Power, Corruption and Lies.

Today's Harald gives us another story about Adur Council's top brass and alleged shady goings on.

Looks like one of them got the bullet, although we're not apparently entitled to much more information than that.

Here's the "scoop":

Strangely, (or possibly not strangely, at all) this fella was the head of the department controlling the local allotments, a department that has mysteriously lost quite a few senior staff members of late, we have had our suspicions of dodgy goings on for a few years now, ever since we raised a few pertinent questions and were met with extreme aggression from the entire department.

It appeared to me that Harrison himself was little more than a "yes man" and it was other senior executives and councillors that actually pulled the strings within ADC, but I guess that we'll have to wait to see what the full story is before we jump to any conclusions, that said, I expect that this is going to cost the local tax payer a heap of cash in legal fees, and the real story will be hidden from public view as is the normal procedure adopted by ADC.

Anyway, that's one down, only another eight to go.

K

I have an MP again!

Following my alleged "Sacking" by the arrogant MP, Tim Loughton, (despite this not being a procedure acceptable in any accepted democratic system) during his parliamentary tantrum in which he claimed that he would no longer be communicating with myself, it appears that he has had a change of heart and now wishes to communicate again. Strangely this is not to be done through the mediation that I have always agreed to and he has repeatedly refused to take part in, but through false accusation of further made up allegations, sent from the House of Commons, via Google to myself.

I attempted to ask the HoC legal bods about this challenge, yet strangely they had no idea about it, despite it being sent in their name. Looks like Timmy hasn't bothered to seek any legal advice before making up new crimes. He has also been trying to have me arrested for this matter since I returned fire to his most recent public tantrum in Parliament, however as I have not broken any laws and certain gullible police officers have already fallen for his made up "evidence" once, recounted his lies to a court in order to obtain an unlawful warrant and arrested me for something that was not a crime and so they are obviously cautious about believing his misrepresentations of the law ever again.

Anyway, enough about the repeated attempts of Loughton to have me arrested and charged for merely challenging his attacks on myself in a manner which is perfectly legal, yet he seems to think is against the law, merely because he says so.

As he is now my MP again, and as I have a right to challenge any legal argument put to myself, I have responded to Timmy, not as my MP but as my legal challenger. There's no point asking him anything as an MP as he has never done a damn thing for anyone who is not middle classed and affluent.

Right, here's my legal response to The Lought:

Clicky maketh biggy.

I think that should do it, although it's going to be rather difficult to conduct any legal argument if one side (Timbo) is refusing to communicate with the other (Meeeee), I guess if there's no response, then the matter is automatically concluded.

TTFO
K

My response to the claims of defamation.

I have now officially responded to my blog host about the misunderstanding which was referred to as "defamation", and I assume that this will now be an end to it.

Here's the response as sanctioned by my legal advisor:

 

I think that should just about cover it.

 

K



Defamatory? Mr Pot, have you met Mr Kettle?

Today I received an email notification that apparently my blog contains "allegedly defamatory content that may violate the rights of others and the laws of their country", note the "alleged" and "may", they are quite important here.

Who could possibly have found me to have "allegedly" broken the law? You guessed it, it's my MP, (not ex-MP) Mr Timbolina Loughton.

Here's the notice:

You will notice that this complaint was sent from "The House of Commons", so it should really be aware that there is no law in this country that prevents me from putting horses heads on a photo, a pillow maybe, but not a photo.

Timmy may find it offensive and distressing, but hey, if he didn't want to be challenged, he shouldn't have stood in parliament and told some extremely unpleasant lies about me. Now he relied on his parliamentary privilege in order to offend me without prosecution, and I'm relying on the malicious communications act in order to offend him without prosecution, and they do say "aint payback a bitch" don't they?

What I'm chuckling about is the potential tabloid story about how the police seized a voodoo doll from my home, and on it's return I then proceeded to replace Timmy's daughters heads with those of horses. That indeed would be a mean trick if I could pull it off, however I merely doctored a photo in order to anonymise (it's not a word I know) his kids identities. This was acceptable to Sussex Police (as documented in various emails I hold regarding this matter and Timmy's attempts to have me prosecuted for suggesting that his kids might look ever so slightly horsie) and under the laws in place in this country, yet old Timmy still thinks it's illegal in some way. Well, it's not, so get used to it.

I am however concerned that I may have broken "Timmy's Law", the new law whereby anything that he does in never illegal, but if anyone else does it, then it clearly must be, so I shall correct what he claims is a defamatory statement in his eyes.

Here's the alleged defamatory statement:

What I meant to say was in fact, "Is daddy an arrogant racist arsehead Dobbin? Yes, he certainly is", I hope that I have now cleared up the misunderstanding.

I obviously wrongly assumed that Loughton's kids didn't think that their father was an arrogant racist arsehead, but I now under stand that this is deemed by Timmy to be defamatory, I must now do the grown up thing and accept that they probably do think that he is an arrogant racist arsehead, just like the rest of the country. I am truly sorry that I thought that they might not agree with the rest of us and support their father and I promise not to make such sweeping assumptions ever again.

If he thinks that this was defamation, then just imagine if I had called him the things that he called me from within his protective bubble, that he assumes gives him immunity from the law. Maybe I'll try that another day, or just feed the truth to the tabloids about his "secret life".

Anyway, in order to show that there are no hard feelings I have now removed the apparently "offensive and distressing" photo montage, and replaced it with an artistic representation of the original, which contains no copyrighted material or any identifying images of his two brats (who in my opinion do look decidedly horsey in the face department) and so clearly is within the law, (just like the other one was, but you have to humour these MPs, you've seen the tantrums thrown by them when they don't get their own way).

Here it is, hope that it reaches the expectations of all laws, both real and imaginary.

There you go, nothing to see here apart from a badly drawn picture of a couple of horse faced slappers, telling a poor quality joke, you can move along now.

ATAB
K

Police Brutality.

As most people would have already seen in today's news, here it is in case you haven't seen it yet:

Caution, contains images of police officers beating the crap out of someone.

It's also in The Mirror if you care to read the full story, although as a humorous side note you will see from this article that the person being punched in the face by these thugs appears to have aged by 10 years during the beating.

This clip, and others like them are beginning to demonstrate the type of people that are given uniforms and the power to behave like this towards people who are by law, innocent of any crime.

Like numerous other videos out there, there is usually one extremely out of control officer, who is accompanied by others who do nothing to stop their colleague from committing violent crimes, and it is only when the media shows the officers in their true light, that any action is ever taken. There is little doubt that if this footage had not been leaked, these officers would still be patrolling the streets, and they would be found to have done nothing wrong due to lack of evidence.

In my opinion, these officers should not merely have been suspended, they should have been arrested for their actions, and treated like any other group of three people who restrain someone whilst their mate punches them repeatedly in the face. there is the possibility that if they weren't police officers at least one of them would be refused bail and be placed on remand. And like any other person who had performed the same act, their names should have been released to the media as well, but sadly they have the protection of being judged in a back office rather than in a public court of law like the rest of us would be.

I personally would have taken what this guy got from these rogue rozzers, twice over, rather than what I received from the thugs that turned up at my home, and yes, these officers are still out there walking our streets looking for their next innocent victim, it was decided that they shouldn't be suspended for the injuries that they gave to me. the reason for this is that apparently the thugs that turned up at my place with a dodgy warrant, issued by Mickey Mouse JP, used "approved" methods of physical violence.

At least now I have some of their names, here's the list of the ones that turned up at my home in order to prevent me from going about my business and not breaking the law by any stretch of the imagination, and believe me, they stretched their imagination nearly as far as they stretched my shoulder, and that ended up dislocated.

The ones marked with an asterisk are still wandering around Shoreham, so watch out, they're not particularly nice people, and the "West" refers to "West Division" so they're all out and about locally.

The one thing that I have managed to work out, is that as there is only one female officer listed here, (the warrant numbers provide this, second letter is surname, and first if "C" is a male officer, and if "D", a female officer, even though I'd have thought it would be easier to remember if reversed), the officer who was stamping on my knees whilst her mates tried to break my neck and successfully dislocate my shoulder was clearly PC Adams, DA154. Who, from my experience is a nasty little opportunist offender and a vicious b*tch of the highest order. She was also the officer that left me face down on the floor of a transit van between Shoreham and Durrington, during rush hour, whilst I was semi conscious and with no medical attention for my injuries, (I did receive medical attention in the end, after I took myself to A&E, turns out that I had been given two herniated discs in my neck, a spinal cord compression injury and a dislocated shoulder, all courtesy of a couple of the b*stards on this list).

I can tell you that, in my opinion, Simmonds is not a very nice man at all, he was the person responsible for intimidating my family with an unauthorised and illegal CCTV camera last year, and here he is with his mate Tim:

Yes, it is pretty clear that PC Simmonds, is a jolly good chum of our local MP, they are often seen out and about sharing hilarious jokes about how great it is to be corrupt, (I must apparently point out that I do not actually know about the subjects of their fave jokes, this is merely a "serving suggestion"  and nothing more).

The idea that a mate of Timbo's was sent to my home, seems to not be a coincidence, and neither do the injuries I received, as apparently even before I returned home, he was being incredibly aggressive and shouting abuse through my letterbox, (to an empty flat) and being very rude to my neighbour for telling him that I wasn't home. He is not very nice, and that is clearly compounded by his friendship with The Lought, I have suggested a transfer to Burgess Hill for Simmonds, so that he can be permanently close to his friend Timmy, but Sussex Police didn't seem keen, and so he remains in Shoreham, and has kept his disgusting attitude and temper here with him. Wide berth, boys and girls, wide berth, you've been warned.

I have plenty more on this, but it seems a shame to share it all at once, after all, who would watch soap operas if they gave you the whole story in one hit?

Until the next exciting instalment

K

MP promotes stereotypes.

The sacked Children's Minister, our local MP, Timbo "The Lought" Loughton, has been let out in the community again. This time he's being billed as a "VIP" I assume that this is an abbreviation for Vociferous (yet) Ignorant Politician, but I can't be  100% sure on that.

This time he was visiting Worthing Homes, the former housing department of Worthing Council, which was given over to private hands in order to become one of those "not for profit" organisations, that benefit from charitable status but have directors on ludicrously large salaries.

Here's the story:

The part that is slightly concerning is his visit to the "art room", where he apparently encouraged young girls to adhere to the princess stereotype, by balancing books on their heads. Obviously I'm not alone in thinking that this demonstrates a clear lack of judgement on his part.

The idea of encouraging kids to adhere to these outdated stereotypes of sex and class, I find repugnant, obviously young girls are forced by Disney and the media to believe that wearing pink will eventually lead to them to marry a rich and powerful man, when they should actually be encouraged to become more than merely someone's wife.

I understand that balancing a book on one's head can improve posture and reduce the likelihood of some spinal problems in later life, but suggesting that it could lead you to marry a frog has the potential to be quite damaging in the long term, and as a former children's minister he should have been given access to numerous reports that would clarify this in great detail. It's just a shame that he spent his time as minister promoting nothing but himself and a crusade against a dead 70's TV freak.

Here he is, teaching youngsters that they should look to marry instead of achieve.

Luckily for me in this respect, I grew up as a boy, so fairy tales to me involved shoving witches into ovens, which is something I still enjoy to this day whenever the opportunity arises, (which is not often enough, if you ask me), and other wholesome outdoor pursuits and adventures. I was never encouraged to go and find a princess and marry her in order to become one of the "handsome" Princes, (which is another myth it appears), as in order to be a prince you had to be born into the role.

The idea that by balancing a book on your head can improve your social standing in some way is crazy, and as responsible people we should be encouraging kids to formulate a contingency plan in case marrying a rich inbred isn't a viable option for them, as they probably are not a member of the outdated aristocratic hierarchy or ruling political elite, and so are unlikely to ever have that easy and unfulfilling option come their way. Surely they would lead a far more fulfilling and useful life by reading the books instead of putting them on their heads. How many princesses have discovered cures for diseases, made scientific breakthroughs or done anything else useful to the world and it's inhabitants? (and don't even think of suggesting that "using their position to raise awareness" crap)

He told them all about meeting the Queen did he? Well, we all remember from our fairy tales that the Queen was always wicked, and this one is clearly no exception, as she takes more cash each year whilst we all get less, and the divide grows larger.

Maybe he should be encouraging them to write to the Queen in order to ask her why their families have to sit in the cold and go hungry, whilst her and her brood are flitting between nice warm castles and draping themselves in the most expensive furs whilst gorging themselves on swans and other meals constructed from inhumanely produced ingredients.

TTFO
K

Crackdown on Tory paranoia.

Today's news brings us proof that the paranoia that seems rife within our local Tories, is shared by the entire party, and that their choice of aggressive bullying tactics to counteract what they claim is bullying being carried out by far fewer and less powerful people than themselves, is the standard response.

I'm referring to this story:

Obviously I chose to reference the Daily Fail to demonstrate the extreme reporting of this matter, other news sources are far more conventional and even handed in their coverage of this matter, but as I know from prior experience, (and documented proof) that the Mail is fed it's stories directly by Tory MPs, then I have no doubt that this is the angle on "The Truth" tm, that they intend to be distributed to us minions.

It appears to me that whenever anyone challenges a Tory, they are a "bully-boy", and a small group fighting for their rights against a far larger, more affluent and powerful group in order to obtain their right to equal treatment, are clearly the bully in the situation.

I personally experienced this with the local Tories, it was claimed that I, a little nobody with no cash or power, was bullying, harassing, and even stalking these ignorant thugs who are so far from the archetypal victim stereotype than is possibly imaginable even by the more avid fairytale readers of the world.

There have been numerous times where I have been accused of "confronting" these people by merely walking through town or by performing seditionist acts like shopping for groceries, and I was even accused of trying to disrupt a charity event by eating a cheese and onion roll on a bench in the same town as the event, (the town in which I live).

They seem intent on repeatedly claiming that people who do not agree with them, who challenge them in order to obtain their rights, are simply trying to force them into a situation where they have no other option but to attack these people and claim that the person using non violent means, deserves to be met with violence and aggression for merely not agreeing, or as they see it, forcing the Tories hands into violent and disproportionate, pre-emptive attacks.

I personally have experienced this, in the form of PINs from the police for upsetting the local Tory party, and even a large scale assault on my home by the police, (controlled by a Tory commissioner selected by the MP with the aggression problem (Loughton)) which resulted in a serious spinal injury, a dislocated shoulder, and the removal of my freedom, liberty and rights, as well as half a dozen rozzers rooting through my home in search of imaginary items, which only existed in the minds of the local paranoid Tories.

I hinted at wrongdoing, corruption, criminal cover-ups, dodgy family connections, and a certain level of deviance and infidelity on their parts, and the result was a thorough search of my home for "evidence" that they believed proved that I was "stalking" them. The funny thing is, this would pretty much suggest that I must have hit a nerve somewhere, and that my suspicions were at least partially on the mark.

Anyway, back to the "Independent" inquiry.

This bit worries me greatly:

After having my home ransacked, being violently attacked in my own hallway, being locked in a police cell, and being placed under bail conditions that removed all of my democratic rights, despite no crime ever having been committed by myself, already suggests to me that the police powers are already too extreme when it comes to representing the powerful against their critics.

The idea that we could end up in a state where, in the name of preventing people being upset by others disagreeing with them and their policies, that the dissenters could be targeted before they express their freedom of movement, speech or protest and prevented from doing so, merely because it would upset the people who are taking the food from their plates, and the heat from their homes.

The ironic twist is that the Tory party would expect support from the police, whilst they are facing the same cuts as the rest of us, and could easily be on the other side of the fence if the cuts to their service continue along the same vein as they have since the current government came to power.

I may appear be contradicting myself a bit, but my belief that there should be no further powers offered to the police in regards to protecting the powerful against uprisings by the people, and my support of the police as public sector workers are not mutually exclusive.

The idea that the current government would expect unquestioned support from police officers whose futures they have put at risk with their sweeping cuts, when it comes to robbing others of their future, just shows how out of touch these people really are, especially considering that the police federation have already flexed their muscles against Tory politicians in recent events.

You can't screw over a whole country and expect to be supported by the people you are holding in a state of limbo over their futures, just because you have a few mates who stand to make a wad of cash out of exploiting them. Democracy works for the many, not the few, and not voting merely creates a democratically elected dictatorship chosen by the minority, in the same vein as other countries whose public are not permitted to vote freely. Spoiling ballots will not prevent this from continuing, your only option is to get involved, challenge the selection process and encourage others to do the same, if you can't change the candidates create new ones, and work towards making people into politicians, because trying to make politicians into people has clearly failed.

TTFO
K

How much public money is paid to EWAS Conservatives?

After reading THIS article in the Guardian, I thought that I'd have a look at whether the practice of MPs renting office space from their own local parties was going on here.

Here's what I found.

EWAS Conservatives give their address as 88a High St Shoreham By Sea, the office above what used to be the Lazy Toad, which has now changed it's name to "Piston Broke", which some might find appropriate to apply to some of our local Tories, and others have complained about bringing the tone of the high street down with a sign that if read out loud, could sound a bit rude. I have a bit of a problem with the sign myself, as it clearly depicts a broken con-rod rather than a broken piston, but there you go.

Here's their contact details:

This is the same address that our MP, Tim Loughton gives as his constituency office, so they clearly share this space between them. I looked at the IPSA website to have a better look at this arrangement.

Here's the released rental details:

So, it appears that he does rent his "constituency office" from the local Tory party. I'm not sure what he gets for the money, because all that seems to be in evidence is an answerphone and public surgeries held one evening a month.

How much does this cost, you ask? Well so far this year we have these figures available:

It looks on the face of it to be £700 a month, and the totals paid to the local party in exchange for the use of a desk and an the space for an answerphone (the cost of this is claimed separately) for the years making up this Parliament are as follows.

2010-2011  - £8,264.52
2011-2012  - £8,400.00
2012-2013  - £7,000.00
2013-2014  - £2,100.00 so far.

So that makes £25,764.52, that has been paid directly into the coffers of the local Tory Party from public funds and by the end of this Parliament in 2015 that figure will top £30k.

Bearing in mind that this cost does not include bills, stationery, newspapers, telephone, internet, or computer costs, it seems like quite a raw deal for us the public, who are footing this bill. I've had a look round the local business premises costs and for £700 a month you could get a damn site more than a desk in a shared office above a pub, but I guess that would have to be paid to someone other than the MPs own party.

Obviously there is a need for MPs to have a base in their constituency, but as we already pay for a second home for these people, that should serve this purpose without the need for a separate office, otherwise we are paying for their home, office and travel costs, as well as all the other cash they can skim off. Why should we be paying for their telephone and internet costs for their homes, when they have already been provided with a suitable office, both in Parliament and their constituency?

In the case of our Timbo, he claims for a second home, and this office, and yet still claims £25 every time he visits his office from his primary home in Burgess Hill (which was his second home until a couple of years ago) and more when he travels from his second home in Westminster (which used to be his primary home, even though his family never resided there).

Obviously the best answer to these problems would be for local council's to provide a small office within their building, and bill central government at a fixed rate for this, and for MPs who choose not to have a fixed base in their constituency to be refused the travel claims in order to visit their own office. Normal people don't get paid to travel to work, so why should MPs?

If the local Tory Party is being directly funded with public monies then this equates to a distinctly unfair advantage over any opposing party, and the potential that there could be a very valid reason why sitting MPs are at an advantage over challengers during general elections as extra cash allows extra publicity and public meetings and other promotional tools. This is one of the reasons that I, personally am in support of the campaign to encourage people not to vote for any sitting MP, in order to have a complete clear out of the current batch of self serving trough snafflers. But you should vote for who you think is best, but be sure to see what the one you already have has been up to for the previous Parliament, and Id recommend the IPSA website, here's the section for East Worthing and Shoreham Constituency you can see exactly what we're paying our MP on top of his already quite generous salary. I was quite surprised at what he doesn't pay for, some of us have to pay our own heating bills, buy our own newspapers, and pay for our own fares to work, but it appears that Timmy claims for petrol to drive to the station, then claims for the parking at the station, as well as the rail fare, it's a different world.

Take care, and control
K

What a nice MP we have.

Following my recent post on voting or rather the lack of it, it appears that our MP has a bit of a problem expressing himself in a polite and courteous manner.

Today saw the posting of this Tweet from Timbo:

Yes, our MP chooses to refer to people as "cretins" in a rather offensive and obnoxious manner. Personally, I can assure you that I have never even been to Crete, so he clearly cannot be referring to me.

I did a quick scan of Twitter for the Tweets that he is referring to, and there were only two, these two:

I can't see any name calling in either of these Tweets, they were both phrased as questions and so the "cretin" post is obviously the answer to these questions. Now, I'm not surprised by this, as it appears that whenever Loughton is posed a question that he doesn't want to answer, and when ignorance isn't appropriate in his mind, then personal insults are the order of the day.

His choice of insults is particularly unsavoury as usual, remember this one?

This time he chose to use "cretins", which is a rather outdated insult, with some pretty nasty overtones, you see, "Cretin" is a term that was used to describe sufferers of certain types of hypothyroidism,  or cretinism as it was referred to in less enlightened times.

Here's the definition from the dictionary:

Not a particularly polite choice of insult for someone who claims to abhor discrimination, to use. But then again, if you believe that Timmy doesn't like a bit of discrimination, then you must have been born yesterday.

Sleep Well
K

To vote, or not to vote? This is a question we need to ask our MPs.

Following the recent furore over Russell Brand and his encouraging of people to not bother to vote, you would expect people to be considering their voting habits and questioning their own motives for voting, or not voting, whatever the case may be.

Remember that we had some very public statements on various media sources, regarding the "destructive" nature of Brand's statements, from our local MP, Mr Tim Loughton?

Here's the piece from the BBC in case you missed it: (In full HERE)

Yes, he talks of "cynicism" and people not being bothered to go out and elect them, he also tells us how much effort him and his mates put in.

Well Yesterday, Parliament voted on the vile "Bedroom Tax". The Mirror published the full list of the votes cast HERE

So, how do you think that Timmy voted?

The answer: HE DIDN'T BOTHER TO VOTE.

You will also remember that after claiming cash to return for the Syria vote, Timbo essentially spoiled his paper by voting twice, and a bit of a look at the figures available show that in the last few years he has neglected to vote in Parliament on more that one in five occasions. Yet you will recall him telling us this....

It is quite amusing to say the least, that a man, who claims that setting an example of not voting should cause "worry" about the future of democracy, doesn't bother to vote himself. This is especially worrying as a lot of us did bother to vote in the election which put him in the position where he should have the opportunity to vote on our behalf in matters of great importance.

The thing that is truly "deeply destructive" is the double-speak that we are being fed by Loughton and other MPs who seem to hold a "holier than thou" attitude when it comes to us voting, yet their responsibility to vote on our behalf after being elected, appears to be of very little value to them.

I for one, in the 25 years that I have been given the privilege to vote in a democratic election process, have used this vote wisely, (when I have been in the country). Yet recently I have even spoken to people in my parents age group who have expressed very similar sentiments to Mr Brand when it comes to voting, and I can assure you that they are not even aware who Russell Brand is, let alone been influenced by him.

If MPs want to tell us that not voting is irresponsible in some way, they need to start doing a bit more of it themselves, after all they are paid very well to vote, whereas we, (the ones who still have some remaining faith in democracy) do it out of the love of freedom, and expect to be represented after doing so.

K