Time is now rapidly running out. I need to get in touch with my MSP, list MSP for West of Scotland Stewart Maxwell. I tried this before but nothing happened and those I asked him to protect me from behaved as I knew they would without getting support from someone with a little clout and he was my last resort. I had a telephone conversation with Stewart some time ago and I thought we had a deal that he would get back in touch. Doesn’t look like I convinced him. Anyway, I am in no rush to make an enemy of Stewart. So I am not going to make a big deal of this failure. I need to see him as a matter of urgency and I am going to try to spell out in cyberspace some of the issues we need to talk about.
When I refer to a New Years Resolution I am referring specifically to a few things: firstly, I need to focus on important stuff. Twitter is very addictive, and as I feared when I returned to that I ended up using it to keep myself amused. I am going to try to focus and get information into the public arena. Stewart needs to see this. And I need to make sure that he is not tempted to pretend he did not know what I was asking him to do for me. I have relied on more than enough people who ‘forgot’ what we spoke about, and who ‘forgot’ to read what I send them in private emails/letters or in material that they knew had already been placed into the public arena. I cannot let that ever happen again.
Twitter’s 140 char limit allows me to overcome writers block. I go on stream of consciousness rants there, ignoring this limit, allowing messages to move from one tweet to the next one. But it is very hard even for me to find what I have already written there. It would be impossible for my MSP to find them, unless he had researchers who knew how to do that. So I need to bring a set of complex arguments together in semi-self contained blog articles.
Because there is so much information to get across I am not going to attempt to bring everything together into a single article. It would be enormous and I would spend a lifetime trying to make it readable, eliminating typos, spelling and grammatical mistakes, stylistic faux pas, boring repetition, factual errors due to lapsed memory when I need to refer to notes I can’t find. I will try to use my blog like a super-twitter account. I will try to write using a stream of consciousness approach to overcome writer’s block, but then to put it into the public arena when I think there is enough there. I can then start a second, third, fourth piece, following on from pieces I have yet to reach. I will try to tidy up each piece by editing after I have published the blog article. I always do this when I find typos, which is a never-ending process. I will probably not remove passages when I realize they are mere repetitions of what appeared in an earlier. That is a stylistic problem I will have to live with. But I may add connecting arguments and facts when I notice that something I have blogged is very unclear to the point of being misleading.
In addition to trying to use my blog as a super-twitter account, there are other parts of this New Years Resolution: I need to work out how to protect the innocent (the relatively innocent), stopping them being made scapegoats for other people’s crimes. Specifically I need to work out how to protect trade unionists at Renfrewshire Council. Many of these people have not made this easy for me. Let me address these issues now
I have been badly let down by many people. I find it hard to work out the precise motives of each individual. But I can classify each betrayal into a set of categories. There are certainly malicious individuals. I will be naming many of these, but not all of them. I can’t name those whose names I have forgotten. I am tempted to name all those whose names I can remember, but after a great deal of thought I have decided against this for several reasons. Almost all of these people are relying on my having no witnesses, or else witnesses who were paid to protect me but who have sold themselves to those they were supposed to be protecting me from. I want to name all these people. Can I be clear that every one of those whose behavior can only be explained in terms of their having acted maliciously I am happy to name in a court of law and I want action taken against them. They should lose their jobs. In many cases they should be prosectued. Some of them should go to jail. I am quite clear about this. Given the fact I want them to be exposed, sacked and even jailed, why don’t I name them? There are two reasons: firstly, I do not believe in summary justice. All these people have the right to the presumption of innocence. They have a right to give their side of the story. They should be allowed to appeal to the court to take into consideration mitigating circumstances of which I know nothing. If they do end up in court my guess is almost all of them will blame others, higher ups, saying they were ‘only obeying orders.’ Since I don’t know what their defense will be if they want to name and shame those who ‘forced’ them to behave as they have, I am happy to give them time to think through the consequences of their action. My guess is they will end up with lawyers who will ask them to do a deal whereby they name names of those who got them to behave inappropriately to me to the point of engaging in verifiable criminal offenses. We shall see. Some of these people may have other defenses: overwork, incompetence, illness. I am allowing a jury to weigh up all such ‘mitigating factors’.
What else? I would be more than happy for others to help me distribute my allegations in cyberspace. However, I have zero incentive to get anyone passing on allegations that could be deemed libelous, repeat them in a pub or elsewhere that could constitute slander, and actionable. No, I don’t want to contribute to that. Removing names of those I would like to end up in jail might be a necessary compromise to get these facts into the public arena in the shortest possible time, placing much more pressure on Stewart Maxwell and his colleagues at Holyrood to get something done.
That is my strategic reasons for not naming many people whose behavior has clearly been malicious and criminal. But there are others who have betrayed me who don’t fall into that category. There are more than one category of those. I do not want incompetence to be punished the same way as maliciousness. There is all the difference in the world between cock-up and conspiracy. A massive proportion of those who have betrayed me did so for reasons other than maliciousness. I don’t want them to pay too heavy a price. I want to work with them, not against them. Their bosses and the media will try to make scapegoats of these individuals and I do not want that to happen. That is why I want all of them to discuss the issues I am raising in my blog with their trade unions. It is in all our interests that they work with me, and become whistle-blowers.
Many of those who have betrayed me are clearly not bad people. Many of them do not seem like stupid people, but when I tell them things they forget them. Not only do they forget them from one meeting to the next; they forget what I have said as soon as I’ve said it. I have repeatedly had people offer a summary of what they tell me I told them and they have eliminated everything of substance. What they have left in their summary is meaningless when gutted of all this context. Their refusal to allow me a witness when they have been told the CAB insists on my right to have a witness, and their refusal to address issues because I am alleging criminal activity by their work colleagues, including their senior managers… How do I get round this? Why do they refuse to let me tape record our meetings when they know I challenge every set of minutes of every meeting we have ever had? The only way to excuse the betrayals of any of these people is for them to fall back on defense of their being incompetent and in many cases not very bright. Having said that, there is a way out of this, at least for many of these people. Let them even at this late stage agree to come forward as whistle blowers.
Renfrewshire Council trade unionists need to stop their bosses and the media victimizing them. Do not agree to be scapegoats for those who gave you your orders. Work with me. This is the only way to protect yourselves. I won’t bare grudges if you fess up to what you have allowed your bosses to do to me for well over a decade. But you need to start working with me now. Part of doing that is recognition that it is not in anyone’s interests to deny me the right to tape record our meetings and/or allow me access to an advocate who is competent to protect me legal rights, someone who is going to act as a witness in addition to everything else. And that is where my advocate comes in. I have been told he is unavailable due to ill-health. I am not sure if this is a lie, but it does not get him out of his obligations to me. He is my witness to a lot of the issues I need to discuss with Stewart Maxwell. My advocate is someone I like. I do not believe he is a bad person. I do not question his intelligence nor competence. I think he is diligent and am sure he has never betrayed anyone in his life. But he has let me down and I am struggling to know why that is. I wish him well and will do nothing to let anyone make him a scapegoat. But I have to wonder if his shortcomings are not typical of a problem many others face. They simply did not believe my account and allowed themselves to ignore my pleas for help on the basis of lies others told about me. My advocate presumably has betrayed me because he was betrayed by others, others who convinced him to cut corners, relying on the fact I have no witnesses, possibly pressure from powerful forces in the local police force. Maybe someone is blackmailing him. Maybe he is being threatened. He has certainly paid zero attention to many things I told him about certain individuals and I have discovered he is still on good terms with those individuals and that has to cast doubt on his willingness to protect me from these people. Let me repeat that I do not believe he has done this because he is as bad as these people. I know for a fact he has not. Presumably he just believed their lies that he did not need to pay any attention to what I said about them, and did not check the facts I told him were out there on the internet. His sudden unexplained disappearance from the picture makes me suspicious. Maybe it is a coincidence. But as I have explained to a series of politicians and staff at Renfrewshire Council my advocate is irreplacable given his role as my witness.