A Riddle: McNicol’s Justice says that I'm not allowed to know the names of my accusers
How then can I cross-examine them?
|It would seem that Michael Foot's semi-house trained polecat and crooked McNicol share a lot in common|
|Solicitor's letter to McNicol asking who is instructing him and who's told him not to reveal legal advice to the NEC|
On reflection I’ve decided it is highly unfair for people to compare Labour’s NCC to a Kangaroo court. The Kangaroo is a lovable and affectionate animal, a national symbol of Australia (though one can’t blame it for the character of the settlers who came to occupy that land).
It is grossly defamatory to the character of the Kangaroo to compare the Crooked McNicol, Labour’s General Secretary with a Kangaroo. This left me with a dilemma. I was hunting around for a suitable metaphor and then I remembered Michael Foot. Foot you remember was the leader of the Labour Party from 1980-1983 who was traduced by the media.
One of his best known lines was when he called Norman Tebbit a ‘semi-house trained polecat’. The pole cat is a cousin of the ferret. I’m not sure that calling the NCC a Polecat Court necessarily has the same ring to it but I’ll give it a go!
Some people may wonder why I call Iain McNicol 'crooked'. The reason is eloquently put in these extracts from a letter to McNicol from solicitor, Martin Howe, whom a Unite member of the NEC, Jim Kennedy engaged.
|The Kangaroo - a much abused animal after whom a corrupt tribunal or court is named|
I sent a further email or two to Ms Jane Shaw who is the Secretary to the Polecat Court aka NCC.
Below are emails to Jane Shaw firstname.lastname@example.org who is the Secretary to the National Constitutional (Expulsion) Committee
14th November 2017
Dear Ms Shaw,
Further to my questions below I have a few further ones.
My application for a postponement was for a variety of factors including not only my own health but the fact that I have part time care for my son Daniel who is autistic. Are your despicable mosers (snoopers) going to be congregating around my house with a tele photo camera in order to time when Daniel is at my flat and when he is at his mothers? Can we assume that McNicol will be prepared to pay for this or is he subcontracting to Special Branch locally?
I have been told to give you a list of witnesses I wish to interview. Well want to cross examine my accusers or some of them but that is somewhat difficult given you haven't given me their name. Perhaps you could ask your handlers how this litte difficulty might be overcome. I know in national security cases such witnesses appear behind a curtain, are you thinking of employing a similar device at the hearing.
Yours as ever
14th November 2017
Dear Ms Shaw
I have few questions of my own to ask.
Who was it who undertook to search the Internet to locate my presence at a demonstration? The photograph you produced barely shows my face as it is turned sideways. This suggests that someone else was there physically to identify people and used that photo as mere confirmation. In case you don't get the gist what I am saying is that I suspect collusion with t he Intelligence Services, either MI5 or Special Branch. I do not believe anyone amongst the snoopers you employ could recognise me from that photo.
Of course some of us have suspected for some time that the Compliance Unit and Labour's Dirty Tricks Unit wasn't operating on their own but I do not believe that any of your mosers would have been able to identify me from that photograph. Even some of my friends would have had difficulty recognising me since my face is all but hidden.
I don't expect the truth from you as I perfectly understand that some Labour staff would rather drink poison than be honest, however it suggests to me that this programme of expulsions is being driven by the deep State and that McNicol Stolliday and others are liasing with those parts of the state that see it as their business to keep tabs on the Left.
You might also pass on this question. How am I able to cross examine those who complain against me, which would be the normal procedure in any court of law, if I don't know their identities? The whole procedure seems designed to convict once a prosecution has been brought.
And just as a matter of pure interest, over the past two years how many cases has the National Constitutional Committee heard and in how many has the person accused been acquitted? It's just I have a feeling that the NCC's record might possibly match the acquittal rate of Israel's military courts in the West Bank, which are 0.03%. As we all know of course Israel is a democracy and it would be anti-Semitic to draw any adverse conclusions from these statistics.
Yours as ever