KHOODEELAAR! No to 'Crossrail hole plot' Constitutional law action programme EVIDENCE ARCHIVE

"

ACTION
against Crossrail hole agenda
ARCHIVE
January 2006
KHOODEELAAR!
The BRICK LANE, Whitechapel, Bethnal Green ‘south’ and Stepney London E1 area SAYS
‘NO’ TO
‘CROSSRAIL HOLE’
agenda

The original materials authored by the Editor in support of the Brick Lane London E1 Area campaign against the Crossrail hole Bill are published on this site as well as on a number of other web sites at the discretion of the

Editor © MUHAMMAD HAQUE.
All materials are published solely for educational purpose and no item or part therefore must be used for commercial or unethical or immoral purpose or object or cause.


NAME: KHOODEELAAR! NO TO CROSSRAIL HOLE BILL

• KHOODEELAAR NO TO CROSSRAIL HOLE
• BRICK LANE lONDON E1 SAYS NO TO CROSSRAIL HOLE
• BRICK LANE lONDON E1 SAYS NO TO CROSSRAIL HOLE
• BRICK LANE lONDON E1 SAYS NO TO CROSSRAIL HOLE: KH...
• KHOODEELAAR DEMO IN BRICK LANE AGAINST CROSSRAIL H...
• brick lane london E1 area demonstrated against the...
• CBRUK tells 'Crossrail-hole Bill' Darling to conf...
• CBRUK tells 'Crossrail-hole Bill' Darling to conf...

• January 2006

TUESDAY, JANUARY 24, 2006
Khoodeelaar
NO to
CROSSRAIL HOLE


BRICK LANE lONDON E1 SAYS NO TO CROSSRAIL HOLE


khoodeelaar manifesto 2006

Part E due to appear here soon


posted by KHOODEELAAR! NO TO CROSSRAIL HOLE BILL | 5:50 AM | 0 comments
MONDAY, JANUARY 23, 2006
BRICK LANE lONDON E1 SAYS NO TO CROSSRAIL HOLE


BRICK LANE lONDON E1 SAYS NO TO CROSSRAIL HOLE



© CBRUK / KHOODEELAAR 2006


The BRICK LANE LONDON E1 AREA CAMPAIGN was supported by more than a thousand people last night who turned up to attend the KHOODEELAAR campaign meeting held in the Hanbury Street to say no to the Crossrail hole Bill now in the UK House of Commons.

The campaign against the Crossrail hole Bill gave a most emphatic democratic ultimatum to the controlling group on the local Tower Hamlets Council to represent the community’s opposition to the Crossrail hole scheme.

The community demand was the implementation of the first
part of the KHOODEELAAR MANIFESTO 2006

"

To

Christine Gilbert
Chief Executive
LB tower hamlets council

Sent via e-mail between 1200 and 1230 Hrs GMT on Monday 23 January 2006-01-23

Dear Ms Gilbert


Khoodeelaar THE BRICK LANE LONDON E1 AREA CAMPAIGN AGAINST CROSSRAIL HOLE BILL – public meeting held at the Brady centre on Sunday 22 January 2006 - community demand on tower hamlets council to pass unequivocal resolution of the full council to openly oppose the CROSSRAIL TUNNEL/HOLE/SHAFT IN THE BRICK LANE LONDON E1 AREA

This is the first transmission of the demand to you. Further details and background information will follow soon after this.

1. This is a legal and constitutional communication. A copy of the same is being sent to you by SPECIAL DELIVERY POST

2. The key demand was unanimously and emphatically agreed by the meeting on the single motion moved by the keynote speaker Mr Muhammad Haque to say that The London Borough of Tower Hamlets Council must hold a meeting within the next 14 days [from Sunday 22 January 2006] and to pass a full Council resolution demanding the dropping of the Crossrail hole/tunnel/shaft provision from the Crossrail Bill now in the UK Parliament.

3. That the resolution must be passed by the same LBTH Council in such a way and on a such a date and with such wording that leaves no room for equivocation and that it is put to the UK parliament by bearing in mind that the transport select committee set up to ‘scrutinise’ the Crossrail Bill is now sitting for a limited period and that the LBTH Council itself has a petition awaiting the formal consideration of the said transports elect committee and that the relevant resolution by LBTH Council opposing the hole scheme/plan must be put in order to ensure that the said select committee and any other constitutional part of the UK parliament takes full account of the resolution and that the resolution is worded in such a way that leaves no room for any constitutional, legal or procedural conflict, contradiction or excuse or pretext to be invoked or used to frustrate or delay or divert or distort the community’s opposition to the Crossrail - hole plan/scheme in the Brick Lane London e1 Area - Bill.

4. That the LBTH Council resolution opposing the locating of the hole/tunnel must be put to or presented to or sent to or made constitutionally validly available to the UK parliament and to the Crossrail hole Bill promoters without delay and in any case not later than 13 days after the community unanimously making the demand at 1830 Hrs GMT on Sunday 22 January 2006.

[Part 2 to follow shortly]
_______________________________________________________

© CBRUK / KHOODEELAAR 2006
E-mail: lawmedia@hotmail.com


posted by KHOODEELAAR! NO TO CROSSRAIL HOLE BILL | 11:22 AM | 0 comments
BRICK LANE lONDON E1 SAYS NO TO CROSSRAIL HOLE


© CBRUK / KHOODEELAAR 2006


The BRICK LANE LONDON E1 AREA CAMPAIGN was supported by more than a thousand people last night who turned up to attend the KHOODEELAAR campaign meeting held in the Hanbury Street to say no to the Crossrail hole Bill now in the UK House of Commons. The campaign against the Crossrail hole Bill gave a most emphatic democratic ultimatum to the controlling group on the local Tower Hamlets Council to represent the community’s opposition to the Crossrail hole scheme.

The community demand was the implementation of the first
part of the KHOODEELAAR MANIFESTO 2006

"

To

Christine Gilbert
Chief Executive
LB tower hamlets council

Sent via e-mail between 1200 and 1230 Hrs GMT on Monday 23 January 2006-01-23

Dear Ms Gilbert


Khoodeelaar THE BRICK LANE LONDON E1 AREA CAMPAIGN AGAINST CROSSRAIL HOLE BILL – public meeting held at the Brady centre on Sunday 22 January 2006 - community demand on tower hamlets council to pass unequivocal resolution of the full council to openly oppose the CROSSRAIL TUNNEL/HOLE/SHAFT IN THE BRICK LANE LONDON E1 AREA

This is the first transmission of the demand to you. Further details and background information will follow soon after this.

1. This is a legal and constitutional communication. A copy of the same is being sent to you by SPECIAL DELIVERY POST

2. The key demand was unanimously and emphatically agreed by the meeting on the single motion moved by the keynote speaker Mr Muhammad Haque to say that The London Borough of Tower Hamlets Council must hold a meeting within the next 14 days [from Sunday 22 January 2006] and to pass a full Council resolution demanding the dropping of the Crossrail hole/tunnel/shaft provision from the Crossrail Bill now in the UK Parliament.

3. That the resolution must be passed by the same LBTH Council in such a way and on a such a date and with such wording that leaves no room for equivocation and that it is put to the UK parliament by bearing in mind that the transport select committee set up to ‘scrutinise’ the Crossrail Bill is now sitting for a limited period and that the LBTH Council itself has a petition awaiting the formal consideration of the said transports elect committee and that the relevant resolution by LBTH Council opposing the hole scheme/plan must be put in order to ensure that the said select committee and any other constitutional part of the UK parliament takes full account of the resolution and that the resolution is worded in such a way that leaves no room for any constitutional, legal or procedural conflict, contradiction or excuse or pretext to be invoked or used to frustrate or delay or divert or distort the community’s opposition to the Crossrail - hole plan/scheme in the Brick Lane London e1 Area - Bill.

4. That the LBTH Council resolution opposing the locating of the hole/tunnel must be put to or presented to or sent to or made constitutionally validly available to the UK parliament and to the Crossrail hole Bill promoters without delay and in any case not later than 13 days after the community unanimously making the demand at 1830 Hrs GMT on Sunday 22 January 2006.

[Part 2 to follow shortly]
________________________________________________________________________

© CBRUK / KHOODEELAAR 2006
e-mail: lawmedia@hotmail.com


posted by KHOODEELAAR! NO TO CROSSRAIL HOLE BILL | 11:19 AM | 0 comments
WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 18, 2006
BRICK LANE lONDON E1 SAYS NO TO CROSSRAIL HOLE: KHOODEELAAR DEMO IN BRICK LANE AGAINST CROSSRAIL HOLE


KHOODEELAAR campaigners to attend meeting at 5pm on Sunday 22 Jan 2006 against Crossrail hole

© MUHAMMAD HAQUE / CBRUK / KHOODEELAAR 2006
Brick Lane London E1 Area campaign 2006
Against the Crossrail hole Bill [UK House of Commons]
KHOODEELAAR
http://notocrossrailholebilllies.blogspot.com


Crossrail hole Bill is a threat to the Brick Lane London E1 Area. As was the contemptuous mini-second media-stunt staged in the Brick Lane area by Blair-bent Hilary Armstrong the whipper of overloyal MPs in the Commons
The Crossrail hole Bill is an attack on the community in the Brick Lane London E1 area.
The Crossrail hole scheme is an unwanted imposition of SIX years of noise on the community in the Brick Lane London E1 area.
Crossrail hole Bill is now being ‘scrutinised’ in the UK House of Commons by a group of selected MPs. They are not really scrutinising the Crossrail hole Bill. What they are doing and what they are prone most to do is to lie down and let the majority group in the House of Commons walk all over them.
So what is the point of there being a ‘select’ committee on the Crossrail hybrid Bill?
The answer is - to stage another show to fool the public. To fool the public about the alleged existence of democracy. There is no democracy in the process that relies on lies and thrives on spin and has given the likes of Hilary Armstrong, a most banal day of exaggerated defiance of democracy to arrive in the vicinity of the Brick Lane area and pose for photographs in the cause of a vengeful rebuff to George Galloway. Hilary Armstrong is a former co-party member of George Galloway’s.
But as with everything within the Blaired Labour Party, there is no sense of proportion let alone modesty left in anyone who wants to enjoy the Blairing approval. So Hilary staged her momentary arrival in the vicinity of the Brick Lane London E1 Area and uttered another set of moronic mumbo jumbo against George Galloway so that she could be exhibited as taking part in the idiotic display of insult to the people in the Bethnal Green and Bow constituency which had been ordered by all the Blairite fiddlers who thought that that was the dignified answer to what they were eagerly claiming was the indignity brought to the office of MP by the alleged antics of George Galloway!
That she did because that was what the Sky-high ambitions of the former MP for Galloway’s’ present seat would love to hear about. Or if indeed she is still ‘sunning herself in the Sri Lanka beach of her present constituency of carefree career’, would like to read about in her overseas editions of the Independent, London. Hilary Armstrong is a woman. As much as Margaret Thatcher ever was. And just as Margaret Thatcher showed the world, Hilary Armstrong is overly authoritarian and overly offensive in her careerist modes. She is the antidemocratic whip that brandishes the lash of power on behalf of Blair to keep the already over timid band of MPs in line so they vote as they are told. The ‘Crossrail’ ‘committee of MPs’ has a pre-decided majority of Blair-leaning, Blair-voters who will not rock Blair’s boat and who will find neither time nor reason to question the serious contents of the Crossrail hole Bill. It will indeed be a miracle to find any truthful challenge to the Crossrail hole Bill by any of the so far seen MPs on that committee. That is why it is futile to make too much of the sitting of that committee. To find out more about the community’s views on Hilary Armstrong and George Galloway. To find out about why the local community must use our democratic right to force the dropping of the Crossrail hole attack, come along to a public meeting at 5 pm on SUNDAY 22 January 2006 at the Brady centre in Hanbury Street London e1 organised by the local community to defend Brick lane area against the Crossrail hole attack Bill. See this site for time and venue


posted by KHOODEELAAR! NO TO CROSSRAIL HOLE BILL | 11:25 AM | 0 comments
KHOODEELAAR DEMO IN BRICK LANE AGAINST CROSSRAIL HOLE


BRICK LANE lONDON E1 SAYS NO TO CROSSRAIL HOLE

© THE AUTHOR / CBRUK / KHOODEELAAR / LAWMEDIA 2006

The community in the BRICK LANE LONDON E1 AREA demonstrated against the CROSSRAIL HOLE attack BILL in london’s east end ON TUESDAY 17 JANUARY 2006. That was to mark the start of the mps ‘scrutiny’ of the bill on that same day.


Organised by KHOOODEELAAR the demonstrators demanded the Crossrail hole bill be redrafted by dropping the direct and indirect provisions for the hole and related attacks as contained in the bill.


The KHOODEELAAR campaign described tower hamlets council and its controlling group as mainly responsible for bringing the Crossrail hole attacks upon the community. Khoodeelaar has issued a final legal demand on the council today wednesday 18 january 2006


The community in THE BRICK LANE LONDON E1 AREA demonstrated against the Crossrail hole attack bill in london’s east end on tuesday 17 january 2006. That was to mark the start of the mps ‘scrutiny’ of the bill on that same day.

Organised by KHOOODEELAAR the demonstrators demanded the Crossrail hole bill be redrafted by dropping the direct and indirect provisions for the hole and related attacks as contained in the bill.

The KHOODEELAAR campaign described tower hamlets council and its controlling group as mainly responsible for bringing the Crossrail hole attacks upon the community. Khoodeelaar has issued a final legal demand on the council today wednesday 18 january 2006


KHOODEELAAR! The brick lane london e1 area campaign against the Crossrail hole bill has today issued the relevant official in the london borough of tower hamlets council with fin al legal notice on their relevant conduct over their role to date in the promotion in the name of the legal and corporate entity of the london borough of tower hamlets council of the lies for the Crossrail hole attacks plan on the brick lane london e1 area community in the past four years.

THE NOTICE SENT TODAY IS DESCRIBED AS ‘THE VERY FINAL REMINDER TO YOU OF ALL THE QUESTIONS PUT TO YOU BY CBRUK ….. KHOODEELAAR THE BRICK LANE LONDON E1 AREA CAMPAIGN AGAINST THE CROSSRAIL HOLE PROJECT /SCHEME AND BILL, BETWEEN MARCH 2004 AND THIS MONTH AND UPTO AND INCLUDING TUESDAY 17 JANUARY 2006’.

HERE ARE THE EDITED TEXTS OF THE REST OF THE QUESTIONS

2. You must realise – or your ‘advisors’ whether they be in place as ‘legal advisors’ or as other types of ‘advisors’ must know a realise – that you cannot indefinitely be in denial over those questions and get exemption from liability to legally account for your conduct.

3. You must provide the answers and make them available to this e-mail address and do so without any further delay.

4. If you are in doubt or if you are under any of the many dubious ‘advice’ regimes to the effect that service by e-mail may not be acceptable, let this be made very clear to you: service by e-mail on this occasion and on this matter is acceptable to the questioners.

5. You must be very careful when you next engage – if you are so ill-advised to wish to so engage – in issuing or backing or approving the issuing of misinformation on behalf of any of the current ‘controlling clique’ of councillors that legal liability will rest on you.

6. What is legal liability and what is it about here?

7. Answer: legal liability is as defined by the law and legal liability here is in relation to the relevant use (that includes abuse) of all the actual and formal powers that the holder of the post of [the named officer employed in the london borough of tower hamlets council] in THE LONDON BOROUGH OF TOWER HAMLETS COUNCIL (LBTH) has access to and or has used in the conception of or in the perpetration of or in the perpetuation of any falsehoods, misstatements or lies.

8. Those statements that you have issued, such as … communications which you eventually sent to CBRUKCENTRAL IN OCTOBER-NOVEMBER 2004, will be tested as extensively and as comprehensively forensically as it is physically and procedurally possible to do in the UK at the present time.

9. What is being meant by ‘untrue statements’?

10. Answer: when you were asked by cbrukcentral to provide the full contents of the notes of the meeting (held during the first half of october 2004 in the room next to the council chamber at mulberry place e14 2 BG ) you failed to provide those.

11. You had been asked to provide those because in your earlier relevant e-mail to CBRUKCENTRAL you had asserted that your recollection and the notes of the meeting concerned contradicted the assertions made by the cbrukcentral and by implication as had been made by the khoodeelaar campaign on the role played by the named councillor on the london borough of tower hamlets council.

12. Your statement as sent to CBRUKCENTRAL IN 2004 asserted that named councillor on the london borough of tower hamlets council had not misrepresented the facts or the role he had played and that he had not misled the community.

13. You were then sent additional details and amplifications.

14. Those details were of the actual proceedings concerned and they quoted from the statements concerned that had been made by [the named councillor on the london borough of tower hamlets council] at the relevant meetings and events and as published.

15. You were then asked to comment on those and to show precisely where the khoodeelaar campaign assertions about the untruthful statements, the misleading assertions, insinuations, suggestions and conduct of the named councillor on the london borough of tower hamlets council could be challenged on the facts and on the evidence.

16. You did not comment and you did not point out any word let alone any sentence let alone any paragraph in anything that had been put by the cbrukcentral committee or by the cbruk chair or by the khoodeelaar campaign to you as the [named officer employed in the london borough of tower hamlets council] postholder in the london borough of tower hamlets council .

18. We are asking you again and finally today wednesday 18 january 2006 to do so and to do so in the knowledge – and we hereby make that knowledge emphatically clear to you – that cbruk central and khoodeelaar shall seek the intervention of a court of law to review your own conduct as well as the conduct of every single one of the ‘controlling’ clique or group of councillors that has played any part or made any decision or conceived of any course of action that has misled - or that would reasonably foreseeably have the potential to mislead - any part or membership of the community in the brick lane london e1 area or in the population ordinarily resident and situated and based within the uk constitutional boundaries of the london borough of tower hamlets council and on the matter of what you … advised the controlling member or members of the tower hamlets council at the relevant time and in the relevant promotion of the Crossrail hole scheme or project or bill to do and to go ahead as far as your legal duties were concerned.

END OF THE VERY FINAL LEGAL REMINDER ON BEHALF OF CBRUKCENTRAL, CBRUK CHAIR, AND KHOODEELAAR BRICK LANE LONDON E1 AREA CAMPAIGN AGAINST THE CROSSRAIL HOLE BILL TO [THE NAMED OFFICER EMPLOYED IN THE LONDON BOROUGH OF TOWER HAMLETS COUNCIL] 1100 HRS GMT LONDON WEDNESDAY 18 JANUARY 2006

lawmedia@hotmail.com bricklanekhodeelaar@yahoo.co.uk


posted by KHOODEELAAR! NO TO CROSSRAIL HOLE BILL | 8:47 AM | 0 comments
brick lane london E1 area demonstrated against the Crossrail hole attack bill


© THE AUTHOR / CBRUK / KHOODEELAAR / LAWMEDIA 2006

The community in the brick lane london E1 area demonstrated against the Crossrail hole attack bill in london’s east end on tuesday 17 january 2006. That was to mark the start of the mps ‘scrutiny’ of the bill on that same day.


Organised by khooodeelaar the demonstrators demanded the Crossrail hole bill be redrafted by dropping the direct and indirect provisions for the hole and related attacks as contained in the bill.


The khoodeelaar campaign described tower hamlets council and its controlling group as mainly responsible for bringing the Crossrail hole attacks upon the community. Khoodeelaar has issued a final legal demand on the council today wednesday 18 january 2006


The community in THE BRICK LANE LONDON E1 AREA demonstrated against the Crossrail hole attack bill in london’s east end on tuesday 17 january 2006. That was to mark the start of the mps ‘scrutiny’ of the bill on that same day.

Organised by khooodeelaar the demonstrators demanded the Crossrail hole bill be redrafted by dropping the direct and indirect provisions for the hole and related attacks as contained in the bill.

The khoodeelaar campaign described tower hamlets council and its controlling group as mainly responsible for bringing the Crossrail hole attacks upon the community. Khoodeelaar has issued a final legal demand on the council today wednesday 18 january 2006


KHOODEELAAR! The brick lane london e1 area campaign against the Crossrail hole bill has today issued the relevant official in the london borough of tower hamlets council with fin al legal notice on their relevant conduct over their role to date in the promotion in the name of the legal and corporate entity of the london borough of tower hamlets council of the lies for the Crossrail hole attacks plan on the brick lane london e1 area community in the past four years.

THE NOTICE SENT TODAY IS DESCRIBED AS ‘THE VERY FINAL REMINDER TO YOU OF ALL THE QUESTIONS PUT TO YOU BY CBRUK ….. KHOODEELAAR THE BRICK LANE LONDON E1 AREA CAMPAIGN AGAINST THE CROSSRAIL HOLE PROJECT /SCHEME AND BILL, BETWEEN MARCH 2004 AND THIS MONTH AND UPTO AND INCLUDING TUESDAY 17 JANUARY 2006’.

HERE ARE THE EDITED TEXTS OF THE REST OF THE QUESTIONS

2. you must realise – or your ‘advisors’ whether they be in place as ‘legal advisors’ or as other types of ‘advisors’ must know a realise – that you cannot indefinitely be in denial over those questions and get exemption from liability to legally account for your conduct.

3. you must provide the answers and make them available to this e-mail address and do so without any further delay.

4. if you are in doubt or if you are under any of the many dubious ‘advice’ regimes to the effect that service by e-mail may not be acceptable, let this be made very clear to you: service by e-mail on this occasion and on this matter is acceptable to the questioners.

5. you must be very careful when you next engage – if you are so ill-advised to wish to so engage – in issuing or backing or approving the issuing of misinformation on behalf of any of the current ‘controlling clique’ of councillors that legal liability will rest on you.

6. what is legal liability and what is it about here?

7. answer: legal liability is as defined by the law and legal liability here is in relation to the relevant use (that includes abuse) of all the actual and formal powers that the holder of the post of [the named officer employed in the london borough of tower hamlets council] in the london borough of tower hamlets council (LBTH) has access to and or has used in the conception of or in the perpetration of or in the perpetuation of any falsehoods, misstatements or lies.

8. those statements that you have issued, such as … communications which you eventually sent to cbrukcentral in october-november 2004, will be tested as extensively and as comprehensively forensically as it is physically and procedurally possible to do in the uk at the present time.

9. what is being meant by ‘untrue statements’?

10. answer: when you were asked by cbrukcentral to provide the full contents of the notes of the meeting (held during the first half of october 2004 in the room next to the council chamber at mulberry place e14 2 BG ) you failed to provide those.

11. you had been asked to provide those because in your earlier relevant e-mail to cbrukcentral you had asserted that your recollection and the notes of the meeting concerned contradicted the assertions made by the cbrukcentral and by implication as had been made by the khoodeelaar campaign on the role played by the named councillor on the london borough of tower hamlets council.

12. your statement as sent to cbrukcentral in 2004 asserted that named councillor on the london borough of tower hamlets council had not misrepresented the facts or the role he had played and that he had not misled the community.

13. you were then sent additional details and amplifications.

14. those details were of the actual proceedings concerned and they quoted from the statements concerned that had been made by [the named councillor on the london borough of tower hamlets council] at the relevant meetings and events and as published.

15. you were then asked to comment on those and to show precisely where the khoodeelaar campaign assertions about the untruthful statements, the misleading assertions, insinuations, suggestions and conduct of the named councillor on the london borough of tower hamlets council could be challenged on the facts and on the evidence.

16. you did not comment and you did not point out any word let alone any sentence let alone any paragraph in anything that had been put by the cbrukcentral committee or by the cbruk chair or by the khoodeelaar campaign to you as the [named officer employed in the london borough of tower hamlets council] postholder in the london borough of tower hamlets council .

18. we are asking you again and finally today wednesday 18 january 2006 to do so and to do so in the knowledge – and we hereby make that knowledge emphatically clear to you – that cbruk central and khoodeelaar shall seek the intervention of a court of law to review your own conduct as well as the conduct of every single one of the ‘controlling’ clique or group of councillors that has played any part or made any decision or conceived of any course of action that has misled - or that would reasonably foreseeably have the potential to mislead - any part or membership of the community in the brick lane london e1 area or in the population ordinarily resident and situated and based within the uk constitutional boundaries of the london borough of tower hamlets council and on the matter of what you … advised the controlling member or members of the tower hamlets council at the relevant time and in the relevant promotion of the Crossrail hole scheme or project or bill to do and to go ahead as far as your legal duties were concerned.

end of the very final legal reminder on behalf of CBRUKCENTRAL, CBRUK CHAIR, AND KHOODEELAAR BRICK LANE LONDON E1 AREA CAMPAIGN AGAINST THE CROSSRAIL HOLE BILL to [the named officer employed in the london borough of tower hamlets council] 1100 Hrs gmt london wednesday 18 january 2006
lawmedia@hotmail.com bricklanekhodeelaar@yahoo.co.uk


posted by KHOODEELAAR! NO TO CROSSRAIL HOLE BILL | 8:30 AM | 0 comments
TUESDAY, JANUARY 17, 2006
CBRUK tells 'Crossrail-hole Bill' Darling to confess


CBRUK TODAY [Monday 16 January 2006] asked UK transport secretary Alistair Darling to disclose the evidence of all contacts he has received in his present post from or in the name of the EAST London borough of tower hamlets council and in relation to the Crossrail hole bill.


CBRUK TODAY [Monday 16 January 2006] asked transport secretary Alistair Darling to disclose the evidence of all contacts he has received in his present post from or in the name of the London borough of tower hamlets council and in relation to the Crossrail hole bill.

In his letter sent to Alistair Darling, CBRUK Chair says that the lesson is that rather than face a towering embarrassment and calls for his resignation when he will not be able to salvage his reputation or career, Alistair Darling must point to those who have misled him in promoting the Crossrail hole Bill attack on the East End.

© CBRUK / KHOODEELAAR 2006

This series of articles is being updated and re-pushed from the KHOODEELAAR! acton archives of January 2006:




posted by KHOODEELAAR! NO TO CROSSRAIL HOLE BILL | 2:40 AM | 1 comments
CBRUK tells 'Crossrail-hole Bill' Darling to confess


CBRUK TODAY [Monday 16 January 2006] asked UK transport secretary Alistair Darling to disclose the evidence of all contacts he has received in his present post from or in the name of the EAST London borough of TOWER HAMLETS COUNCIL and in relation to the Crossrail hole bill.


CBRUK TODAY [Monday 16 January 2006] asked transport secretary Alistair Darling to disclose the evidence of all contacts he has received in his present post from or in the name of the London borough of tower hamlets council and in relation to the Crossrail hole bill.

In his letter sent to Alistair Darling, CBRUK Chair says that the lesson is that rather than face a towering embarrassment and calls for his resignation when he will not be able to salvage his reputation or career, Alistair Darling must point to those who have misled him in promoting the Crossrail hole Bill attack on the East End.


"