LABOUR LEADERS, LAWYERS AND LIARS

JOHN SMITH, CARDINAL IRVINE, WINDBAG BLAIR, STRAWMAN STRAW & COCK ROBIN COOK

Irvine and Smith cheated at Glasgow University. Had they been found out both would have been sent down. Irvine recently lectured the legislators in Hong Kong about the importance of the separation of powers. He presides over a system where his minions keep tipping the scales of justice to favour their friends. Another politician, the Attorney General, is outrageously biased in favour of his own kind. He interfered in the Straw cannabis case, in the judge Gee fraud case and in an attempt to conceal the police raid on the Crown Prosecution office. Had he not interfered in the Gee case the Cardinal would have secretly briefed the judge to either dismiss the case and not leave it to the jury. The Cardinal also seduced the wife of Donald Dewar.

Blair and Straw, while in opposition, strongly opposed the Tory proposal to limit the number of cases going to trial by jury. This proposal would have resulted in police frame-ups succeeding before politically instructed judges and increased prison sentences for innocent defendants. Now these two are in favour of tampering with the jury system. Both of them blamed parents for the wrongdoing of their children until Straw's son was involved in drug dealing. They were ready to accept the political cover-up. Cook was carrying on an adulterous affair with his secretary bringing shame and pain on his wife and family. This week, in Bucharest, he stated that the UK government could not allow politics to be involved in the Pinochet affair. The decision to arrest Pinochet was clearly political. The politicians interfere on a daily basis in matters before the courts. They often make the excuse that they cannot intervene because the matter is sub iudice. Pinochet case is sub iudice. That did not stop MPs referring to him as a murderer.

The surviving four are all barristers. They would all argue that the art of advocacy is to tell lies. That hardly makes them fit to govern. Nobody, not even Labour MPs, believes them.

DAVID SHAYLER & "LIBERTY"

David Shayler, the former MI5 man, is still languishing in a Paris prison because he exposed criminality, waste and incompetence in the UK security services. It has been suggested that the reason for the sensitivity of Blair and Irvine is that Shayler has knowledge of the secret sexual proclivities of a high profile cabinet minister. "Liberty", the human rights organisation, represents Shayler.

Liberty was formerly known as the National Council for Civil Liberties. In the 60s Jeremy Thorpe was a member of the council. Patricia Hewitt, MP, and Harriet Harman, MP, were successive solicitors for the NCCL. Both are enthusiastic New Labourites.

When the NCCL had its office at King's Cross a man visited the office and informed staff that he was being followed by Special Branch and feared for his life. The NCCL decided there and then that he was suffering from delusions and sent him on his way. A few days later he was found in the Surrey countryside shot in the back of the head.

We contacted the NCCL and explained how the Mobil Oil Company had succeeded in having us wrongly imprisoned and how the police, the courts and West Lothian County Council, were hammering us. The NCCL told us that our best course was to visit their office then located at 4 Camden High Street. We hitch hiked from Scotland to London along with our two young children. On arriving at Camden High Street we were informed that the NCCL had never heard of us. It was busy organising a demonstration at the USA Embassy in Grosvenor Square. One penniless adult and two young children crossed the road to a café and bought one plate of chips, which they shared. From there we walked to the office of the Royal Scottish Corporation (Chancery Lane?) where the director named Mr Cook loaned us a few shillings to buy a meal after obtaining a promise from a relative that a Money Order would be telegraphed to Mr Cook's office. On returning to Mr Cook's office he greeted us with "You'd be surprised at how many people know you in London". After we agreed to leave the children with him he handed us the Money Order which we cashed. We still feel indebted to Mr Cook even if, as seems likely, he used the Masonic grapevine to check us out. Note the contrast between Mr Cook's behaviour and that of the NCCL. Later, before spending about two years in prison on remand, we suspected that a visit to the NCCL resulted in our location being reported to the authorities. Don't tell us that an accused cannot spend two years in prison on remand. Incidentally a jury acquitted us, unanimously in minutes, after a trial lasting about a week. Had we used a solicitor we would have been convicted of inflicting grievous bodily harm on a police inspector and spent years in prison. The judge said that since there were no other charges against us we were free to leave. We were detained below the court while the prison officers collected our documents but really so that half a dozen policemen could pounce on us as we left the court building by the rear door. That's Freemasonry.

Back to David Shayler…….. We feel that something should be done about having this man released. The fax number of the French Ambassador is 0171 201 1004 and his phone number 0171 201 1000.

BLOODY SUNDAY AND TWO BELLIES PRESCOTT

When the accusing finger was pointed at the Prescott family in Hull an enquiry cleared Two Bellies within days. The Windbag Blair promised an enquiry into the Bloody Sunday massacre months ago. We have heard nothing more. A television documentary provided conclusive evidence that a sniper, under orders from the army, deliberately shot dead two youths. It is reasonable to conclude that the other murders resulted from a shoot-to-kill directive. Even the British army does not commit murder of its own citizens unless there is a political directive. Will the Windbag now admit that British soldiers murdered the civil rights marchers and tender an apology and compensate the relatives? Will he order a further enquiry to find out who gave the order and reveal their identities? The Windbag's fax number is 0171 930 1419.

LETTERS

#### 15 October 1998

J.S. Phillips, The European Commission of Human Rights

Conseil De L'Europe, F-67075 STRASBOURG CEDEX, FRANCE

Dear J. S. Phillips, Your ref: Application No. 42016/98

Eva Adshead and Others v. the United Kingdom

Thank you for your letter of 2nd July notifying CFAFH of the registration of our application on behalf of litigants in person. We see no need to forward any additional material at this time.

I would however be grateful to know whether the enclosed leaflet falls foul of any of the restrictions mentioned in the final paragraph of your letter. You will see that the leaflet does not raise individual cases but merely presents arguments against an administrative procedure, which is improper, secretive and dishonest. CFAFH believes airing legitimate criticism of court administration--especially where human rights are currently being violated--is in the public interest.

If there is a reasonable objection to the publication and distribution of the leaflet, please let me know (1) what the objection is and (2) what authority is being relied upon. I thank you in advance and look forward to your prompt reply.

Comment:- This man Philips misdirected himself (lied) in telling CFAFH that a group application was impermissible. He persistently obstructs UK applicants. There are long delays during which the UK authorities do their utmost to neutralise applicants. Except in minor cases applications are declared inadmissible. Apart from Turkey the UK has the greatest number of complaints against it. There is no appeal against ECHR decisions. Even if the UK citizen has a watertight case applications are declared inadmissible on the false submission that applicants are associated with subversive elements, pose a threat to the security of the state or are undermining the authority of the judiciary and/or Parliament. After an application has been registered the applicant cannot publish details of the application. That would expose the commission to ridicule since it would highlight the perverse nature of its decisions. See Scriven/Adshead cases below.

OooOooO

Letter from James Chapman & Co, solicitors, Manchester (Fax 0161 828 8018) to Geoffrey Scriven (Fax 0161 428 1159).

#### Dear Sir, Re Yourself V. McKenna and Others. 20 October 1998

We refer to the above matter and enclose Order of District Judge Clegg dated 12 October 1998 by way of service. Kindly acknowledge receipt.

Yours faithfully, Chapman & co.

ORDER

On hearing an application by the Applicant for an order that the Statutory Demand issued on 10^th September 1998 be set aside

Upon the Applicant not appearing and upon hearing the Respondent's solicitor

AND UPON READING THE EVIDENCE

IT IS ORDERED THAT the Application be struck out. Applicant pay the Respondents' costs to be taxed if not agreed. ####

Comment: The Applicant Mr Scriven is suing the Lord Chancellor. He did not appear because he was not notified of a hearing. On another occasion the judge made an order stating that Mr Scriven had been present at a hearing when in fact Mr Scriven was occupying a hospital bed. You will recall that the Lord Chancellor visited Manchester District Registry and scampered away when the senior clerk identified Mr Scriven. Mr Scriven is one of the group subject to the ECHR application above.

OooOOooO

From Smith Forts, solicitors, Stockport, Nr Manchester. Fax 0161 474 7491 to Mrs. E C Adshead (fax/phone 01298 813182). 20 October 1998

#### Dear Madam. Re: Adshead v The Rt Hon Lord Irvine Lord High Chancellor and Others.

We enclose herewith Notice of Adjourned Hearing in the above matter which is to take place on Monday the 4^th January 1999 at 10.30am. Kindly acknowledge safe receipt.

Yours faithfully, Smith Forts.

PLEASE NOTIFY ALL RELEVANT PARTIES

TAKE NOTICE THAT the hearing on Thursday 20^th day of August 1998 at 2.15pm has been adjourned to Monday 4^th day of January 1999 at 10.30am with an estimated length of Hearing of one day

At Manchester County Court, 186 Deansgate, Manchester. ####

Comment:- Mrs Adshead is one of the group subject to the ECHR application above. Smith Forts are Legal Aid franchisees. They awarded Legal Aid to Mrs Adshead's opponents and then represented them. Now they appear to be representing the Lord Chancellor. The Adsheads have appeared repeatedly in court and have alleged Legal Aid fraud by Smith Forts. The judges took no action and, as usual, the Lord Chancellor failed to take action against the judges. These frauds gave rise to the case against the Lord Chancellor.

James Chapman & Co manage the Solicitors' Indemnity Fund. Complaints have been made to the police about both firms of solicitors. Again we see the pattern of the UK authorities attempting to neutralise applicants to the ECHR.

OooOOooO

LETTER TO THE CORRUPT DACORUM BOROUGH COUNCIL

From David Fisher BA (Hons) Oxon (Phone 01442 260329) to Director of Finance John Reed. 13 October 1998.

#### Dear Mr Reed, 1) Why was the Council Tax raised by over 20% when you already had been told by the District Auditor (Deloittee & Touche) that the reserves were too high? 2) Where are the reserves of £12.469 million being held? 3) Why was £4.4 million put aside for a site which you were not going to acquire? 4) Where does the interest on £1.4 million appear in the accounts? 5) Where does the additional interest of £2.2 million appear in the accounts? 6) What is happening to all this interest? 7) Please give details of how the £3.9 million which "must be spent soon " will be spent and when?

Your charter requires you to answer within five working days. Yours sincerely David Fisher. ####

ONE NATION ANTI MASON PARTY

We now have one member but hope to double the membership next week. The victims now believe that Masons are involved in public life but still refuse to believe that Masonry is behind their persecution. They lurch from crisis to crisis focussed on their own problems while the Masons wink and nod in the courts that are crucifying them. They have no problem convincing us of the corruption in the legal system because we have experienced it but they refuse to accept the role of Masonry in that corruption. Will it take another twenty years to convince them? DEVON & CORNWALL AND DORSET. No space. Next week. TV programme makers looking into the Michael Goughlin case. Dorset Masonic cops having a go at Barry Hunt. Gerald Coulter suing the Dorset police Masons who lost him a £70,000 top of the range Jeep by failing to tackle a bent Mason car dealer. Al Baron was screwed again. Case adjourned. Judge Philpot. We'll be watching him.

Published by J M Todd, Misbourne Farmhouse, Amersham Road, Chalfont St Giles, Bucks. HP8 4RU