LOUDSPEAKER: AND YET A.N.OTHER !! GOVERNMENT DIRTY TRICKS CAMPAIGN
DAY 3923: TUESDAY FEBRUARY 28TH 2012.
DAY 43 WITHOUT SHELTER.
So, in the rest of the country it is straightforward.
You don't need consent to use a loudspeaker for political speech.
However, today it was revealed (SEE BELOW) when I notified of my intention to use a loudspeaker again, outside Parliament, that the powers to be in Westminster, have been busy behind the scenes, arranging their latest dirty tricks campaign, to try and silence our speaking out about Genocide.
There is of course nowhere too low that our dear leaders, who are mass murderers will go.
Unusually, Westminster City Council put my notification out to a selective "consultation", without of course, informing me of this.
Then in dirty tricks 101, Westminster City Council dumped, shortly before the hearing tomorrow, a 45 page pile of mainly unsubstantiated he said/she said drivel on me, along with some straight out libel, calling it their "report".
Having failed to give me any time to respond properly, (and I would say a court looks the best place to have what is libel heard) they were obviously hoping to proceed on the basis of a verbal he said/she said, response.
The "report" did however, give some interesting behind the scene insights into the mindset of control freaks, including some prize gems that in the circumstances very stupidly refer to the old chestnut of security risk.
ie: Peace Strike (who would probably have been known as red baiters in the old days) have sought to smear my name, in lodging an "objection" to my using a loudspeaker, while attempting to continue covering up their relationship with the police involving their often unmanned campaign, which curiously is not deemed a ...err...security risk..
The paper trail also shows the police meanwhile, oddly asked for a condition that I could not use a loudspeaker unless I am authorised under SOCPA 2005 ss 132-138 by them, despite the use of a loudspeaker no longer being restricted by SOCPA 2005 ss 132-138 !! The police must have been suprised when they had to produce an authorisation last Friday !!
While Westminster Abbey did a 360 degrees going from having no objection to one week later informing of their total opposition....without giving any reasons !!
From: babs tucker
Subject: loudspeaker and libel.
Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 08:57:47 +0000
most importantly, it really is beyond time for the state to face up to the fact that we are speaking out about war crimes, involving the brutal deaths of innocent civilians, in illegal wars of aggression. and grown adults in government really need to start showing some respect for human life.
i do not therefore appreciate being bounced with having a 45 page "report" which basically outlines a culture of backstabbing skulduggery, in government, being dumped on me at too short notice for me to be able to properly respond, in time for the hearing.
i therefore require, and will be down to collect shortly written confirmation that you have withdrawn my notification from what would have been a kangaroo hearing.
i would appreciate this written confirmation being left at reception.
i will then take legal advice on how i will proceed over the issue of the loudspeaker with westminster city council. and i copy this to: a) ms gallastegui's lawyer, mr ridge from bindmans and b) superintendent morgan, to whom, I have this to say about their objections for example.
i am going to issue proceedings against ms gallastegui and the police in the courts, for trying to publicly smear my name in an attempt to dishonestly continue covering up that peace strike can repeatedly be left unmanned ….while the old chestnut of security risk.. is repeatedly, wheeled out to be used against our campaign ( I refer to that idiot Julian Lewis MP who would also like to avoid the truth of what he is responsible for) the latest "objection" by the equally responsibility free zone, known as ms gallastegui just underlines the deliberate malice involved in maintaining the deception.
how dare anyone (ie: ms gallastegui and the police) try to smear my name, (and have me arrested etc) to try and cover up what they have been doing.
i will now be pursuing ms gallastegui and the police through the proper venue, of a court, to receive a written public apology along with damages, admitting that they have sought to conceal that peace strike is repeatedly left unmanned, while both the police and peace strike, have sought and continue to try to smear my name while attempting to cause our campaign, very, very serious harm.
you only have to look at CAD 8501 from last sunday, to see the police came down and saw peace strike unmanned, yet still try to cover this up, meaning this is being sanctioned by superintendent morgan.
and as you know yourself, when westminster city council sought to deliver what now turns out to be the consultation to ms gallastegui, the irony is the campaign was unmanned !!!!
in all the circumstances it is an affront to the rule of law and common decency that the "police" were even pursuing any "conditions" on our use of a loudspeaker. no-one should even need an authorisation or conditions from the police under SOCPA 2005 ss 132-138 when peace strike could be left unmanned.
parliament square peace campaign
keep running sunshine
From: babs tucker
Subject: FW: Report for the Licensing Sub-Committee - 29.2.12
Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2012 16:37:20 +0000
further to our conversation earlier this afternoon when you visited me in parliament square.
obviously i did not & could not
a) realise that my notification would go out to consultation, nor given that i have not had a copy of the subsequent 45 page "report" until around midday today,
b) given it is 45 pages long, have had proper time to consider and address (through obtaining legal advice and providing a written witness statement containing a statement of truth, the numerous issues raised, some of which include serious allegations and in the case of one, a grossly libellous statement that was made, knowing it to be untrue).
given that the outcome of any council hearing may mean where consent may be denied, that i am subject to the very serious consequence of being arrested, prosecuted, and convicted as a result of any decision, to not give consent, (which in my opinion would nevertheless be based on submissions that are at best the he said/she said made for a council hearing of doubtful legal validity), i will now need to be given sufficient opportunity:
a) to take legal advice
b) and be legally represented at any council hearing c) to address the issues raised and provide my own evidence
obviously i will need the opportunity to provide evidence to address for example, the libellous attempt by peace strike to disgracefully publicly smear my name ...AGAIN in their "objection", which has now, (which is very, very serious), been publicly circulated etc.
as we discussed only this afternoon, you know (and we have the photographic evidence) which is an irony... that even as the council sought to consult peace strike over my notification, your staff found the peace strike campaign unmanned. clearly the fact their campaign is repeatedly left unmanned (with the agreement of the police) is not for example, an "unfounded" allegation.
it is a fact with very serious legal consequences where the police and ms gallastegui have repeatedly and maliciously sought to deliberately cause our campaign very serious harm.
and this latest public "objection" in the face of their continuing public deceit (and where i haven't even used a loudspeaker since obama's visit) just underlines the level of ongoing deliberate malice involved, on their part.
and one only has to consider this: how could one campaign be considered a security risk (and subject to onerous searches and legal proceedings) or indeed prosecuted as an obstruction of the highway (by westminster city council), or need "police authorisation" where conditions regarding a security risk are imposed (see attached authorisation), when the only other campaign (peace strike) can repeatedly as a matter of fact be left unmanned without by contrast being considered a security risk or an obstruction ?
there have been very real and serious - legal - consequences arising from the continuing cover up over what continues to repeatedly be an unmanned campaign.
only the other day CAD 8501 on 26.02.2012 where cw 3551 responded, to concerns peace strike was left unmanned, shows the cover up still going on.
it should also be further noted that ms gallastegui declined to appear or provide any signed witness statement with an attached statement of truth, in any legal proceedings in the high court involving the mayor of london, which she then would have had to defend on a witness stand under cross examination, the allegation that i put in writing on january 13th 2010, at belgravia police stataion, in legal proceedings, where i named her as an agent provocateur.
and let's face it. i was being generous, because she is not working alone.
it is of note that the mayor's counsel confirmed in proceedings in the high court, when asked by our counsel, that the mayor, despite knowing, ms gallastegui was an organizer of democracy village, declined to name her in proceedings, while the mayor chose to name and put brian and i through onerous legal proceedings that anyone can see arose entirely out of the actions of those who organized democracy village.
so what any hearing needs to highlight is that individuals like, ms gallastegui for starters and for example, are not being at all honest about the true nature of any "objection" which in the case of peace strike, is a) about controlling our message b) trying to silence me, by having me arrested if necessary to cover up peace strike are working with the police to ...cause our campaign harm.
when you think about it, peace strike have had and have refused every opportunity to publicly come clean and this latest "objection" just underlines the need to make what they are doing, stop.
given the lateness of my being given 45 pages of paperwork relating to a hearing tomorrow, i will need you confirmation in writing that the hearing is either:
b) you have withdrawn my notification prior to the hearing,
which i will then resubmit following legal advice etc & with the necessary evidence etc.
i would prefer to take the time to do this properly, rather than risk another arrest, prosecution and convictions (which is a serious issue that in my opinion is being treated in rather a frivolous manner by "objectors")
i copy to anghel.
parliament square peace campaign
From: babs tucker
Subject: ps Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2012 17:19:23 +0000
ps. the report is also incorrect in that i am not applying to just use a loudspeaker between 10-1030pm on tues, weds, thurs and for one hour on a wednesday.
parliament square peace campaign