a "setup" by drawing off water from the usage in another flat. Again, when I began to drain the tub, his collection activity below was obvious as he filled a vessel(s) for what was the entire tubful of water which took a long time to drain.

    "Tampering with the drains in this manner constitutes a life threatening danger to me from bacterial infection since I have no lymph nodes under my right arm due to cancer surgery. Not only did I see extensive drain backup into the bathtub on Sunday which I tried to alleviate, but I noted it this morning before I began my bath and had to rinse the smelly effluent from the tub. This is a grave health threat to me. I have had serious bacterial infections on three different occasions for which my cancer surgeon had already given me an antibiotic prescription which I carried for that purpose. I take every reasonable precaution to avoid bacteria danger. It is one of the problems I have with the inadequate rubbish disposal facilities in this [Estate]. It is obvious to me that the drainage has been tampered with as to block it in order to obtain "water samples" from my usage.

    "I take baths like this to soak my right arm to help alleviate the lymph oedema problem that hardens the tissue. I am trying to keep it soft to facilitate lymph fluid drainage so I am resuming taking two baths a day that the harassment has taken away from me in July 1998. Instead, I am now getting a far worse and direct harassment that causes extreme distress, anxiety and disturbance. To remove the essence of any privacy that I might have in the bath is reprehensible beyond words, but to do so in the presence of both a female and child participant is the most despicable thing that I can imagine. When the water sample was being taken Monday evening, a little girl below was shouting "bad" over and over."

    Child present when sewage sampling sprays everywhere in the flat below

    Later on there was a young guy in the flat below showing off how easy it was to sample the sewage that came from my flat. I heard this male talking with a small girl in the flat below while I was using the toilet. When I flushed the toilet, there was loud yelling from the flat below under the bathroom as evidently he had not done the job properly and the sewage sprayed out everywhere. There was a great commotion and much laughter following after this from the flat below and outside as he waited for an ambulance to take him to the hospital.

    There were continuous references to the fact that the sewage had sprayed all over him, and he had to be taken to the hospital as had to be arranged. The most important question is what happened to the small girl who was also present?

    All sewage effluent collected and analysed for years

    This activity has gone on continuously for years sampling all my sewage effluent that was accompanied by continuous verbal abuse comments from below while this was happening. I could always tell by the noise in the pipe area that this activity was being carried out.

    At the end of March 2001 this was still going on with a big uproar from those in the flat below about the sewage with BS shouting as loud as she could at her mother's male partner to "clean it out" referring to the container used to collect the sewage effluent. I had no end of backed up drains with the water flowing into the bathtub from its drain. I've spent a considerable amount of time and money unblocking this drain and even had to bail out the bathtub pending unblocking the drain on a couple occasions.

    Who pays for this sewage collection and analysis?

    However, there is a much larger question looming over this regarding the cost of this activity and who is paying for it to create this safety and health hazard in the flat below that has put people and especially children at a direct risk for years. Who are all the people involved and who are legally liable for this occurring or allowing it to occur. Such questions will have to be answered by legal processing.

    Tenant management has run out of money with the TMO posting a deficit of some £200,000 for its last fiscal year. Here is an example of diverting funds and activity toward criminal and unlawful objectives that put people's health and safety at risk for years while abusing the whole process of management activity. This has impacted the management process itself quite negatively and its responsiveness with regard to addressing real needs and problems concerning the tenants as a whole. There will have to be court proceedings to determine everyone's involvement and allocate liability.

    Legal proceedings precluded by surveillance technology abuse benefits tenant management

    Such legal proceedings cannot be undertaken until the surveillance technology abuse carried out 24/7 with the intent to destroy human activity and life itself is halted completely with verified and verifiable assurances that it is no longer being used in any manner whatsoever. The surveillance technology continues to be used as a means to stop legal proceedings and pervert the course of justice as occurred seven years ago when I initiated legal proceedings in the High Court against these people, the Council (RBK&C). the Lancaster West Estate Management Board (EMB) and the Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea Tenant Management Organisation (TMO).

    Toilet flushing limited due to harassment and sewage sampling accident including presence of children

    One of the reasons for my limiting toilet flushing is to avoid such a problem as occurred with the sewage sampling being sprayed all over below especially in the presence of children. Another reason is that it provokes harassment from the flat below for the simple act of flushing the toilet. On one occasion when I was cleaning the limescale from the toilet, I flushed it three times while cleaning. The tenant below went berserk and had a whole group of tenants/residents out front afterwards yelling and screaming about the fact of my flushing the toilet which she was apparently taking as personally directed at her.

    Hence, I limited my toilet flushing which has also been for water conservation reasons with good results. That has no impact, however, on my water rates bill since I do not have a water meter, and starting the 7th of April 2008 I will be paying £268 per year (£5.17 per week) for water usage when I am only one person using water in this flat. I limit toilet flushing and all other usage as much as possible to minimise harassment and conserve water. Despite this I am forced to pay an exhoribitant amount for water usage in addition to the harrassment being carried out against me 24/7.

    Should I view the water rates amount as harassment?

    0 Comment(s) / Post Comment

    Friday the 14th of March 2008

    11:59:59 PM

    Extraordinary General Meeting Tuesday next for the Kensington & Chelsea Tenant Management Organisation regarding the expulsion of two of its directors. Any organsiation that needs a decade of surveillance technology abuse to sustain itself will collapse.


    Web Journal Friday 14th March 2008
    • RBK&C TMO EGM notification 04.02.2008. Originally, the TMO Company Secretary sent a letter about this Extraordinary General Meeting (EGM). I received the official notification on 1st March 2008 for the 18th March 2008 EGM.
    • Tenant Management failures amid comprehensive notification. At the point of the July 2003 Audit Commission Housing Inspectorate inspection massive suppressive retaliation and extreme measures from the abuse by surveillance technology to cause physical injury and blindness were carried out against me.
    • 12.03.2008 Leader of the Council Email. I received this extraordinary letter today about the EGM which takes place in a few days on Tuesday next. I sent an immediate Email reply a copy of which is enclosed here.

    1. RBK&C TMO EGM notification 04.02.2008. An organisation that survives by using surveillance technology 24/7 for a decade to suppress dissent and truth in reporting problems is an organisation that will eventually collapse. The Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea Tenant Management Organisation (TMO) is one such entity that is coming apart. Last fiscal year it posted an unlawful £200,000 deficit. Currently, the Board of Directors is attempting to remove two of its directors and deprive them of membership in the TMO. There will be an Extraordinary General Meeting (EGM) this Tuesday, 18th March 2008 at 1930 at the Great Hall at Kensington & Chelsea Town Hall, Horton Street, Kensington W8, for members to vote on these expulsions.

    I first heard of this problem in a letter dated 4th February 2008 (received 6th February 200 from the TMO Company Secretary announcing the EGM and outlining what was to be addressed (four resolutions) and urging that I follow the Board of Directors recommendation and vote in favour of all the four resolutions. The letter promised that more information would be forthcoming along with the official notification of the the EGM. Why was this letter sent at all?

    On 1st March 2008 almost a month later I received the official notification with a cover letter that was not dated. This communication contained an explanator note, TMO Board letter, a statement of conduct about the two directors and postal and proxy voting forms.

    The enclosed TMO letter from the Board of Directors was dated 13th February 2008. They have expelled two directors because they "refuse to accept the responsibilities that come with Board membership or be bound by Board decisions." These two expelled directors:

    "have failed to abide by the majority decision of the Board that all Board Members consent to Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) checks";

    "were offered a number of chances to apply for the checks, but they failed to consent";

    caused a complete breakdown of trust and confidence in them by the remainder of the Board "by them not abiding by majority decisions of the Board, for example at the AGM in November 2007"; and

    "have been found in breach of the Code of Conduct for Board Members due to their unacceptable behaviour towards other Board Members and TMO staff".

    The letter went on to note that the supporters of the two expelled directors called an EGM to question the decision. The Board seeks to uphold the expulsions and concludes that it wants to "ensure that the TMO Board continues to build on the achievement of the 3 stars in 2006 and secure the future of the TMO for you."

    2. Tenant Management failures amid comprehensive notification. I notified the Audit Commission Housing Inspectorate with two Emails on 2nd and 12th May 2003 about the tenant management problems. This was monitored carefully by those carrying out the surveillance technology and subjected to suppression and extreme abuse. Cataract surgery followed in early June and late July 2003 subjected to this extreme abuse. Six faxes were sent to the Prime Minister in May/June about this abuse since it was so bad. Copies were provided to an extensive distribution list including the Leader of the Council. The heat wave of early August 2003 then hit while the central heating was fully on at the Lancaster West Estate. My emergency correspondence about this on 11th August and 12 August 2003 went without a reply.

    My position always has been that the TMO has not deserved the three-star rating by the Audit Commission as a result of the July 2006 inspection since this was achieved by means of fraudulent misrepresentation of its management. I further did not support the Audit Commission's award of a two-star rating in the July 2003 inspection for the same reasons. Nothing has changed in these years, and the situation has degenerated getting worse as I continue to document and report.

    Correspondence to the Audit Commission Housing Inspectorate and others including the Leader of the Council

    In May 2003 I sent a couple Emails (2nd and 12th May 2003) to the Audit Commisson Housing Inspectorate regarding the forthcoming housing inspection indicating the reasons why I could not participate and would not have an "open door" since I was subject to extensive surveillance and punishment from tenant management which had been in effect for almost five years at that point. I have made these communications and another related item available on my web site at Abuse of Power for £36 Million.

    I provided several photographs of tenant management failures regarding serious safety and health issues which are available on this same web site page. I provided a comprehensive written summary at that point of the failures which I had noted and had been bringing to the attention of tenant management for years along with the included photographs to show exactly what was still happening. You will see that the second Email was widely distributed with its distribution list at its end which is specified in the paragraph after next. All those in key positions of responsibility were notified almost five years ago after this activity had been underway for five years.

    Cataract surgery in June/July 2003 and correspondence to the Prime Minister and others including the Leader of the Council

    The inspection occurred in July 2003. I had also had cataract surgery on one eye at a time in early June and late July 2003 with about a five to six week recovery period after each eye surgery during which I was subjected to very intense and continuous abuse 24/7 from those using the surveillance technology to do as much harm as possible hoping to destroy the benefit of the cataract surgery. The surveillance technology was also used to abuse me while I was on the operating table since this was performed under a local anaesthetic while I was awake. The intention was to create damage during the eye surgery by causing me to move.

    This situation was so extremely bad that I sent six faxes to the Prime Minister from 15th May to 11th June 2003 concerning the Cataract Surgery 9th June 2003 Resulting From 58 Months of Surveillance Technology. Copies of these faxes were also sent to a distribution list including President George Bush due to the presence of US government agents who had been "invited" here as thugs to carry out lethal surveillance technology abuse, Gordon Brown as Chancellor of the Exchequer now Prime Minister, Secretaries of State for the Home Office, Health, Works and Pensions and Trade and Industry, the Chief Executives of St Mary's and St Charles Hospital, Western Eye Hospital General Manager, my Member of Parliament, the Leader of the Kensington & Chelsea Council since the EMB and TMO were both Council creations for which he was responsible and 16 media recipients. This distribution list can be seen in the web page for these faxes/Emails whose link is noted in the first sentence of this paragraph.

    Early August 2003 heat wave and emergency corrspondence to the Leader of the Council and TMO Chief Executive

    During the first week of August 2003, there was the worst heat wave in the UK for a considerable length of time (perhaps since 'time out of mind') that has been estimated as causing the death of some 2,000 people. The central heating was on permanently in the Lancaster West Estate causing the temperature to be even more elevated in my flat. I sent an emergency Email to the Leader of the Council enclosing a letter sent to the TMO's Chief Executive on 11th August 2003. One Email was sent to the Leader of the Council as a follow up 24 hours later including copies to the media since I received no reply and the heat was still on. There was no subsequent reply to this second emergency notification either.

    I included this problem in further correspondence to the TMO Chief Executive at the beginning of September after the excessive heat of August 2003 was over and finally received a reply toward the middle of October which was useless. My Emails to the Audit Commission Housing Inspectorate in May 2003 were unbelievably accurate in characterising the failures of tenant management which persisted throughout the summer, during the Audit Commission Housing Inspectorate inspection and, most especially, throughout the early August 2003 heat wave.

    Rather than solve problems tenant management and others tried to suppress their reporting by the most extreme methods possible in the interest of image management

    Evidently, tenant management did not want to acknowledge the central heating problem until the result of the inspection was accomplished with an award of two-stars to the TMO. Thus, thousands of people's lives were put at risk in the early August 2003 heatwave at the Lancaster West Estate. To not even respond to emergency Emails/letter at a time like that is one of the greatest abuses of power and deliberately disregard for the safety and health of tenants and residents imaginable. It was, however, consistent with my experience for over a decade so far.

    All the while, of course, I was subjected to 24/7 second-by-second surveillance technology abuse that sought to do as much damage to me as possible continuing what I described above. Those using the surveillance technology were not going to report the problems about which the knew, and I was reporting. They wanted these problems to persist so that maximum harm could be done to me during the heat wave with the central heating on while I was recovering from cataract surgery on my second eye. This has been the same for the past decade. Nothing has changed, and this abuse continues while I write this web journal entry.

    Tenant management has instead planned, prepared, constructed and managed 38 business units in the Barandon Road at the Lancaster West Estate at the expense of the 900 residential units

    During this period of several years including the summer of 2003 and after, there occurred the preparation for and construction followed by the renting of 38 business units in the Barandon Road known as Baseline. At a cost of over £1 million time, attention, energy and money were misdirected for years toward the creation of these 38 business units by tenant management while the needs of the the 900 or so residential units in the Lancaster West Estate were deliberately disregarded.

    Naturally, these business units require attention as well on an ongoing basis. This served the greed, glory and power of the few in charge at the expense of the thousands of residents calling into question the very purpose of tenant management. Anyone like me who was going to address these problems at their source would be subject to intense abuse as I have been 24/7 for almost a decade to suppress these devastating revelations. Those in power remained so by virtue of the violent abuse of surveillance technology in the hands of the criminal and antisocial elements.

    3. 12.03.2008 Leader of the Council Email. Today I received a letter from the Leader of the Council which appeared to be sent to each and every TMO member with regard to next Tuesday's Emergency General Meeting. I sent a reply to the Leader of the Council by Email immediately. Here's a copy of that Email:

    ---------- Forwarded Message ----------

    Subject: Your letter of 12th March 2008 re TMO Emergency General Meeting (EGM) Tuesday, 18th March 2008
    Date: Friday 14 March 2008 17:08
    From: Gary D Chance
    To: Leader of the Council, TMO CEO, TMO Company Secretary, news24@bbc.co.uk

    Cllr Merrick Cockell
    Leader
    Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea
    Town Hall
    Horton Street
    London W8

    Dear Mr Cockell

    I was quite amazed to get this letter from you today in regard to this Tenant Management Organisation (TMO) EGM next Tuesday and assume that it is part of a general mailing to all TMO members.

    Your concluding statement:

    "A period of disarray is likely to prevent your Board and Chief Executive directing their attention to essential reforms that will lead to better services and improved housing quality."

    opens two questions of great concern to me:

    1. In my twelve years of residency since May 1996 just after the TMO was founded c April 1996 I have not experienced anything that could be construed as adequate management by the TMO. The opposite has been my experience about which I have dealt in essential correspondence during these years.

    2. I take the statement you are making which is consistent with other written statements concerning this matter from the TMO as blackmail. Are you going to deny essential management services to the social housing stock in the Royal Borough if you do not get your way?

    A. My big problem with this issue concerns the paucity of information which has been provided for voting purposes. Therefore, I have voted against the TMO recommendations for the following reasons:

    (1) I know nothing about the content of the petition presented by TMO members which the Board wants to [include] [for] presentation and discussion. I cannot vote for the [inclusion] of a petition about which I know nothing and have, therefore, voted against such [inclusion] of this petition. It should [not] be presented and discussed. It should have been circulated to every member [beforehand for preparation purposes]. What is being hidden?

    (2) Two directors have been removed from the Board and as members of the TMO.

    (a) Failure to consent to a criminal records background check is most serious, but I do not quite understand why this has become such an issue.

    Anyone in such a position can be supervised if they should come in contact with vulnerable people pending the results of such a background check. Why is consent required when it is part of the requirements of being a director of the TMO? Isn't this in the hands of the Board and the TMO administration to carry out such checks? Further, why isn't this done as a prerequisite for candidacy as a director?

    I am amazed that the TMO Board would take such a stern position when it can do this itself and should be required to do this regardless of whether the person being checked consents or not. This stunning tough stance flies in the face of my experience after reporting child abuse from the flat below mine almost ten years ago on Tuesday, 5th May 1998, to the Chief Executive of the Council.

    Following police intervention on Friday, 8th May 1998, these child abusers carried out an intense harassment campaign against me from a public declaration to do so on Monday, 11th May 1998. They were provided with surveillance technology in mid-August 1998 to augment this harassment campaign which has gone on 24/7 up to and including this writing driven by the mother of the abused children.

    Where is the TMO concern and tough stance on the child abuse which actually exists in the community to preserve and protect those who report such child abuse? Instead the TMO has knowingly allowed such continuous violent suppressive abuse to be carried out against me 24/7 despite a significant amount of correspondence to the three consecutive TMO Chief Executives.

    How can the TMO Board carry out this action against two directors for a relatively simple background check when it knowingly tolerates child abuse to continue with surveillance technology used by child abusers to thwart the reporting of this ongoing violence against children and adults for almost a decade?

    (b) These two directors have lost the trust and confidence of the Board by not abiding by the majority decisions of the Board with an example cited for the Board meeting in November 2007 without any specifics provided.

    No facts are provided pertaining to the issues with which these directors disagreed. Only general statements were provided that these two directors behaved in an intimidating, domineering and aggressive fashion as well as expressing adverse views about the competence of some board members.

    They did not treat TMO officers with respect at meetings while acting contrary to the interests of the TMO at meetings. They were noted as acting in an intimidating and threatening manner towards a number of elderly or vulnerable residents when seeking votes for board elections in June or acting contrary to the interests of the TMO at meetings of the Senior Citizens Forum in October and November.

    I do not know what was said and am only provided these personal attacks by the TMO against these two directors by means of general statements. There is a whole range of varying degrees of such kinds of behaviour that may or may not be considered for such action as has been taken and is sought by reinforcement from the TMO membership.

    Further, the abuse carried out against me by those using surveillance technology against me 24/7 for almost a decade nonstop goes beyond anything that is humanly conscionable. This abuse has caused me grievous personal injury and continues to attempt to cause my death. Almost all Human Rights Articles have been breached with regard to my treatment during these past almost ten years.

    Yet, the TMO with full knowledge of this activity including participation in it has allowed it to continue 24/7 in order to prevent me from communicating this extreme criminal activity being carried out against me. I took the exceptional step to write to each individual Board member two years ago about this situation and was further subjected to an attempt to intimidate me by threatening to reroute any further similar communications to the Company Secretary. This was provided to me in writing by the then TMO Company Secretary.

    All I was doing was trying to save my life from the abuse being provided by tenant management, and for this I was being officially and further blocked by the officers of the TMO.

    I have further brought the issue of corporate governance to the attention of the TMO Chair, Juliet Rawlings, who replied to my correspondence and indicated that further comments to me about corporate governance would be forthcoming.

    I have received nothing further in this regard despite the fact that there is a requirement to engage in communication regarding all issues of corporate governance which are raised. There was a failure to do this with me and a failure to do this in this instance where the Board now seeks to banish those who are raising the issues.

    I cannot support the Board's recommendation in these instances and have voted against having these two directors removed from the Board and removed as [TMO] members.

    The TMO Board is demonstrating to me a double standard that I cannot support. With respect to its concern for protecting the vulnerable of any age, it has taken actions which are arbitrary and capricious when it suits it power purposes at the Board level without regard to a fundamental standard of such protection applied objectively in the community.

    I believe that dissent on a Board of Directors is a healthy activity and should be encouraged not suppressed and squashed with a brutal dismissal such as appears to be the case here. I don't know what was said, and it might very well be a simple matter of one group of directors no liking another group or, in this case, pair. The case has not been made without the facts being presented. General statements of an ad hominem character do not suffice.

    [NB "It is most commonly used to refer specifically to the ad hominem abusive, or argumentum ad personam, which consists of criticizing or personally attacking an argument's proponent in an attempt to discredit that argument. It is also used when an opponent is unable to find fault with an argument, yet for various reasons, the opponent disagrees with it. Many times, an opponent's use of an ad hominem attack is an indication that the opponent realizes that the argument itself is correct and cannot be refuted."

    ["The argumentum ad hominem is a genetic fallacy and red herring, and is most often (but not always) an appeal to emotion."

    [See Wikipedia ad hominem. I add this definition information here for the web journal entry since I am subject to this kind of verbal abuse daily from those using the surveillance technology. They never deal with facts and evidence but only personal abuse in general terms because they are trying to manufacture a hoax and incite others where they realise that what I describe is "correct and cannot be refuted." In fact, I've said this thousands and thousands of times over the years during the past decade.]

    The matter of the criminal background check can be taken care of as described above.

    (3) "That the meeting requests the TMO Board to continue to act in the best interests of the company."

    I can't support this at all and have voted against it. The objective of the TMO is the best interests of the tenants and residents of the Council's social housing and not its own interests which might very well be the personal interests of certain board members who can control and dominate the entire Board of Directors.

    I have not noted in the past that the TMO has acted in the best interests of the community and tenants which they purport to represent through the Board of Directors of the TMO. My experience has been exactly the opposite.

    Concluding Comments:

    I believe that it is the Council's responsibility to ensure that its social housing is managed according to basic standards of safety and health for all concerned. It is the Council who is ultimately responsible which is explicitly noted by the fact that the Council has created two separate but overlapping and competing entities to accomplish this responsibility: the TMO and the Lancaster West Estate Management Board (EMB). Both of this entities have failed in practise and as organisations as can be seen by these and other events.

    If, as Leader of the Council, you perceive that that the TMO and/or the EMB are failing to provide the essential management services, you must assure that the Council then takes over such management forthwith to preserve and protect lives and property.

    It is not your position to blackmail members of the TMO into voting for such proposals by stating that a failure to do so will result in disarray which will deprive tenants and residents of proper management for their homes.

    I have called on you earlier to takeover these organisations as failed organisations based upon my decade long experience of such failure first hand which has been communicated extensively and continuously to all people in positions of authority throughout this decade.

    My position remains the same. The TMO as it is currently constituted cannot and will not manage the properties properly. There is an overriding concern for power and sustaining it. I consider the activities of the TMO and EMB to be criminal by nature of the conduct specifics which I have communicated extensively for more than the past decade.

    I do not believe that these organisations will improve the management and will hinder the so-called essential reforms being considered for this year about which I am sceptical as a solution to the existing problems. Tenant management of whatever shape or colour is a failure because it has been predicated upon a foundation which cannot sustain a standard of proper management, heath and safety for everyone who resides in the Council's social housing.

    I believe that the Council will have to act with dispatch to take over the management of the social housing base from these tenant management organisations in order to ensure that the well being of everyone is preserved according to objective standards agreed upon and supported by the democratic rule of law which is absent at present in the Council's social housing management.

    Yours sincerely

    Gary D Chance

    0 Comment(s) / Post Comment

    Wednesday the 12th of March 2008

    11:59:59 PM

    British talent successful in the US appears to be resented and osctracised in the UK. Why is this? More on House with Hugh Laurie's apparent "snub" in the UK. House is relevant to surveillance technology: they invade people's homes!


    Web Journal Wednesday 12th March 2008
    • Why is this happening to the best from Britain?. It has happened to Minnie Drive as well some fifteen years ago. Does anyone remember Chatsky at the Almeida theatre in March and April 1993 where its hero "tells the truth and is branded a lunatic?"
    • Being rich 'should be celebrated'. It doesn't matter how the wealth was accumulated as long as its there, huh? Sorry folks, I'd rather be broke and honest, thank you very much. What happens to those who speak the truth like Chatsky?

    1. Laurie 'snubbed' after US success. Having commented upon House, recently this added item appeared yesterday about Hugh Laurie who plays the part of Dr House. Why is it that success has a negative impact on Britains in their homeland? What is it about the British who reject those who go overseas and achieve success?

    BBC News Tuesday, 11 March 2008, 10:36 GMT

    Laurie 'snubbed' after US success

    Hugh Laurie
    Hugh Laurie has won two Golden Globes for his role in House

    Actor Hugh Laurie has said Britain has turned its back on him since he became a success in US TV serial House.

    The award-winning star told the Radio Times the hours on the show are "relentless" and he has not been offered any work in his home country.

    "The door slammed behind me, and that's it. There's a notion that I've sold out," said the performer.

    Laurie added that he would "love to do anything" with Stephen Fry again, his former Jeeves and Wooster co-star.

    Laurie 'snubbed' after US success

    2. Why is this happening to the best from Britain?. This has happened to Minnie Driver too as I describe below. Does anyone remember Chatsky at the Almeida theatre in March and April 1993 or its short tour afterwards?

    And, now I get to tell my Minnie Driver story such as it is. Somewhere around April 1993 I went up the Almeida Theatre in Islington to see its current production. Whatever they were doing was worth seeing. I considered this the best theatre in London which did about six weeks of a play before moving onto the next one during the season. It's a small theatre seating about 300. Jonathan Kent and Ian Mcdiarmid as joint artistic directors made this small theatre what it was attracting talent from all over the world to work at equity minimum producing years of astonishing theatre from 1990 to 2001.

    The play at that time was Chatsky with Colin Firth, Jemma Redgrave, Dinsdale Landon, Minnie Driver along with a very large cast. I had no idea what Chatsky was all about which is another good reason to have seen whatever the Almeida was producing in order to learn. I now see that this Russian play is billed as "the Russian Hamlet." This production was the world premiere of a new verse translation by Anthony Burgess. "The briefest of summaries: the hero of the play, Chatsky, tells the truth and is branded a lunatic."

    Usually, I go to the theatre somewhat early to have something to eat/drink and read the programme thoroughly. In the case of Chatsky this turned out to be rewarding to learn what this production was all about. The Almeida has a small bar with a bit of food available and tables in a small room between the bar itself and the theatre. As I eventually later learned, the "stage door" as it was is in the passage next to the theatre entrance, but I never thought it to be such. It led down into the basement where all the actors shared whatever small space was available. It was indeed quite small all around, but this only contributed to its intimacy, quality and extraordinary productions.

    On this particular April 1993 evening, I got my programme along with my ticket at the box office, a glass of white wine at the bar and settled at one of the tables by the front window in the small room. There were only three other people in this room sitting at a table facing me whom I thought to be other theatre goers doing as I was doing a bit before the performance. Only after the performance began did I realise that these three had been Minnie Driver, Jemma Redgrave and Colin Firth. I did not recognise them and had no idea who they were. Had I known, I would have sat somewhere else completely out of sight.

    As it was, they went on jabbering away about whatever while I concentrated on reading the programme thoroughly while enjoying my glass of wine. I might have had a snack as well. It was only after the performance began when I saw an actress with this huge head of hair start speaking the first lines from a chair on the left side of the stage, did I realise that this was Minnie Driver who played the role of the maid. She was stunningly good throughout the play. Naturally, after that I also recognised Colin Firth and Jemma Redgrave. I was stunned that I had not recognised them and had in some sense invaded their private space before the performance to my great regret. If I had only known . . . but then this was the Almeida and very, very small as noted.

    Minnie Drive was so good that I made a point of looking up her name again in the programme afterwards noting that this was her first London stage appearance. I thought that certainly she was on her way to success with that talent and ability. I enjoyed Jonathan Kent's production of Chatsky so much that I sent him a letter saying so and noting that he was able to not only bring in established talent but could also identify those who were quite gifted when they were just starting. At least that is the way I felt about what was happening at the Almeida. They did some spectacular productions in those days, and it was a marvellous theatre during a very rough financial time in the early 1990s in London.

    Although I kept waiting to see Minnie Driver appear somewhere once again which I felt was bound to happen, she apparently never did on this side of the Atlantic. Not that she hasn't been back to do some interesting work here, for the most part she has lived and worked in the US. When I went looking for information about Chatsky on the Internet, I found something about it that was connected with a Colin Firth appreciation web site. Out of the six major newspaper reviews about Chatsky on this web site only one of them, The Sunday Times, mentioned Minnie Driver noting that her performance was excellent.

    It's a terrible shame that she was not recognised for her talent at that time. I suspect that one of the great problems with the theatre as opposed to cinema revolves around the fact that unless a play runs for a long time or the reviews include rave notices, a stunning talent like Minnie Driver can be overlooked.

    Another example is Diana Rigg's performance in Medea at the Almeida again directed by Jonathan Kent. It had closed after its six weeks or so in production in September/October 1992 when she won the Evening Standard's Best Actress award. It was not possible to go and see her in her smashing portrayal of Medea. The following autumn in 1993 her role in Medea did come to the West End for four months before she went to New York in the winter of 1994 and won the Tony award for Best Actress there as well. So, it's easy to see how an outstanding talent can go unseen or a newcomer can go unnoticed.

    The great problem is why should someone be ostracised in Britain for success across the Atlantic?

    ---------- Forwarded Message ----------

    Subject: "Laurie 'snubbed' after US success" Why is this happening to the best from Britain?
    Date: Tuesday 11 March 2008 14:03
    From: Gary D Chance
    To: e24@bbc.co.uk, news24@bbc.co.uk

    It's a shame that really talented people migrate to the US, become successful and then are criticised/ostracised in their native UK.

    I'm a dedicated fan of "House" and Hugh Laurie which surprises me since generally I don't think that television programming like this has had much to offer, but "House" is an exception, and Hugh Laurie makes it happen along with the writers and other cast members. "House" is a thoroughly delightful, enjoyable, outrageous [and outrageously funny] and even educational programme

    What's happened to creativity in this country including the BBC? Remember "Doctor in the House?" That was a marvellous series along with many others that just don't exist today. Why is UK talent left "fronting QI?"

    The same thing happened to Minnie Driver. She was sensational in her first London appearance in a play, "Chatsky," at the Almeida in 1993. She then disappeared off the radar until resurfacing in the US. More recently she has said in an interview that she could not find work in the UK for a year and went abroad where the work was. She too has been criticised for going to the US where she has become successful.

    I was pleased to see him approaching the Baftas and being interviewed on News24 recently because I had locked into "House." I must admit that I was surprised to see him without a cane and not limping as he came up the red carpet. Shows you how we are conditioned by the characters these actors create. He said that he was a private person which is understandable.

    It's too bad that he could not continue to do well in this country, but I think you have to look deeper into the creative process and what is getting into production to discover why the best are going where the work is. The quality of "House" is outstanding. More power to him for doing it.

    3. Being rich 'should be celebrated'. For the last decade this government has allowed surveillance technology to be used 24/7 indefinitely against enterprise activity to ensure that nothing gets done. This surveillance technology was and is in the hands of those ho-hopers whose only ability is violence against children and other defenceless people especially those made defenceless by surveillance technology. This is what this government really means by the so-called "entrepreneur." It is destructive behaviour carried out in the community to ensure that no one succeeds at anything. Thus, the bullying no-hopers crush everyone else.

    BBC News Wednesday, 12 March 2008, 08:18 GMT

    Being rich 'should be celebrated'

    John Hutton
    There should be no cap on success, Mr Hutton says

    The UK should "celebrate the fact that people can be enormously successful in this country", Business Secretary John Hutton has said.

    In a speech he argued that "more millionaires" are needed, calling freedom to get rich "a good thing".

    The goal that "no-one should be left behind" should not mean no-one can get ahead, he said.

    But the Tories called the comments a "weak attempt" to appeal to an "exasperated business community".

    Mr Hutton's Progress lecture came on the eve of the Budget and as ministers announced plans for an "enterprise academy".

    . . .

    "We want more millionaires in Britain not less. Our overarching goal that no-one should get left behind must not become translated into a stultifying sense that no-one should be allowed to get ahead."

    For the Conservatives, shadow business secretary Alan Duncan said: "This is a weak attempt by Labour to soothe an increasingly exasperated business community.

    "John Hutton waxes lyrical about his 'instincts' for aspiration and wealth-creation, but the irony is that over the last nine months his government has gone to great lengths to stifle British enterprise."

    Being rich 'should be celebrated'

    4. Gordon Brown committed to entrepreneur activity?. Be careful when speaking the truth. Like Chatsky it can result in being dubbed a lunatic especially by this Labour government's apparatchiks. It is necessary to get Gordon Brown and his cabinet ministers to define exactly what they mean by "entrepreneur."

    In my direct experience it means the no-hopers feeding of the productive using surveillance technology as a weapon to bully and destroy human and entrepreneurial activity so that the no-hopers without any ability, training, education or experience can effectively use violence to destroy those whom they do not like and rise up as king/queen of the dog pile.

    It also means that those elected as directors and Chair of the Lancaster West Estate can exploit their position at the expense of thousands of people to construct 38 business units at a cost of over £1 million while neglecting the tenants whom they are supposed to serve by properly managing the 900 or so residential units. Using surveillance technology in a violently abusive manner against anyone like me who addresses the real problems by speaking the truth results in my being labelled as "potty," "psychotic" and other equally nonsensically infantile name calling epithets.

    The antisocial and criminal elements carry out this activity serving the interest of the so-called "entrepreneur" who seeks to make money at the expense of everyone else without providing standards with respect to safety and health. At a tenant management Annual General Meeting, the local MP, Karen Buck, ended her speech with a call to arms: ". . . and everyone can be rich." Well, we've seen what this Labour party government means by that with its Cash for Honours and having to provide cash for secondary school applications and acceptance at a school of the parents' choice.

    If you've got the dosh, you'll get the posh.

    ---------- Forwarded Message ---------

    Subject: Gordon Brown committed to entrepreneur activity? Nonsense.
    Date: Tuesday 11 March 2008 08:45
    From: Gary D Chance
    To: news24@bbc.cos.uk

    Why has my enterprise activity been destroyed for the last decade by this government's abuse of surveillance technology against me 24/7?

    This Prime Minister and this government has not stopped this activity which is displayed by its own actions that it has nothing to do with the entrepreneur and individual business activity in this country.

    This is a prime example of this government and its Prime Minister speaking one thing but doing exactly the opposite.

    It is frightening when the truth is known, but you do not report the whole truth do you?

    When the full truth about this government, enterprise activity of all kinds will shrink and disappear out of fear.

    No one will be able to function with any trust and confidence that there is privacy and confidentiality in this country. It just does not exist.

    When it is wiped out in one instance like this for a decade without stopping it despite all my reporting, it is wiped out everywhere.

    What do you think will cause the next depression?

    5. Grim prospect for economic growth. It's even worse than anyone begins to imagine. By glossing over everything for so long, it will all come undone at the same time. Image management has its day of reckoning just as did Enron, World.com and their ilk. The UK government is the Enron of governments skating faster and faster to keep from breaking through the thin ice. Anyone government who uses surveillance technology indefinitely against people and enterprise activity as has occurred to me for almost a decade is destined to bring about a massive collapse. Any organisation or government who cannot assimilate a critical evaluation properly and tries to squash it will come a cropper.

    BBC News Wednesday, 12 March 2008, 14:24 GMT

    Grim prospect for economic growth

    By Steve Schifferes
    Economics reporter, BBC News

    READ THE BUDGET IN FULL

    Most computers will open this document automatically, but you may need Adobe Reader

    The UK economy is facing its biggest slowdown since Labour came to power - and the biggest rise in public borrowing, the chancellor has said.

    Chancellor Alistair Darling warned that economic growth in 2008 and 2009 would be slower than the government expected.

    He cut his growth forecast for 2008 to 1.75%-2.25%, well below the 2.5%-3% predicted in last year's Budget.

    And he warned public borrowing would rise to £43bn next year, rather than falling to £36bn as he had hoped.

    . . .

    What is not in doubt is that the slowing economy has had a significant effect on government borrowing.

    Mr Darling said the budget gap would rise sharply from £38bn this year to £43bn next year, and would still be at £38bn in 2009-10.

    This is a sharp change from assumptions made just six months ago in the pre-Budget report, when borrowing was predicted to fall to £36bn, and £13bn worse than the Budget prediction just one year ago.

    The rise in borrowing means that it will take longer for the government's finances to return to surplus, and meet its fiscal rules.

    The chancellor said this meant that fiscal policy "will support" the economic recovery by running a bigger deficit in order to underpin spending and keep the economy ticking over.

    Grim prospect for economic growth

    6. 'borrow to get ourselves out of this'. The government's borrowing during the forthcoming downturn will make it all the worse. It is caught between a Northern Rock and a very hard other place. This government will sink, sink, sink while the horrified population watches. Any government who uses surveillance technology indefinitely against anyone is a government that has no legitimacy in democratic terms. It is a totalitarian government, and such governments invariably collapse.

    ---------- Forwarded Message ----------

    Subject: "We're going to borrow to get ourselves out of this . . ." said [a BBC commentator] commenting on what the government (Chancellor) has indicated he's doing.
    Date: Wednesday 12 March 2008 14:40
    From: Gary D Chance
    To: news24@bbc.co.uk

    He noted that there was an acknowledgement from the government of the world economic risk scenario, but he went on to note that the government has not indicated how this might effect the UK.

    Instead, the government has tried to back foot the opposition by "borrowing" through the economic problems whatever they might be.

    Therefore, the government will be squeezing the private sector out of the capital markets.

    Therefore, the government's demand for borrowed funds will put upward pressure on interest rates.

    Thereore, the government will be inflationary by sustaining its spending and not cutting spending.

    The brunt of the blow from the economic risk will be borne by the private sector which will suffer, suffer, suffer.

    The government, however, will have excellent macro numbers to absolve itself of the problems.

    'It's you lot who are going to have big problems, but we will be able to go to the voters with a glossy macro scenario,' the government will be saying.

    Will it work for the government's re-election?

    I think not. The opposition will have the decimated private sector to vote out this Labour government and vote in the next.

    0 Comment(s) / Post Comment

    Tuesday the 11th of March 2008

    11:51:56 PM

    "Proconsul" Fallon has resigned taking early retirement. Will Bush now try to invade Iran before the the election before he leaves office? What are the implications if he does so about power in the White House? What will John McCain do?


    Web Journal Tuesday 11th March 2008
    • Central banks fight credit crisis. Massive US election year intervention in the financial markets by central banks in North America and Europe means the problems are very serious indeed. Nothing like this has ever happened before. Does this reflect a desperate effort to push on a string?

    1. US Mid-East commander steps down. The news hit the wires tonight that the Central Command's commander had resigned. A US "Proconsul" [see Dana Priest's The Mission, W W Norton, New York London, 2004 about how the US military has divided the world for its military and foreign policy initiatives: Chapter 3: The Cincs: Proconsuls to the Empire) was forced out over his dissenting views about invading Iran. What will follow?

    BBC News Tuesday, 11 March 2008, 22:13 GMT

    US Mid-East commander steps down

    William Fallon (archive)
    Adm Fallon became head of US Central Command in March 2007

    The commander of US forces in Iraq and Afghanistan, Admiral William Fallon, is to retire from his post early.

    He cited the "embarrassing situation and public perception of differences between my views and administration policy" as the reason for retiring.

    He was the subject of a recent article by Esquire magazine, which said he was opposed to the use of force against Iran over its nuclear programme.

    The 63-year-old admiral became head of the US Central Command a year ago.

    US Mid-East commander steps down

    2. The Man Between War and Peace. Here's the full Esquire article that summed up Admiral Fallon's position and liability to the Bush Administration.

    Esquire March 11, 2008, 3:11 PM

    The Man Between War and Peace

    By Thomas P.M. Barnett

    As the White House talked up conflict with Iran, the head of U.S. Central Command, William "Fox" Fallon, talked it down. Now he has resigned.

    The Man Between War and Peace

    3. Central banks fight credit crisis. Bush is making every effort to stave off any election problems before the November elections to keep the Republicans in office. In the process he has pushed through fiscal and monetary policies of unprecedented proportions and of such a magnitude that the ongoing liquidity crisis is seen for what it is: massive and most likely intractable. He does not care what he does as long as he can keep the Republicans in the White House. The question arises about whether he will invade Iran to make it imperative to remain in power by a fabricated state of emergency?

    Don't forget that Richard Nixon put the US military on war footing for an entire month until he was forced to stand down because he was using up the war machine. He did this for political reasons vis-a-vis the Soviet Union in October 1969. See Seymour Hersh's book The Price of Power: Kissinger in the Nixon White House, Summit Books, New York, 1983, pps 124, 125 and footnote for a description of this Def Con I alert.

    Also read in the same book Seymour Hersh's description of the Christmas bombing of Hanoi in Chapter 40: Vietnam: the Christmas Bombs. After he had been re-elected president in early November 1972, Nixon proceeded to bomb Hanoi. In a footnote on page 618 he describes that "Fifteen B-52s were shot down over North Vietnam during the twelve days of bombing with ninety-three American airmen officially listed as missing." Some US air crews refused to fly. This was hidden from the American people.

    Seymour Hersh goes on to describe in the footnote on pps 618 and 619 how the airmen in the USAF Security Service at the 6990th Security Squadron at Torii Station on Okinawa refused to monitor the SAM sites an behalf of the B-52s bombing North Vietnam. They knew by their intelligence activity that North Vietnam was standing down with a ceasefire from 1st November 1972. Nixon bombed North Vietnam anyway after he was re-elected. These airmen were court martialled later as he describes. I urge everyone to read this book.

    It is highly possible that Bush will pull the same stunt with respect to Iran if the Republicans are re-elected to the White House in the early November election this year. He could easily decide to bomb Iran as Nixon bombed North Vietnam knowing full well that the North Vietnamese were standing down. It is easy for me to see that Bush with the agreement of President elect John McCain would take the US to war against Iran as part of the middle east war effort once the election is settled. Dumping Admiral Fallon as is noted above is one step in this direction.

    BBC News Tuesday, 11 March 2008, 21:01 GMT

    Central banks fight credit crisis

    Federal Reserve building
    Five central banks have announced co-ordinated action

    The world's largest central banks have launched their latest co-ordinated action to calm jittery credit markets.

    The US Federal Reserve, the European Central Bank and central banks in the UK, Canada and Switzerland will inject billions of dollars into money markets.

    The news cheered investors and US stocks surged more than 3% - their biggest one-day gain in five years.

    The injection of more than $200bn is aimed at easing the credit crunch and its impact on the wider economy.

    On Wall Street, the benchmark Dow Jones industrial average soared 416.66 points, or 3.55%, to close at 12,156.81.

    In London, the FTSE 100 index of leading shares ended 1% higher.

    Central banks fight credit crisis

    0 Comment(s) / Post Comment

    Monday the 10th of March 2008

    08:35:06 PM

    Obstruction attempt in Jersey by former police revealed. Five US military personnel killed by suicide bomber on the street in Baghdad. Why aren't they using the "see through" technology being touted by the UK government for security?


    Web Journal Monday 10th March 2008
    • Ex-police 'thwarted' Jersey probe. Jersey cover up tentacles continue to reach out with former police officers now alleged to be obstructing the investigation to cover up their "failure" in the past.
    • Baghdad bomb kills five US troops. US military on the street in Baghdad are targeted by a suicide bomber. This threat and its execution will never go away regardless of any "surge."
    • Camera 'looks' through clothing. Here's another "Son of Tempest" emerging into the public domain. It detects the radiation emitted by the human body and maps it. Those object which do not emit electromagnetic radiation are observed in their absence. Why isn't the US military using this in Iraq to detect suicide bombers?

    1. Ex-police 'thwarted' Jersey probe. First, there was the intimidation of the abused children now adults to try to keep them from telling their stories. Now, apparently former police officers have been trying to obstruct the current investigation to "hide" what they did not do in earlier days. It sounds like the cover up is more than valid and still alive and well explaining why this went on for decades.

    BBC News Monday, 10 March 2008, 13:17 GMT

    Ex-police 'thwarted' Jersey probe

    Examination of the cellar
    Forensic experts will start searching a second cellar this week

    The man leading the investigation into alleged abuse at a former children's home in Jersey says retired officers have tried to obstruct the inquiry.

    Deputy Chief Officer Lenny Harper told the BBC some had attempted to cover up their own failure to investigate complaints of child abuse.

    He said his priority remained the alleged victims, but he would also look into complaints against the police.

    More than 100 people claim to have been abused there in the 1970s and 1980s.

    Up to 25 people are suspected of having taken part in sexual and physical assaults at the Haut de la Garenne children's home dating back to the 1960s.

    Ex-police 'thwarted' Jersey probe

    2. Baghdad bomb kills five US troops. As long as the likes of Colonel Vine and Lt Harry Bird continue to carry on as extreme terrorists themselves reflecting the US military and US Marines activity throughout the world, terrorists will be created. These will target the US military.

    While this is expected in Baghdad, this on the street foot attack demonstrates that whatever is done to counter terrorist activity in the war zone will have no effect as long as those elements of the US military behave in the same way in the rest of the world as I've directly experienced as a target for over seven years in London. It's an ever escalating war of terrorists carrying out their attacks back and forth. Anyone who talks about democracy in the West will appear to be naive and ignorant of this reality.

    When the US military/US Marines conduct themselves publicly in this manner in London, it is irrational to expect that London and the UK will not be a high priority target. Continuing to attack me only makes the situation worse by demonstrating the real character of the US military/US Marines that creates a like terrorist response. Such a destruction of democracy and its institutions by the US military/US Marines in London destroys any and all pretension to values other than that of the terrorists.

    BBC News Monday, 10 March 2008, 15:42 GMT

    Baghdad bomb kills five US troops

    US troops on foot patrol in Baghdad, 10 March 2008
    Attacks on US soldiers had dropped since last summer's troop surge

    Five US soldiers have been killed by a suicide bomb attack while on patrol in Baghdad, the US army has said.

    Three other troops and an Iraqi interpreter were also injured in the blast, an army statement said.

    The attack is one of the most deadly strikes on US forces in Baghdad since last summer's US troop surge.

    It came hours after a Sunni tribal leader, Thaer Ghadban al-Karkhi, was killed in a suicide bomb attack at his house near Baquba, north of Baghdad.

    Most vulnerable

    Iraqi army spokesman Maj Gen Qasim Ata told AFP news agency: "A terrorist wearing an explosive vest blew himself against a dismounted US patrol.

    The US military told the BBC that the attack took place in the Mansour district of the capital.

    Baghdad bomb kills five US troops

    3. Camera 'looks' through clothing. Actually, according to this article this is an astronomer's instrument for receiving the electromagnetic radiation from distant material in space. This is not a "camera" and emits no radiation. It just receives and decodes it. Why isn't the US military using this in places like Iraq to detect suicide bombers?

    The human body as I've been experiencing can be subjected to brainwave monitor and feedback surveillance technology because the brain emits electromagnetic radiation. The human body as a whole does this too, and this technology picks that up noting the gaps were it is absence presumably where items such as drugs, guns or bombs might be concealed under clothing.

    I suspect that the human body's emission of electromagnetic radiation can be decoded finely to reveal its complete outline. Someone will develop for the illicit items being transported under clothes their own matching electromagnetic radiation emissions which will mimic the body's "terahertz" emissions. Thus, guns, explosives and drugs will soon be developed to have these properties too. They already have such unique properties of their own. Most likely there will be efforts to develop disguises.

    All matter is composed of atoms which emit electromagnetic radiation. The brain and the human neurological system are special in that they generate electrical circuits by chemical reactions providing a rich source for monitoring the electromagnetic radiation emissions. At the other extreme is radioactive material whose atoms emit dangerous electromagnetic radiation about which we all are familiar.

    I note that the government has not acknowledged publicly the use of brainwave monitoring and feedback surveillance technology yet, but the Home Office is displaying this "see through" technology this week. If it is open to the public, go see it. Please read this fascinating article in full at its link provided below. We'll have a nudist society by the backdoor sooner or later.

    BBC News Monday, 10 March 2008, 11:47 GMT

    Camera 'looks' through clothing

    Scanner
    All objects emit terahertz radiation

    A camera that can "see" explosives, drugs and weapons hidden under clothing from 25 metres has been invented.

    The ThruVision system could be deployed at airports, railway stations or other public spaces.

    It is based on so-called "terahertz", or T-ray, technology, normally used by astronomers to study dying stars.

    Although it is able to see through clothes it does not reveal "body detail" or subject people to "harmful radiation", according to the designers.

    "It is totally and utterly passive - it receives only," said a spokesperson for Thruvision.

    The portable camera, which has already been sold to the Dubai Mercantile Exchange and Canary Wharf in London, will be shown off at the Home Office scientific development branch's annual exhibition later this week.

    Camera 'looks' through clothing

    0 Comment(s) / Post Comment