Department of Work & Pensions *Page created 27th April
2003* |
| Page last revised on July 15, 2011 |
October 2010, the Attorney
General Dominic Grieve QC, spoke of his concerns because of the fact that the police
distance themselves from cases of fraud and we reproduce part of the article from
'COUNSEL', the month's Journal |
1. |
October 2002, the government
announces changes, new measures to address Housing Benefit Fraud. |
In the
article mention of the 11 BILLION annual benefits bill, as raised by
the opposition. In the meantime, for years we were and have been pointing to and stating
the full facts in some of the cases that caused us to contact the government; all the
while the press barons caried on and continue shoving their heads in the sand. In our
view, and from our experiences, the possibilities for fraud are not removed through the
changes the government proposes; these may well appear to be aimed at reducing the rents
payable to landlords but such arrangements are nothing but a joke and wool over your eyes.
The existing 'co-operation' between the staff and officers of Local Authorities, with
local Letting Agencies officers and staff, also Rent Officers (who are on the Council's
payroll) also amenable, encouraged and used 'assisted tenants', as covered in our pages,
cannot possibly be dealt with as proposed by the Government. The scenarios born of and
attached to the Housing Benefit cases we released in the public domain, in our pages,
constituted criminal offences and as such the activities remain. OUR OBSERVATIONS &
FINDINGS WERE REPORTED TO MINISTERS and to the Department, and we expect / demand action
as the Law Stipulates & Provides. |
'The Sun'
October 18th 2002
 |
The Minister of State is called to account for the fact that that
so many secured their cuts in the case stated, through the Appeal that is published at and
by *human-rights*. (*F1)
In the letter of 18th December 1998, to the
Home Secretary*, the three and four tier system of distribution of Housing Benefit
funds was clearly pointed to. ( *F2)
In the same page below the letter to the Home
Secretary the issue of the 3 million Housing Benefit fraud for invisible (non existent
tenants) that could only have been executed with blunt and arrogant participation and
arrangements by / with the public(!) servants(?) who handled Housing Benefit funds.
Nothing unusual, as far as we are concerned. (*F3). |
| *Link from here to the letter of 18th December 1998, to the Home
Secretary, almost 4 years earlier. We pointed to THE ORGANISED ABUSE OF PUBLIC
FACILITIES for rampant Housing Benefit funds fraud and encouragement of CORRUPTION care of
the used who benefit in the process. One and all relying in the meantime on protection
care of blunt failures by the police to prosecute any of the participants in the
INSTITUTIONALLY ORGANISED FRAUD on Mr & Mrs Average and the corruption of the used
stooges, as in the case of the THREE FORGERIES used by Haringey Council staff and officers
with participating 'officers of a Letting Agency' party to the theft and misappropriation
of Housing Benefit funds due and payable to targeted private landlords whose properties
were occupied by the flood of of |
| *Link from here to the page where we publish an affidavit when an
encouraged and used 'tenant' benefited from false records created and promoted by Local
Authority Staff, one of a number in the London Borough of Hanringey. |
The
submissions to the Secretary for Work and Pensions must be seen in the light of the
obvious; even school children can work things out, when informed of the processes and
which public(!) servants(?) are responsible for determining the rent to be paid in any
given situation; the appeal we point to was and remains very clear. The elements raised by
way of challenges to the staff and officers at both Hackney and Haringey Council (and to
the officers and staff of the County Court) could not be clearer, in view of the perpetual
fraudulent demands made of targeted private landlords. The very persons also happen to be
the targets of the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions and in the meantime the
managers of CIUKU Enterprises as free as ever. The creative and the frugal, the citizens
who plan ahead and make their own arrangements for their old age (pensions) and for their
children systematically targeted. Law abiding citizens ARE subjected to organised
constructive frauds, as covered and appropriately challenged in the letters that were
delivered to the naive, the arrogant and the abusive public(!) servants(?), who acted and
act as directed and as tutored / instructed by their superiors. All acting outside the law
while relying on other abusers of public office (the police and judicial chair occupants)
to endorse their constructive frauds and to ignore even the crudest of forgeries used for
the thefts and misappropriation of funds attached to and owing to the targeted, the frugal
and creative, for the occupation of their properties.
The letter to the Rt. Hon.
Andrew Smith, Secretary for Work and Pensions and the copies of the letters that were sent
in support of the submissions are published below in HTML. It is intended to use the text
of the communications for links to and from other material facts, such as those stated in
the letters, and to link to evidence that is published in other pages and or other
web-sites. |
| 2. |
The letter to the Rt. Hon. Andrew Smith, Work and Pensions
Secretary. |
14 July 2003
The Rt. Hon. Andrew Smith. MP.
Work and Pensions Secretary
House of Commons*
Westminster
London
SW1A 0AA
My Ref: 15JLHBCF
Your Ref: Benefit Switch and FRAUD
OPEN LETTER
(Posted 5th August 2003)
Dear Sir
Re: Housing Benefit arrangements FOR FRAUD on the targeted
I attach hereto copies of communications that specifically cover and
relate to THE ACTIVITIES indulged into and generated / instigated by public(!)
servants(?). All care of the arrangements that various Ministers put in place, for obvious
reasons to anyone who bothers to look into such matters!
- Letter dated 10th July 2003, from citizens, who were/are, targeted by the
unscrupulous and incompetently or recklessly instructed and tutored in fraud
‘public(!) servants(?)’. It was sent to such public(!) servants(?) at Hackney
Council who, you will note, repeat their criminal in intent activities relentlessly.
- Letter dated 8th June 2001, from the same targeted citizens to other
public(!) servants(?) similarly trained and FOR THE SAME FRAUDULENT, IN INTENT, ACTIVITIES
MAINTAINED persons. The coincidence of more than one common person and similar factors and
practices are NOT ACCIDENTAL. The persons trained and maintained for such activities and
attempts by Haringey Council, treat all citizens as morons or idiots, and rely on the
corrupters, the corrupt and the corrupted that operate within the legal system and the
courts.
- Letter dated 16th May 2000, from the same targeted citizens to persons
trained, tutored and maintained as alleged public(!) servants(?) by Hackney Council. You
will duly note the references to earlier attempts at the very same harassment routines and
much more.
- My letter of 29th April 2003, to the Rt. Hon. Frank Field MP, ex Minister,
that qualifies and clarifies much. Due reference to all of the material published and
pointed to at the relevant pages on the Internet is called for. Diligent reference to the
applicable law should establish the validity of the Prime Minister’s intentions, and
propositions, to ensure that the government you represent, and act for, brings in much
needed changes in the management, application and administration of Parliament’s
Laws.
I ask that you consider the specific issues raised with, and pointed
to, to the Home Secretary, the Rt. Hon. Jack Straw, in my letter of 18th
December 1998. I request that you cross reference the issues raised in my recent letter to
the Rt. Hon. Frank Field MP and that you duly consider my submissions to the Rt. Hon. Tony
Blair Prime Minister as put in my letter of 17th November 1999 which you can
access with other submissions to: |
|
The Treasury
The Home Office
The Prime Minister and
The press at: |
|
The purpose of my present communication, to you
directly, is multifaceted. One of the most important issues, at this point in time, is to
request that you do your very best to ensure that the scams and fraudulent activities,
instigated, promoted and taken to fruition, ALWAYS by and through public(!) servants(?) is
duly addressed through the propositions, by the Prime Minister to introduce fundamental
changes in and for the administration of Justice.
We cover more than enough elements arising out of the practices such as
those addressed in the letters that were sent to the naﶥ and arrogant who were/are
trained, maintained and overseen by allegedly legally qualified persons retained by Local
Authorities as part of their management teams.
I beg to draw your attention to the words of the French
Jurist, Charles Louis Montesquieu:
"When I go to a country I do not look to see whether
there are good laws, but whether those there are enforced, for good laws are
everywhere".
Reference to a letter that an arrogant public(!) servant(?) who was
retained, trained and maintained by Haringey Council (published in the human-rights
web-pages) qualifies and clarifies the level of ethos, and the practices indulged into by
the naﶥ and ignorant in law WHO ALWAYS RELIED and rely on the element promoted by that
naﶥ or arrogantly abusive of public office public(!) servant(?).
I refer you also to the words of authorities on the rights of citizens
and what they should expect and be benefiting from in a democratic state. The elements
covered in the short statement are clear:
"The guarantee of the rights of man and citizen
necessitates a public force; such a force, therefore, is instituted for the advantage of
all and not for the particular benefit of those to whom it is entrusted".
The above quotes specifically cover provisions in law and the
administration of it. Any state that rests and is founded on the simplest of principles of
Democracy must be seen to account to its citizens. The citizens who are called upon to
remit taxes for the maintenance of the necessary forces, which in return can ensure and
assure the citizens, they are retained to serve, of the delivery of unadulterated and
incorruptible service of the law. Lamentably no government, in my lifetime thus far, has
been seen to honour or respect or to adhere to the delivery of the fundamental freedoms
and rights to the citizens. The pivotal element behind it all, because of the freedoms
granted to and or bestowed to the criminals who occupy judicial chairs, thereby leading to
the sad conclusion:
"Many from the long depleted empire joined in the fight
against Hitler’s Nazi machine. We are in the grips of similar practices in an alleged
Democracy. Our politicians are either as blind, as the population that is starved or real
education, or they are part and parcel of the creeping dictatorship through the back door
imported and through illicit practices by and via the courts illegally adopted and
unconstitutionally endorsed".
Of such sad conclusions I had to write to Members of Parliament and
to many a member of the media core as of 1975. You will duly note that as of 1995,
following submissions to the Rt. Hon. Tony Blair, leader of the opposition at the time, I
merited from acknowledgement of the fraud in the legal system with attached promises and
undertakings that the problem would be addressed when in government.
You will further note, through diligent reference to the pages and
material pointed to, as published at and by *human-rights.org* at: |
B
C |
http://www.human-rights.demon.co.uk/
(closed as of March 2006 because of the usual invasions allowed & instigated by Demon
staff) http://www.uk-human-rights.org/
Also at various Community on Line web-sites, the element of abuse of the courts’
processes and facilities are seen to have been freely indulged into by many who rely on
the administrators of the Law Enforcement Agencies to endorse, to promote and more often
than not to instigate blunt fraudulent activities whereby the development of a thoroughly
corrupt state of affairs prevails. The right to life and to a life of one’s choosing,
within the law and without infringements and or any violations on any other citizen, is
systematically denied to the honest and the creative. That right is violated and taken
away by none other but persons who are maintained at the public’s expense, in both
branches of the Law Enforcement Agencies, as alleged public(!) servants(?).Returning to the main cause and reason for contacting you directly, I
would like to point to the following facts and realities with the attached fundamental
elements as expressed at:
There you will duly note that fraud on the taxpayers could not possibly
have been processed without the participation and arrogant endorsement of the scams by
public(!) servants(?).
Cross refer the above fundamental issue and element with the facts
stated in the letter to the Home secretary in December 1998, when the Home Secretary was
made aware of the fact that the DSS had been informed of the three tier system of
distribution of public funds. The criminal indulgences that Local Authority staff and
officers WERE ORGANISING as instigators must be considered by your office, in
conjunction with the submissions to the staff and officers at Haringey Council, in the
letter dated 8th June 2001. Thereafter the simple observation: Where-be the
element of enforcement of the law, as Montesquieu rightly pointed out over a quarter of a
millennium ago?
Cross refer both of the above scenarios to the elements covered in the
letter to the Rt. Hon. Frank Field MP, and the conclusion as to upon which parties do
public(!) servants(?) relied and rely for the perpetration and perpetuation of the rampant
fraud and corruption if not the amenable or as retained and maintained for, public(!)
servants(?) incompetent if not criminally motivated persons who were seen and observed to
have been acting as and in the two cases that I point you to below: |
In both instances you will find and duly note, through diligent
referral to the incontrovertible facts and realities stated and covered by documented
evidence, that judicial chair occupants and court staff and officers / administrators
feature as the creators and promoters of many an act of fraudulent abuse of public office.
In the circumstances I urge of you to act within the spirit of Parliament’s Laws. I
urge that you ensure that the government you represent, and act for, should deliver
Justice out of the dungeons of the courts. Her abductors have been holding her captive for
at least as far back as the times of Jesus Christ, when we consider the words attributed
to Him in the New Testament in accordance to St Luke’s Gospel, which you can access
in the quotes page at *human-rights*.
Sincerely
Andrew Yiannides NDD., ACFI., ATI., FNAAAS
For and on behalf of the victims of institutionally organised crimes
against humanity
ENCL. As text
PLUS copy of an article relative to 'experiments' evincing new facilities with more
freedoms for the dishonest and the retained for fraud public(!) servants(?). |
<>
| The letter to the
Benefits Control Manager at Hackney Council Re: 4323314 & 4553265 &
2757487 & 2831206/amagbagb
Our Ref: 10JL03UA
Mrs. A Magbagbeola - Benefits Control Manager
Hackney Revenues & Benefits Service
Keltan House
89 - 115 Mare Street
London E8 4RU
10 July 2003
OPEN LETTER
Dear Mrs Magbagbeola
| Re: |
Miss. R Doherty, 8 Ickburgh Road London E5 8AD
Mr. A Hamilton, 117 Chatsworth Road, London, E5 0LA
Mr. W Fisher, 117 Chatsworth Road, London, E5 0LA
Mr. Y Cevik, 52 Blurton Road, London E5 0NJ |
I refer to your communications dating 28 & 29 April 2003 in respect of the above.
Your attention is drawn to various communications resting on similar
assertions and erratically founded on claims for and in respect of issues that were
clearly covered in past submissions by us. We acted within our rights in law because of
similar attempts amounting to nothing short of harassment and bordering on deliberate /
obstinate fraudulent misrepresentations, for and in respect of creative accountancy
presentations, either to your department's superiors or to the council's chamber and more
than likely by the council to central government.
I attach hereto reprint of one of my earlier / past letters, dated 16th
May 2000. It covers and relates to similar assertions and harassment from your office and
colleagues.
I attach also reprint of another letter, dated 8 June 2001, sent to
persons retained by the London Borough of Haringey, with which your authority (Hackney
Council) has more than cursory affinity. In accordance with information imparted to us,
the organiser and controller of similar scams at and by employees of Haringey Council, the
Social Services Director, Mrs. Mary Richardson moved on and was / has been retained by
Hackney Council AFTER FAILING TO attend to the challenges put to her subordinates at
Haringey Council, as covered in the letter.
In the circumstances we point you to provisions under European Union
Law and the European Convention on Human Rights, both providing for the constructively
engineered fraudulent demands and attempts you engaged in, either as an illiterate in law
or purely as a used 'stooge'.
Refer this communication and contents to the Chief Executive, and submit
copies to Mrs M Richardson who, as far as we are aware is employed by Hackney Council.
Ensure also that you refer the contents to the Council's chamber by acting primarily as a
law abiding citizen, and not just as a person acting on instructions or as directed by the
controllers and creators of the artificially created accounts resting on unjustified,
inexcusable under the law misrepresentations.
Sincerely
P Nicolaou
Arcade Accommodation Services Ltd.
ENCL. As text |
| Copy of a letter as submitted
to Haringey Council and posted with the above challenges. Re.
HB118545 / Invoice
50601538
Our Ref. 8JFCAOHB
Haringey Council
Housing & Social services
Benefits Recovery Team
Civic Centre
High Road
London N22
8 June 2001
BY HAND DELIVERY - Signed for & Date Stamped
OPEN LETTER
Dear Sir/Madam
Re: Alleged Housing Benefit
Overpayment– HB118545 – Ac.127/01 (8/12/97-22/03/98)
Mr. D Molley – 28 Elsden Road, London
N17
May we draw your attention to the fact that you failed to
respond to other communications attached to other assertions arising out of alleged
fraudulent claims for Housing Benefit and or errors on your part, and or by other public
servants who, like you, recklessly misconduct in public office?
Our letters of 6th March 2000 (our references: 6MATA1LC and
6MATA2LC) arose out of similar allegations by yourselves and your colleagues. We are not
responsible and we cannot, under any circumstances, be held liable for any allegations in
respect of alleged Housing Benefit Overpayments attributable to either fraudulent claims
by persons, who you imply so acted, and or due to errors by third parties, including
yourselves and other public servants.
Your failures to respond, as we have been demanding, indicated that you
either recognised we are not liable for the criminal activities and or for the mistakes of
others. It may well be that you have pursued your claims through the normal channels, if
the allegedly recoverable funds were secured by AND FOR THE THIRD PARTIES who at all
material times were in occupation of our properties. WE REPEAT OUR statements yet again in
respect of this present attempt at creative accountancy by you and your colleagues.
We stress yet again, that we receive Housing Benefit funds only for the
occupation of our properties by persons who are claiming such funds from central
government, through you. Ensuring that the claims are genuine is a matter for PUBLIC
SERVANTS who receive their fat salaries from the taxes collected by Central and Local
Government from the creators. Wasting tax funds on the scroungers, the dishonest and for
the salaries of the recklessly incompetent public servants is a matter for central
government and those who are retained to deal with crime AND THE INCOMPETENT.
IF YOU HAVE EVIDENCE that the alleged overpayment was due to any
fraudulent claim by the beneficiary, who allegedly failed to give factual information to
you and or to other public servants, you must refer the crimes (deception and fraudulent
misrepresentation) to the police. Through the channels at their and your disposal you can
claim back the alleged claim for overpayments from the offender / beneficiary through the
tax system and attachment of earnings by applying ‘to the relevant court’.
We insist and demand, yet again, that you justify your inexcusable and
ill founded, on fact and law assertions that are THREE YEARS LATE, this time, in pursuit
of the creative accountancy practices by council officers and staff. We insist and demand
that you justify your present actions, which we view as harassment of the most obnoxious
and insulting nature. We draw your attention to our explicit representations in previous
letters which you and your colleagues received on numerous occasions, whenever you
indulged in similar fraudulent, in intent, assertions.
We are familiar with the financial state the council is in and we have
now been made aware of explicit exposures on the Internet. We do not subscribe to attempts
at blunt theft of rights and or of our properties because you and others need to subsidise
your joint generosity. We worked to create for our selves and for our families and we
choose which ‘worthy causes to support’.
Evidently the Council’s Legal Department elected not to pursue us
following receipt of our letters of 6th March 2000 and other communications
from us. We expect of you to write and confirm that you have since and as of this letter
that you are abandoning the erroneous belief that we are easy pickings for the 'generosity
of others'. Such others can indulge their generosity at the expense of their own family
budgets, not ours. We meet our taxes and through such our duty to society is served,
WITHIN THE LAW. We subscribe to and accept no abuse of public office from any quarters.
For over a year now we have had no response from the legal officers we addressed. Each and
every one simply indulged in a pass the parcel exercise. No one has had the decency either
to write that Haringey Council abandoned the fraudulent and inexcusable demands from us.
Neither has anyone come forward with any statement supported by documented evidence
establishing grounds upon which they or anyone from your department can substantiate and
or assert that we are responsible for fraudulent activities and or for any alleged
mistakes by others.
We demand that you pass this present communication to the Chief
Executive and to the acting mayor. We conclude by emphasising that unless you can
categorically assert we received funds for any period during which the respective
claimants did not occupy the relevant properties, you must cease submitting false and
unjustified instruments to us. The, respective Housing Benefit, claims were processed by
your colleagues and other public servants; we had no input in those activities. You must
therefore cease all other acts of harassment and violations of our rights to a life as we
planned. We can do WITHOUT IMPOSITIONS by the reckless and the criminals you act for and
with through your very own blind recklessness, as illiterates in law ‘public
servants’.
Sincerely
Peter Nicolaou
Director |
Copy of
the earlier letter that was re- submitted to Hackney Council with
the above challenges.
Re:
50203600
Our Ref. 16MA12ML
Adrian Walters - Benefits Manager
Hackney Revenues & Benefits Service
Dorothy Hodgson House
Reading Lane
London E8 1DS
16 May 2000
OPEN LETTER
Dear Mr Walters
Re: Mr J Walsh - 117 Chatsworth Road London E5 OLA
I refer to your communication dated 18 March 2000 in respect of the
above.
Your attention is drawn to our communication of 28 February 2000. It
was posted recorded delivery to Ms Ann Malloy. Copy of it was also posted, first class, to
Ms Kate Leach.
Your latest communication appears to go one step further. It is now
asserted and implied that the allegations promoted in your earlier communication were not
for the implied period as we understood and wrote of but it was, allegedly, an ongoing
matter for well over ONE YEAR.
Your attention is drawn to the content and the demands made of you and
your colleagues in our letter of 28th February 2000. We hereby emphasise and
qualify that we are neither responsible for any false statements and or misrepresentations
made by any other, nor are we accountable for your department's, your colleagues', your
own and or errors and mistakes by any others.
Our demands, as stipulated in our letter of 28 February 2000, were
clear. Your attention is drawn to various acts of Parliament in respect of fraud,
deception, dishonest handling, fraudulent misrepresentations, false accounting and failing
to furnish statements of accounts and or for submitting statements of alleged accounts
that LACK MATERIAL FACTS. Kindly furnish documented evidence in respect of the allegations
you are advancing, promoting and relying upon TWELVE MONTHS LATE, and after the bird has
flown to pastures unknown to us. Yourselves and the authorities that allegedly were
'cheated', if we are to accept your allegations, have access to his records (National
Insurance and Tax Returns) and you must act collectively accordingly.
We repeat that WE ARE NOT OUR TENANTS KEEPERS and never claimed to be.
Nor did we ever submit and or were parties to submissions made to you and or to the
Department of Social Security by the tenant in question.
You failed to furnish us with the evidence we demanded of you in our
letter of 28 February 2000 and you assume the right to infer that we received funds in
error without establishing that the tenant was not in occupation as contracted with us.
Our letter was succinct and clear. Any errors on your part and or by any other must be
dealt with between yourselves, the others whoever they were and the person you allege
'behind his back' deceived you and the others. You allege Mr J Walsh acted dishonestly and
or fraudulently in order to secure from you and any others you may care to name pecuniary
advantage for which only the offender, if you have such evidence, is accountable and most
certainly not us. The law is very clear on such issues.
We suggest that you refer the matters raised to higher authority. Do
not assume any liberties with OUR RIGHTS IN LAW by implying that we were party to
deceptions, dishonesty and or fraud on either you and or on those you represent and act
for in the issues you allege without furnishing any substance. You have no rights in law
to 'assume and or imply' that we are accountable for the dishonesties and or the mistakes
of others.
It is your duty to report acts of fraud to the police and in the
instance at hand to the authorities who can and have the means to contact Mr J Walsh
through and because of his national insurance number and the tax returns he has to submit
annually. We would hate to think that, somehow, he duped the department of Social Security
with false National Insurance numbers/records, too. That would be too much, even for a
child to accept.
It is also the duty of the police to investigate crime, and as fraud is
a criminal offence you must act accordingly and forward to us copy of your submissions to
the police.
Incidentally harassment, fraudulent misrepresentations and false
accounting ARE INDICTABLE OFFENCES. Produce the evidence we demanded; prove that the
allegations you are advancing and promoting are genuine and thereafter WE WILL REFER the
matter to the police, to the appropriate minister and to the DSS who should inform the new
employers of Mr J Walsh. You are after all stating that he was, had been and more than
likely is still working; any funds you may care to claim back from him you could secure by
attachment on earnings and or adjustments to his Tax liability and deductions. USE the
system and secure that which he benefited from you and the other 'public servants' by
deceptions through the usual omissions and defaults by public servants who fail to
exercise their public duties diligently.
We emphasise yet again. We received rents as contracted and as you
remitted for and in accordance with the terms of a Tenancy Agreement. You used the tenancy
agreement to secure release of funds, for the occupation of our property, from the
department of Social Security. The issues arising out of the allegations you promote and
assert relate to actions, activities and errors or mistakes (if your allegations are true)
that are attributed to Mr J Walsh, yourselves and the parties who failed either to ensure
they were dealing with a genuine claim and or in any event failed to act while the alleged
offender was around.
Thanking you for your anticipated co-operation. The copies /
submissions we demand must be made available to us by return post, as herein demanded. We
grant you no rights to violate our rights in law especially as provided for by
International Law.
Sincerely
P Nicolaou
Arcade Accommodation Services Ltd. Director |
<>
FOOTNOTE:-
Footnote eXtra:
In October 2010, the coalition's Attorney General, in an interview
published by 'COUNSEL' specifically spoke of the police distancing themselves
from cases of (small-fry) fraud and asserted that he was
making that element his department's priority. IT REMAINS TO BE SEEN, WHAT the
coalition of the Con-LibDems, THE GOVERNMENT OF THE DAY, WILL IN FACT ATTEND TO THE
RAMPANT FRAUD. IF IT WILL DEAL APPROPRIATELY with the criminals who abuse public office,
especially when faced with appropriate submissions and claims that will be
delivered in due course. Visitors/readers are urged to read the article published
in the London Evening Standard, as settled by the Rt. Hon. David Blunkett, Home Secretary
in 2003 [*Link from here to the article we reproduce in another webpage
and consider "Why tolerate the
arrogance of the legal circles who had and have the audacity to assert to the lawmakers
that the lawmakers have nothing to do with the law"]. While there, above it, the explicit letter to
ex-Minister, the Rt. Hon. Frank Field MP, delivered a few days earlier. ALL alleged
victim-challengers who contacted Andrew Yiannides, by the time the letter was sent to the
Minister, received copy of the letter just as they received copies of other letters
submitted to government maintained Ministers and other official appointees to public
office. Accessing the material pointed to from the letter (URLs) is of utmost importance.
It should assist 'recognition of the citizen's rights at work', when called upon properly
in truly democratic states. The above in 2003; there were other 'submissions' and among
such civilised and, within the law, approaches by citizens that led to the right actions
by governments, the explicit challenges when we set about exposing one of the most evil of
alleged victims of the legal circles to have ever contacted us [*Link to our explicit submissions to (a) the Prime
Minister, (b) the Chancellor / Treasury, (c) the Home Secretary. WE acted so after we had
secured more than enough evidence about the parts of an alleged victim whose only
interests were (i) the rewards under the table FOR KEEPING QUIET about the ORGANISED FRAUD
THROUGH ABUSE OF THE COURTS' FACILITIES and (ii) her parts in blunt attempts that were
intended to discredit the person she was sent along to mess about with, Mr Andrew
Yiannides]. Access please the
letter to the Home Secretary, the Rt. Hon. Jack Straw, in December 1998 [*Link*
[*L] from here to the letter] and note the results
evinced in the newspaper article (Hornsey Journal) also within days of the letter reaching
its destination. Many the charlatans and stooges -lovers and 'promoters of the system as is'- on the
job for decades; one and all acting as sold souls always do [*Link [*L] from here to the evidence we
point to relative to the parts of one of a number of sold to the system fraudsters who
were sent along / introduced to Andrew Yiannides by the managers / organisers of the LIPS
crowd / mob].
1.
Access from here the
appeal lodged at court and recognise why the government acted at the time. The link takes
visitors to an explicit paragraph of the appeal filed at Edmonton County Court by the
targeted 'serfs'. *Link also
from here to an explicit letter as submitted TO THE FRAUD SECTION at the Head Quarters
of the Department of Social Security at Quarry House, in Leeds.
2. Access from here the first image /
page of the letter to the Rt. Hon. Jack Straw, when Home Secretary. Note the
succinctly stated realities arising out of the criminal activities INSTIGATED BY ALLEGED
SERVANTS OF THE PUBLIC operating out of Local Authorities. One of the many hard pressed
for funds Local Authorities, faced with the ever increasing burden attached to the costs
needed FOR THE INTENDED CREATION OF THE MELTING POT. Note the fact that the government
acted immediately and Haringey Council 'benefited from extra funds, as the creator of the
land of milk and honey image, for such was the image sold to the world by the media barons
and the Intellectual Prostitutes the barons retain and maintain for the services intended
for mass consumption and the conditioning / indoctrination of the ill-educated
non-thinking robots that David Icke wrote of.
3. Access from here headline
news relative to the established and acknowledged FRAUD ON THE NATIONAL BUDGET in respect
of the billions plundered through fraudulently created and engineered transfer of assets
- from targeted citizens and from the national budget funds. Read of alleged
inability, by the police, to investigate and prosecute appropriately offenders. *Link from here to AN
EXPLICIT AFFIDAVIT covering the activities and the practices as organised and instigated
by and through alleged servants of the public. One and all simply engaging in all
manner of criminal acts and servicing the plans of the abductors and rapists of both
Democracy & Justice. All acting as instructed / tutored stooges who rely on abusers of
judicial chair occupation to endorse their criminal activities and to absolve them of the
evil wrongs they collectively impose on the ill-educated and ill-informed, conditioned
'serfs'. *Link also from here
to the image of a letter by an abuser of public office, an employee of Haringey
Council who wrote of such reliance while of opinion that he was addressing just another
ill-informed and ill-educated moron of his mentality and aptitude. He was simply pointed
to a Court of Appeal ruling (of the time) and thereafter he shoved his tail between his
hind legs and probably went back to his masters to report what he benefited from.
4. xxxx
5. xxxx
6. xxxx
7. xxxx
8. xxxx
9. xxxx
10. xxxx
11. xxxx
12. xxxx
|
|
Send mail to CompanyWebmaster with questions or comments about this web site.
Last modified: July 15, 2011 |
|
