© Copyright by Paul Trummel 1992-2013. All rights reserved.
|Updated 25-Feb-2013 17:49|
Club JournoScam - Solidarity and Human Rights
National Union of Journalists
Club JournoScam - Solidarity and Human Rights
International Federation of Journalists
Professor Patrick Denis Brown (WSBA 23033), Seattle University School of Law acted pro bono as amicus curiae in Washington State Supreme Court (30 Mar 06) at the instigation of the Journalist (Paul Trummel then a septuagenarian) which resulted in a unanimous decision by nine judges in his favor. That followed six years of harassment, bullying, eviction, death of his dog, jail and solitary confinement during which time he lost his home and all his possessions. That occurred after sixty years as a writer without any legal challenge. He insisted on his basic rights as an international journalist and investigative reporter (especially his individual rights under US First Amendment to the Constitution) to write and publish at his sole discretion using new media.
First Amendment to the US Constitution
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
After a four year struggle against a corrupt judge and HM consul, Seattle mafiosi and their lawyers, self-serving IFJ and NUJ officials the judicial opinion created a legal precedent. It established that new media journalists have the same constitutional rights as print journalists and that freelance investigative reporters have the same rights as those employed by publishers.
The Journalist then returned to UK (after 40 years in the US as both a corporate chief executive officer and university professor also a trade union member in good standing since the late 1950s) to face, as an octogenarian, an absolute denial of human and civil rights together with personal physical violence not experienced in the US despite having worked in volatile civil rights situations in 1960s.
Apologia (Formal Defense and Justification)
Before I stuck out my neck, as I have done since first published in 1944 and knowing about the corrupt judiciary in Seattle, I consulted with officials and officers of National Union of Journalists (NUJ) and International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) to insure that I had their legal backing if I stood my ground and it resulted in legal action: a distinct possibility. I had no idea that trade unions and HM Foreign and Commonwealth, sworn to support me under Vienna Convention, would dump me for political expedience and financial gain.
Washington State judiciary did not accept new media as a bona fide publishing medium until the supreme court opinion primarily through Luddite ignorance. In UK, both old and new media have deteriorated in the ten years since I went to jail evidenced by the need for The Leveson Inquiry led by Sir Brian Henry Leveson PC QC, an English judge, Lord Justice of Appeal of England and Wales and head of the Sentencing Council for England and Wales.
Media generally, trade unions and law enforcement authorities in particular ignore the illegal acts of government and public sector officials by giving lip service to laws and precedents for personal financial advantage and political expedience. Now an octogenarian still working a full schedule, people ask me if would stand my ground again under similar circumstances to those in Seattle. I answer in the affirmative without reservation knowing that it makes me vulnerable to abuse.
Constantly derogated by greedy antagonists, I still heed the words of Winston Churchill as I have done for seventy years. His speeches had a lasting influence upon me during trying times which caused me to follow the advice in his speech (29 Oct 41) to the boys at Harrow School with the theme: "Never, never, in nothing great or small, large or petty, never give in except to convictions of honour and good sense. Never yield to force; never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy''.
I did not have the privilege of attending a public school like Harrow despite being referred by my elementary school teacher to Christ's Hospital, Horsham (The Bluecoat School) as eligible for a special scholarship grant at the age of ten. That came to a swift conclusion when my mother told me that she would not sign for me to “rise above my station”.
I experienced the London blitz and simultaneous sexual abuse in air raid shelters and as an evacuee (similar to that currently in vogue with the investigation of the late Jimmy Savile: ironic considering that BBC has imposed an unlawful prior restraint on the issues contained in this article for ten years). My parents forced me to wear pyjamas fashioned into a straight jacket (at the age of 6) in case I molested little girls. With rape and a parental beating for their perception that I had seduced the pedophile (at the age of eight), I decided that I needed permanent role models.
I had excellent mentor experiences with several teachers at Henry Thornton Grammar School, Clapham after winning a scholarship at the age of eleven and decided that sports were not for me. Instead, I played in the school orchestra as a violinist with private instruction by David Rael, leading violinist of the London Philharmonic Orchestra and joined the debating society as an alternative. Peter Katin, the internationally acclaimed concert pianist, was also a Henry Thornton student at that time.
I had my first writing and entrepreneurial experience by starting a school magazine in my own time and at my own expense. I funded it with money earned collecting horse dung after following United Dairies horse and carts which I sold to rose growers: fresh it was worth sixpence a bucket and stale thruppence so I chose to market the quality product. Coal merchants were more profitable because they used two horses which doubled the volume and the income; however, the milkman delivered daily while the coal merchant delivered only once a month.
The magazine caused my first confrontation with authority. A Marxist teacher wanted to make it a class project with himself as the publisher whereupon I immediately stopped publication and have from that time remained apolitical. He reported me to the headmaster for disobedience and told him that I had cartooned him in my magazine. I had to report to his office and found him to be a very tall Welsh Oxford PhD wielding a bamboo cane shaped like a walking stick and holding up my cartoon.
The headmaster asked if I had caricatured him. I replied that if he found my satire offensive then it portrayed him and that if he found it humorous then it depicted someone else. He put down the cane and put his hand on my shoulder and told me that if I kept thinking that way I would succeed. I was reputedly the only student that came out of his office without a caning.
My mother terminated my successful three-year Thorntonian experience, during which time I joined the Air Training Corps, on grounds that she had decided that I should start an apprenticeship as a cobbler under my father. I rebelled.
I spent the summer finding an apprenticeship with a legal publisher and printer in Fleet Street to meet the parental requirement for me to earn money and retain my working class status. Apprenticeships at that time were limited to father and son relationships; however, I overcame that problem with logical argument that implied professional incest to the master printer who acquiesced. That started me on a career of my own choosing.
I served in Sinai and the Suez canal zone with a Czech wing commander who won the Distinguished Flying Cross for exceptional valor, courage and devotion to duty in the Battle of Britain. He had a positive influence upon me because I could see the cultural disrespect and discrimination that he suffered from the Sandhurst nobs and how he overcame it. Born into a working class family with German and Jewish ancestry, I identified with him and overcame that dilemma.
While at grammar school, I chose as diverse role models: Winston Churchill, British statesman and journalist (1874-1965); Mahatma Gandhi, Indian nationalist, lawyer and spiritual leader who developed nonviolent disobedience (1869-1948); George Orwell, British journalist who attacked totalitarianism and lobbied for social justice (1903-1950) and Rudyard Kipling, British writer and poet (1865-1936) awarded the Nobel prize for literature in 1907. Kipling had a particular affect with his poems If and The Reeds of Runnymede.
I learned from their experience and wisdom that anything other than free speech classified as propaganda imposed upon the unwary though political correctness. Racist intellectuals like Paul Joseph Goebbels, one of Adolf Hitler's closest associates and most devout followers, led zealous orations on anti-Semitism in the same way that current politicians gain power and try to destroy anyone that does not agree with them.
Those role models lived during my formative years and had a profound and lasting influence upon my life. Throughout my adult life I have identified with each of them in different ways. That resulted in an envious academician referring to me as an “eclectic enigma” and a Boston Anglican priest ironically stating “Paul does not suffer fools gladly” in a reference to support my application for the presidency of a US university. I later declined when I found it to be a fund-raising position. In retrospect, I believe that I made wise choices. I feel grateful for the example of these men especially at this time when I again experience bizarre fascist and Marxist pressures.
While in maximum security and solitary confinement, I had 111 days to think about my fifty years professional and academic experience. During my military training in Sinai desert as an Air Observation Post radio operator, I was told by a warrant officer that if I “injured a wog then finish the job: we do not need the paperwork”. From that moment, I have never used any weapon other than my pen and my writing has never suffered a legal challenge. Sixty years later I am seeing a similar philistine, racial attitude in the same geographic area. Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose. (The more things change, the more they are the same.)
As the only “honkey” on the block, the guards knew about my writing and refused me pen and paper. However, a murderer gave me a pencil stub and I used toilet paper to make notes. I worked with many of the prisoners during my time in jail and three of them graduated with a GCE. Many left jail with their first resume after I wrote up the many skills that they possessed as legitimate work attributes. They granted me the dubious honor of calling me the "honkey home boy". Some of them have since contacted me to tell me about their legitimate employment. The week that a public defender sprung me from jail, I wrote an apologia which I had not done before. In it I recalled and examined my attitudes and experiences which encouraged me not to change. [Apologia]
With apologies to Carl Marx, I have coined a phrase to describe the disgusting people about whom I now write in the hope that eyes will open and elderly people will take steps to protect themselves from people who practice the maxim: "From each according to their inabilities, to each according to their greed." With that maxim in mind, I dedicate this article to Jeremy Dear and Michelle Stanistreet (NUJ), Aidan White (IFJ) and NUJ shysters Claire Susan Kirby (SRA #21078) and Roy Martin Mincoff (SRA #112029).
They showed no interest or even acknowledged that the Washington State Supreme Court hearings took place. They have for ten years maintained an absolute media blackout on the hearings which resulted in a unanimous decision by nine judges in my favor. They maliciously capped my gas supply and left me without heat and hot water in a flat riddled with noxious fumes for 15 months which includes two winters with below zero temperatures. They jointly and severally denied me my human rights and gambled upon my death. More important, they have used prior restraint to mislead the many ethical journalists in union membership who buy their extremist dogmas.
Jonathan Tasini, President, National Writers Union (NWU-US); Aidan White, General Secretary, International Federation of Journalists (IFJ-EU) and nine hundred other journalists in Europe published details of my indeterminate, illegal imprisonment. In contrast, Reginald (Tim) Gopsill, Editor, Journalist (NUJ magazine) in a consort with Jeremy Dear, BBC, PCC and Press Gazette ordered an absolute media blackout. That blackout has lasted for ten years and prevented NUJ members from offering solidarity to a union member of sixty years standing. Instead, using myriad elder abuse they have portrayed me as a doddering old bastard to cover up their own subliteracy and inadequacy. They have gambled upon my death and lost.
I hope to remain a pain in their ass for another twenty years (several family members lived to 100) so that people who ethically and morally stand their ground gain impetus. I hope that The Leveson Report will reestablish the traditional standards that so many people have fought for since Magna Carta and that Lord Justice Leveson takes note of Professor Brown’s argument when he publishes his opinion. I have no inclination to go to jail again; however, Shakespeare wrote in All’s Well that Ends Well: “My poor body, madam, requires it: I am driven on by the flesh; and he must needs go that the devil drives”.
Washington State Supreme Court
Professor Brown performed admirably when he argued the case in supreme court six years ago. The linked abstracts relate to amicus curiae briefs filed with Washington Supreme Court (25 Oct 04 and 23 May 05). [Washington Supreme Court - Abstracts]
Professor Patrick Denis Brown (WSBA 23033), Seattle University School of Law argued before Washington State Supreme Court that:
International Federation of Journalists (IFJ), the world's largest journalists' group, represents more than 500,000 reporters, editors and creators working in all sectors of media worldwide, states that: appellant suffered infringement of his personal freedom of expression through restrictions imposed by a Washington State trial court. This led to his imprisonment and interference with the content of his Internet publication.
Freedom of expression, as set out in Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), remains the professional right of journalists except in the most extreme cases. The agencies of the United Nations and within the democratic community of nations recognize self-regulation.
Definition of the term "journalist" varies. In some countries, the law defines the term professional journalist, establishes criteria for persons wishing to enter the profession and sets out the legal rights and responsibilities of persons carrying out this work.
We strongly dispute the attempt to discredit appellant as a journalist. The trial court's reasoning represents a real and direct threat to the freedom of thought and expression on which journalism depends.
National Union of Journalists (NUJ) represents 35,000 journalists working in all media. London Freelance Branch (Local) has about 3,000 of the 6000 freelance members working nationally and internationally. A Washington State trial court infringed the freedom of expression of a freelance member by imprisoning him for exercising his journalistic and personal freedom of expression.
A veteran journalist, he worked for many years as a columnist, public relations officer and media academic. He has spent half his life in London and half in USA. NUJ contends that the trial court committed a gross error of judgment by jailing a journalist because he would not submit to restriction of free expression enshrined in documents universally recognized by the civilized world.
Internationally notorious, this case presents an appalling spectacle. The court threw an elderly journalist into jail and forced him to endure several weeks in solitary confinement for exercising rights guaranteed by the United States First Amendment, the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the United Kingdom Human Rights Act. The case raises troubling questions about freedom of expression and Internet publication.
The Internet, a medium that affords automatic global access to everything published on it, requires civilized standards of freedom of expression that transcend national boundaries. Those standards protect essential human aspiration to freedom enshrined in documents universally recognized by the civilized world no matter what regime prevails. If trial court thinking in this case forms any part of judicial response to journalistic or other expression in any country then freedom of expression could end.
Journalists often cause offense by telling the truth. The court's judgment in this case suggests that if a reader complains about offense resulting from content of a publication then they can ask for restriction or termination of the publication. Such a precedent would lead to constant prior restraint of authors and publishers, limitation of existing publications and dominance of "official versions" of events - a travesty of the whole principle of freedom of expression.
United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights declares: "Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes the freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers". United Kingdom Human Rights Act addresses the same issue in nearly the same terms.
The trial court ruled that petitioner does not rank as a journalist because he self-published some of his work. If even remotely accurate, then this characterization seems far removed from national and international standards governing freedom of speech and journalism. It takes little imagination to recognize how the damaging implications in this case affect all publishing media. Even under the law of defamation a court cannot order the unconscionable sort of abuse meted to the petitioner by the trial court.
Trial court's actions in this case manifest a profound and troubling disregard for the petitioner's freedom of speech. Court of Appeals reasoning represents a real and direct threat to the freedom of thought and expression on which journalism depends. A free press forms an integral part of the very foundation of democratic institutions.
Other Published Opinions
Jonathan Tasini, President, National Writers Union (NWU) an IFJ affiliate wrote:
Paul Trummel, a member of the Seattle local, has been in jail since (27 Feb 02). He is charged with contempt of court by James Doerty, a King County Superior Court judge, who says Trummel is not a legitimate investigative reporter because he edits and publishes his own work.
This message comes to ask you to help Paul Trummel by seeking his release and, at the same time, help yourself and your colleagues by standing up for your status as a freelance writer. . . . Doerty's ruling strikes at the legitimacy of every freelancer who is not attached to a specific publisher or periodical.
According to the transcript (19 Apr 01), . . . Doerty said, " . . . It is my finding specifically that his claim to be a journalist is a bogus claim insofar as he has no useful journalistic purpose. . . . He is not employed by anybody but himself, there is no publisher involved, there is no press involved, there is merely the misguided use of an obviously well-developed talent. . . ."
The judge ordered Trummel held until he takes down a web site on which he accuses management of a Department of Housing and Urban Development-subsidized senior housing project of various improprieties. Trummel instead moved his web site to a server outside the United States [Holland], with a notice to Washington State residents not to read the material.
The National Writers Union deplores any judgment that denies freelance writers the status of journalists simply because they publish their own work. The First Amendment applies to all writers, regardless of their employment status. Trummel should be freed immediately without requiring that he censor his publication.
Independent writers are having an increasingly difficult time preserving their rights to do their work. In a recent Massachusetts case, community reporter Patricia Demarest went to court after a public access cable TV company suspended her for airing a broadcast in which she grilled local officials about conflicts of interest. In that case, a federal judge ruled (05 Mar 02) that freelance journalists have the same rights as those employed by news outlets.
Last year freelance book author Vanessa Leggett was jailed on civil contempt charges for 169 days after refusing to disclose interview material she gathered under a promise of confidentiality. The judge who jailed her said she was not a real journalist because she had never published a book. Leggett is out of jail now. Her case is headed for the US Supreme Court.
Independent journalists are crucial to our society's ability to understand daily events that they might not otherwise read or hear about. Any erosion of the rights of independent writers to do their work undermines the free flow of information.
Aidan White, former General Secretary, International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) made the following comment about the case which European media widely published:
The judge has advanced the dangerous argument that this freelance has no professional status because he edits and publishes his own work. If this argument is upheld it is a threat to reporters everywhere, particularly those who live in the real world of journalism which is dominated by self-starters and independent professionals.
Journalists' unions in the US and elsewhere are right to deplore any judgment that denies writers the status of journalists simply because they publish their own work. Freelance reporters must have the same professional rights as those employed by media outlets." Referring to the journalist's solitary confinement while denied access to a prison telephone or a lawyer, White said: "This victimization has gone on for long enough".
Robert Ménard, Secretary-General, Reporters Without Borders made five recommendations for online free expression:
1. Any law about the flow of information online must be anchored in freedom of expression as defined in Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
2. Internet users alone must decide what material they can and wish to access online. Automatic filtering of online content, by governments or private firms, is unacceptable. Filters must only be installed by Internet users themselves and only on their personal connection. Any policy of higher-level (national or even local) filtering conflicts with the principle of the free flow of information.
3. A decision to shut down a web site, even an illegal one, must not in any circumstances be taken by the site's host or any other technical provider of Internet services. Only a judge can ban an online publication. A technical service provider cannot therefore be held criminally or civilly responsible for any illegal material posted on a hosted website unless the service provider refuses to obey a ruling by an impartial and independent court.
4. A government's civil or criminal powers are limited to content hosted on its territory or specifically aimed at the country's Internet users.
5. The editors of online publications, including bloggers and those running personal sites, must have the same protection and be shown the same consideration as professional journalists since, like them, they exercise a basic freedom, that of freedom of expression.
Jeremy Dear, former General Secretary, National Union of Journalists wrote:
Absolutely nothing; instead, he orchestrated a campaign of derogation and defamation to cover up his own subliteracy for financial advantage and political expedience: the established behaviour of a psychopath. Reginald (Tim) Gopsill, former Editor, Journalist (NUJ magazine) ordered an absolute media blackout supported by Jeremy Dear, General Secretary, NUJ. That blackout has lasted for ten years and prevented NUJ members from offering solidarity to a union member of sixty years standing which maliciously denied him due process of law and perverted the course of justice. [Derogation]
Whores of Headland House
Political accountability and statutes apply to both trade union officials (full-time paid employees) and members of parliament. In both cases, recall elections can be used to revoke the office of elected officials for misconduct; however, constituents (members) do not generally have any direct way of holding their elected representatives to account during an elected term. Arguably, this does not legally apply to officials elected unopposed as the result of machination allegedly the case in the appointment of Michelle Stanistreet, NUJ General Secretary.
Trade union members can call for independent, public or court inquiry when allegations of misconduct or corruption arise. Parliament has power to impeach its members or suspend them from office for a period of time. The government relies on the support of parliament which gives it the power to hold its members accountable.
Jeremy Dear, former General Secretary, National Union of Journalists (NUJ) and successive NUJ lawyers, in a consort with Gareth R Thomas MP (Harrow West), former Minister of State, Department for International Development neglected to act in accordance with Vienna Convention and NUJ Rules by not providing an NUJ member and West Harrow constituent mandatory support. They have since refused to account for their dereliction either by dumb insolence or silent withholding of information to obstruct justice.
Although journalists report crimes they do not prosecute them. Restriction of their activity and lack of union support for which they have paid dues, makes NUJ officials morally and legally responsible for negative outcomes. Dear condoned or ordered an illegal prior restraint upon NUJ news articles. By that, he prevented exposure of crimes that could have precluded or preempted abuse and death of elderly people and imprisonment and torture of an NUJ member.
Couched in Machiavellian terms:
. . . how laudable it is for a Prince to keep his word and live with integrity and not cunning.
Nonetheless, experience shows that nowadays those princes who accomplish great things have had little respect for keeping their word and have known how to confuse men's minds with cunning. In the end they have overcome those who preferred honesty.
Club JournoScam addresses the alleged conflicts of interest among NUJ officials and a Member of Parliament which have prejudiced an NUJ member and constituent. Attempts by NUJ officers to cover up UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office misconduct, through action or inaction, constitute obstruction of justice.
Facts Michelle Stanistreet, NUJ General Secretary does not want Members to know.
Judge James A Doerty, Washington Superior Court censored constitutionally protected writing published in print and on a web site. He then jailed a British subject (an NUJ/IFJ/NWU journalist) without due process of law and benefit of legal counsel in violation of Vienna Convention. By that, he permitted torture and established a legal precedent. The finding granted carte blanche for arbitrary prior restraint which negatively affected all journalists; however, Doerty overlooked the fact that ethical journalists meet their responsibility to write about what they know then stand up for their rights to publish it.
Doerty claimed (in a decision later reversed by WA Supreme Court) that interviews by journalists with willing sources defined as harassment and news gathering constituted illegal surveillance and stalking. He then conspired with David C Broom, then British Consul, to ratchet up coercion for removal of EU hosted web sites by transferring the Journalist to incommunicado solitary confinement among murderers and rapists.
The Journalist languished in jail (contrary to Vienna Convention) on an unlawful, indeterminate contempt order issued by a rogue judge for investigating and exposing elder abuse and terrorism. Doerty acted for political expedience contrary to contempt of court rules by arbitrarily trying to silence an investigative reporter. After 111 days of torture and solitary confinement, a public defender had the Journalist released on a writ similar to habeas corpus. [Vienna Convention]
Jonathan Tasini, President, National Writers Union (NWU-US); Aidan White, General Secretary, International Federation of Journalists (IFJ-EU); and, about nine hundred journals in Europe; published details of the illegal imprisonment. In contrast, Reginald (Tim) Gopsill, Editor, Journalist (NUJ magazine) BBC and Press Gazette ordered an absolute media blackout.
The blackout has lasted for ten years and prevented NUJ members from offering solidarity to a union member of sixty years standing. By that, Dear, Gopsill, Thomas and NUJ lawyers neglected to provide member or constituent support guaranteed by parliament and Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 (the Act).
Ongoing investigation by four Law Enforcement Agencies (LEA) (with two more impending) involve violations of the Act and criminal complaints. The investigations cover cyber-terrorism by Internet denial-of-service attacks and illegal computer vandalism which could involve extradition of the culprits; illegal prior restraint by Gopsill; and obstruction of justice by Dear, Stanistreet and NUJ NEC officers.
Law enforcement agencies include local, national and international police empowered to enforce laws and rules of government, trade unions or political bodies. They have power to effect public and social order through the enforcement of laws resulting from abrogation of administrative rules at trade union level and international crimes like cyber-terrorism.
Jeremy Dear and Roy M Mincoff, NUJ in-house solicitor have either used willful blindness and deceit to evade their responsibilities or committed crimes themselves. Supported by an exclusive group of NUJ officers and officials (the Cabal) they usurped power for political expedience in violation of the Act. Dear has used the politics of deceit and a ten year media blackout to cover up willful negligence then accepted a government grant as quid pro quo - a distinct conflict of interest.
Lies supported by shrewd and skilled deception portend the end of freedom of expression. Silent withholding of public information and minutes of meetings contradict the open ethics principles that govern acceptable conduct within trade unions. Transparency implies openness, communication and accountability using procedures that include open meetings, financial disclosure and access to records and minutes.
Trade union transparency requires removal of all barriers to, and facilitation of, free and easy member access to laws, rules and processes that facilitate and protect members from disingenuous officers and clandestine government associates. Openness creates an everyday participation in political processes by media and the public and allows a modern democracy to build upon involvement by all concerned.
Accountability, an ethical concept, synonymously defines with responsibility, answerability, enforcement, blameworthiness, liability and associated terms. An aspect of governance, it remains central to discussions related to problems in both trade union and public environments. In leadership roles, it forms the basis of acknowledgment and assumption of responsibility for administrative and governance decisions and policies by encompassing an obligation to report, explain and remain answerable for consequences.
Ethical union members do not conceal abuse of office and obstruction of justice. They voluntarily reveal what they know to insure due process of law and freedom of expression through solidarity - union of fundamental interests, purposes and sympathies based in law. The term "conceal" implies an intention to withhold or secrete information so that a member entitled to it will remain in ignorance. The term "obstruction of justice" (which defines a criminal offense under common law) applies to those who abuse executive powers and evade mandated responsibilities in order to impede trade union members who seek due process of law predicated upon their trade union membership.
The recent closure of the Marxist NUJ-Left, which has abused elderly members and contributed to the near bankruptcy of NUJ, takes a step toward achieving those goals.
Alan Gibson, for the NUJ-Left steering committee wrote:
Closure of NUJ Left (11 Sep 12)
Comrades. It has, over the past few months, become clear that the NUJ Left in its present form cannot survive. Major disagreements over the future of the union, and controversy over the Recovery Plan and alternative proposals, has created huge tensions which cannot be accommodated in one body. . . .
This action showed some sense after years when officers milked funds using a loophole in NUJ rules which enabled them to live on expenses. That loophole also facilitated unlawful financial support of NUJ-Left and other extremist political factions contrary to trade union rules and the unopposed, unlawful appointment of Michelle Stanistreet, NUJ General Secretary.
NUJ must now make reparation for the serious damage done to long-time elderly members through harassment and abuse in violation of the Equality Act 2006. The linked articles show how two of the principal NUJ branches (Manchester and London Freelance) used alleged criminal activity to support their Marxist contentions. [Political Factions and Member Apathy]
Although oligarchy and anarchy do not normally share the same political space, Jeremy Dear has managed to cultivate coexistence (a fertile ground for despotism) which portends another trade union disaster reminiscent of the 1980s. NUJ now consists of a strange political mix which has resulted in a system of leadership based upon fear, discrimination and harassment which results from coercion, intimidation and propaganda. NUJ officers and officials deny civil and human rights to members despite potential litigation under international law.
If union members maintain a conspiracy of silence about illegal acts, then eventually the reputation of the whole trade union movement suffers. They cannot improve public perception of trade unions while officials abuse the overriding rights and welfare of members.
If journalists acquiesce to decisions by others on what they may write and what they may not write, then they concede to censorship which starts a long trail of prohibitions for political or other self-aggrandizing purposes. Self-censorship often provides solace to unethical journalists who attack a particular genre or a writer to establish political agendas when they cannot fault or challenge the accuracy of content.
Any type of censorship restricts language to narrowly defined criteria. Then, politically correct ideologies force everyone to learn the same way, to teach the same way, to research the same way, to discourse the same way and to write the same way. Subsequent conformity destroys any vestige of individuality. The exclusivity forces everyone to become a clone of someone else.
The job of media remains one of encouraging debate and not merely supplying the public with information. Past failures have contributed to the present talk-show mentality with its ranting and posturing. This has created a world that allows a worldwide totalitarian presence to cover-up wrongdoing through censorship, prior restraint and silent withholding of public records which defines as "political silence".
Unfortunately, the public identifies the innocent with the guilty when details of corruption eventually surface: currently demonstrated by exposure of the expenses scandal in parliament and investigation of the late Jimmy Savile, a BBC celebrity for many years, for sexual deviance. Ethical journalists do not conceal abuse of office and quid pro quo to give the appearance of justice. Instead, they reveal what they know to insure due process of law and freedom of expression through solidarity: the union of interests, purposes and sympathies.
Dear and Stanistreet ignored the basic precepts of trade unionism afforded to members arguably for ulterior or biased motives and defrauded a member by withdrawing support at a critical time which resulted in an indefinite jail sentence. Then, they tried to cover up their dereliction by record withholding, clandestine hearings and personal abuse in a consort with lawyers.
Practices exist today in National Union of Journalists (NUJ) which have moved away from the basic principles of trade union democracy: due process and freedom of expression through solidarity. NUJ now operates on an illegal notion that allows elected and appointed officers to usurp power by subverting elections and mandated procedures to benefit themselves financially. The machination includes unopposed election, sycophancy, rogue lawyers, propaganda, media censorship and coercion.
A journalist who writes his own story creates a personal conflict which he accepts to protect himself and to obtain due process of law. After sixty years as a writer and a member of various journalism, academic, media trade unions and professional organizations as an official and journal editor, he now finds himself defrauded by union officers, a member of parliament and diplomats: a situation that he will not tolerate and will pursue to the full extent of the law. This will include filing criminal charges of fraud and discrimination against NUJ officers and officials, jointly and severally, in addition to civil complaints already filed.
Politically correct thinking and writing destroys diversity. It enables those in power to deny freedom of expression to dissenters and to destroy media which paradoxically describes the practices now in place within National Union of Journalists which its General Secretary condones. Covert manipulation of union media makes her personally and legally liable for the outcome of prior restraint and impunity that it implicitly grants. No executive immunity exists for malicious criminal intent under the Act and willful blindness precedents make officers criminally liable if they do not investigate, mitigate and arrange for prosecution of crimes.
Malfeasance and machination by Dear and Stanistreet, NUJ lawyers, elected officers and Thomas during the past ten years has denied support to a member seeking to overcome illegal censorship and outrageous imprisonment. By that, they jointly and severally condoned the jailing and torture, also a cover-up of crimes involving prior restraint and Internet denial-of-service attacks as accessories after the fact.
For successive NUJ general secretaries to abuse and humiliate members upon whom they rely for their livelihood, manifests stupidity. To extend that behavior into a coordinated campaign based upon apparent antisocial personality disorders ranks much more seriously. Pathological lying has made them a prime target for unscrupulous lawyers (whom they scrupulously parrot) and manipulative sycophants. [Politics of Deceit]
The Journalist has written hundreds of articles about harassment of senior citizens and homicide by abuse. He founded Contra Cabal, one of the first electronic magazines to appear on the web, for which he develops the site, writes articles, designs pages and produces graphics. He has published in print since 1944 and on the web since 1992. Published for 68 years, he has not received a single challenge to the authenticity of his investigative reporting.
He has held international press credentials for more than fifty years; spent twenty years as a new media industry CEO and systems designer/consultant; and, twenty years as a post-graduate professor teaching computer industry executives and students of journalism, law and graphic design working on their masters or doctoral degrees. He has attended hundreds of business, faculty and trade union committee meetings including national conventions.
The Journalist must now spend his retirement years trying to mitigate the malicious damage caused by NUJ/IFJ officials and officers through harassment, dereliction and a malicious cover-up of criminal activity. In any legal action against NUJ, he will show that he has done everything possible to reduce damage in a way that lessens severity or intensity. That mitigation only proves an effort to contain monetary damages pursuant to law. Washington State Bar Association (WSBA) and Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) filings fulfil a mitigative purpose but do not reduce the severity of NUJ/IFJ neglect to provide a duty of care to its members and its perversion of the course of justice. [Perverting the Course of Justice]
On her alleged unlawful appointment as NUJ General Secretary, Michelle Stanistreet continued the abuse of process that has lasted for more than ten years. IFJ General Secretary, Elisabeth Costa has acted in a similar fashion to obstruct due process of law by willful blindness and laissez faire. Both Dear and Stanistreet, through their in-house solicitor Roy Mincoff, have interfered with investigation of criminal complaints by several police divisions considered derelict in their duty to thoroughly, investigate charges of threatened and actual grievous bodily harm and myriad other issues they have now become the responsibility of Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC); by that, the issues define as pendente lite.
Recent 0pportunities to Mitigate
Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2012 10:04:32 +0100
Beth Costa, IFJ General Secretary.
If I do not receive a signed apology from Mindy Ran before a deadline of 08:00 Wednesday 14 November 2012, which must be prominently published on the home page of both the IFJ and NUJ web sites for at least six months, then I will proceed with legal and government action.
While it does not appear at first sight that the defamatory statement by Ran is very serious, it forms part of a much wider slagging operation orchestrated by Michelle Stanistreet for several years.
Stanistreet's behaviour is currently being examined by several government investigators especially details of her fraudulent appointment as NUJ General Secretary and my unlawful expulsion from both IFJ and NUJ. With other officials and officers she rigged the election then had my membership removed so that I could not challenge her appointment with the Certification Officer within the time allowed. By that, I could not challenge her manipulation of NUJ election rules to her own advantage.
If you read all the articles linked to the panel entitled Media Release - Whores of Headland House - The Leveson Inquiry you will realize how serious and damaging to NUJ/IFJ are the human rights issues involved which I am quite prepared to take to EU if I do not get satisfaction from IFJ and NUJ.
See the panel at the foot of column two at:
to realize the seriousness of this situation which implicates Mindy Ran who has probably been used as an ethnic gatekeeper by Stanistreet (implied by a source).
I travelled to Brussels especially to meet with former General Secretary, Aidan White to give him an opportunity to mitigate damage to my reputation by NUJ officials and officers. My journalistic standing has never been challenged by anyone since I was first published in 1944. I have been a member in good standing in IFJ and/or NUJ and NWU since the late 1950s.
Although I travelled to Brussels and stayed at a local hotel 21 nights (26 Nov 08 through 17 Dec 08) at my own expense, when he was available in his office most of the time, White deliberately humiliated me by not meeting with me on the eight days that I visited IFJ offices. While I was in Brussels, I was in daily contact with Ernest Sagaga whom I found to be courteous, helpful and understanding.
Sagaga should have all the documentation that I gave to him at that time after preparing it at the Central Library for lack of an Internet connection. I suggest that you should read the articles linked to the panel and those documents then discuss the issues with him. He discussed them with me in depth; however, at that time it appeared that he was a new member of staff and could do very little except spend time discussing the issues and documenting them. I have kept him posted during the four years since I met with him.
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2012 10:47:23 +0100
Beth Costa, IFJ General Secretary.
Individuals featured in Contra Cabal receive prior notice in accordance with international codes of ethics agreed among journalists. Several of those codes have international legal precedent. They have an opportunity to mitigate damage and to refute statements that could negatively affect their reputations or cause investigation or prosecution of them for alleged illegal acts.
The notices give them an opportunity to challenge with substantiated evidence any charges affecting their ethical or moral character. For public accountability, the author encourages them to respond in open exchange before a deadline. Individuals mentioned incidentally receive a copy of the notice as a courtesy.
Journalists must report the truth no matter whom they offend and with disregard for the consequences of publication. Accurate reporting predicates a higher purpose and the common good.
The author does not solicit personal opinions and informs individuals that they should address only matters of fact. The notices declare personal or conflicting interests that relate to topics or to opinion especially when the content draws upon advocacy, experience, conclusion, or interpretation and advise of a responsibility to gather information and develop public awareness about wrongdoing and violation of codes of conduct.
Primarily, the articles expose malfeasance and misuse of public funds also abuse of elderly tenants by landlords, trust officials and law enforcement agencies. Named individuals neglected to adhere to their duty of care. Some maliciously damaged others and their reputations by libel, slander, assault, or other unlawful acts. No person receives immunity from investigation. Anything published results from investigation, verification and validation which takes into account violations of law or breach of established rules and ethical practices.
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2012 09:52:24 +0100
Media Release - 880-37-45 - 12-1014-1200
Restricted Release to Recipients on IFJ lists.
International Federation of Journalists
Elisabeth Costa, General Secretary <email@example.com>
Ernest Sagaga, Human Rights and Information Officer <firstname.lastname@example.org>
The deadline for a response has now passed; however, it will be extended to 12:00 Friday 16 November 2012. The responsibility of IFJ to address these issues is now four years overdue.
As protagonists or principals in trade union farce, Dear and Stanistreet (NUJ) have set up unlawful procedures to evade prosecution for criminal activity. Dooley (NUJ Ireland) and Fray (NUJ) all members of IFJ have colluded with them as straws. Dooley ranks as a citizen of a foreign country. They repeated behaviour strengthens the call by the Journalist for a public inquiry. Although formally approached to address the issues during 2010, IFJ has stonewalled them. By that, they have repeatedly violated human rights laws especially as the Journalist is an octogenarian. They have used laissez faire to gamble on death. If they knowingly proceed with this farce, then they will become liable to prosecution in EU courts for fraud and evasion of pending charges of criminal activity in UK courts.
The Journalist, formerly a Pacific Northwest Delegate, National Writers Union (NWU) and member of National Union of Journalists (NUJ) has challenged many court decisions that violated constitutional and journalism rights in the 66 years since he first joined a Fleet Street union and started to read law. As CEO of one of the 10% largest (by number of employees) publishing/printing corporations in the US and a professor of communication he has seen it all before but not to the criminal extent that exists within NUJ/IFJ. Electoral incest and rogue lawyers exist in almost all trade unions regardless of country; however, most participants temper their machination with a sense of self-preservation.
In any legal action against NUJ, the Journalist will show that he has done everything possible to mitigate damage in a way that lessens severity or intensity: a fruitless task when dealing with a psychopath and his sycophantic deputy (now the alleged fraudulently appointed NUJ General Secretary). This notice gives yet another chance to IFJ officials and officers to mitigate intentional tort before NUJ becomes embroiled in multiple law suits which by their machination they have elevated to the international arena.
The Issues Involve
Abuse of Process
Anarchy and Apathy
Human Rights Act
Law Enforcement Railroading
Mincoff's Flying Circus - Position Paper
Perverting the Course of Justice
Questionable Quid Pro Quo
Without Let or Hindrance
Without Let or Hindrance - The Sequel