This page was last edited at 1740 GMT London Thusrday 28 August 2008
KHOODEELAAR! No to 'Big Business Crossrail hole agenda' Constitutional law UPDATE 1640 GMT 28.08.2008
The 'presence' of the Lib Dems [='The Liberal Democratic Party' = abbreviated in ordinary conversations to 'Lib Dems'] in Tower Hamlets is itself a questionable concept. Do they exist as a 'political party'? If so, what do they stand for? If they do, what difference does it make, if any.
This is a question that KHOODEELAAR! will go into to a significant extent over the 'role' of the Lib Dems as a party that had an actual membership presence on the Crossrail hole plot-inviting Tower Hamlets Council.
Part of the updated evidence in the constitutional law action [from which corrupt councillors shall be specifically excluded, even as observers!!! We shall go into this more in due course] against Crossrail hole agenda consists of the role played by the so-called official Opposition group on Tower Hamlets Council.
Our submission to court includes the claims that the Lib Dems group was wrongly ‘led’, mis-led and in effect was contributing to the maintenance of the fraudulent stance being exhibited by the corrupt clique that was at that time promoting the CRASSRail hole plot and agenda in the East End of London.
We are very aware of the pretentious posturing promotions of certain ‘Lib Dems’ currently on the Tower Hamlets Council and we intre3nd to draw maximum attention on their own dubious roles and we shall do so to reinforce the argument that the so-called opposition benches should be subject to regular sxsruintu8ny by members of the community.
As is quite clear from our daily published scrutiny of the controlling clique, KHOODEELAAR! is already well recognised as the source and the forum for scrutinising the controlling clique.
What there has not been so far is a regular and sustained scrutiny of the so-called soupspoon.
The word Opposition in Tower Hamlets is almost without any meaning.
Especially after the display stated by three councillors including Lutfur Rahman courtesy of the people who control the decision-making at the LC ['London Muslim Centre'] and who played the decisive role in allowing Towe4r Hamlets councillors use the space at the ‘London Muslim Centre’.
More, later, on the abuse of the phrase 'Open Meeting’ which Lutfur Rahman took part in earlier this week.
BACK to the LIB DEMS in Tower Hamlets and the KHOODEELAAR! campaign against Crossrail hole agenda :
Much of our comments about the Lib Dems' then 'leader' on the Council repeatedly making claims that they were 'active' about Crossrail by referring to her [Janet Ludlow's] frustrated attempts to get the controlling clique [Khoodeelaar! words, NOT Janet Ludlow's or anyone else's. Janet Ludlow never used the phrase and she would not even know how to ...] to set up a 'consultative forum'.
That was - and here is the first time that KHOODEELAAR! is actually saying so, - a plea by Janet Ludlow to be part of a stooge outfit!
The stooging of councillors is not the same thing as the enabling of a democratically active group of elected members.
Janet Ludlow did not understand that telling people that she was being ignored by the controlling clique did not amount to doing her job as leader of the Opposition on the Tower Hamlets Council.
Janet Ludlow was not comfortable being seen to be in any way identified with the KHOODEELAAR! campaign because it took real political understanding to back the campaign against Crossrail.
Janet Ludlow of course did deliver leaflets when she was 'leader'. At least some members of her group still recall this≥
Khoodeelaar! has no evidence to support or to dispute that particular assertion.
What Khoodeelaar! can say and will say is this: if Janet Ludlow did not want to be seen with KHOODEELAAR! then why was she prepared to come and be photographed at Khoodeelaar! events?
That behaviour occurred on more than one occasion.
the result was not significant for the campaign. Because every single alleged and real opponent to the Blaired band in control of the Tower Hamlets Council at the time, came along to the KHOODEELAAR! events of that particular time and was more than willing to be photographed with the Khoodeelaar!. campaign....
That included the Lib Dems' devious and dishonestly made CD ..... That CD had a series of fabrications in it.
One young person allegedly a supporter of the Janet Ludlow-'led' 'Opposition 'Lib Dem' councillors', is seen in that Lib Dem CD as using the word KHOODEELAAR! in a series of utterances that did not, contextually fit in with the rest of the contents.... And he was filmed at the corner of Hanbury Street and Sp[ital Street, the very spot that has for years been known as the spot for Khoodeelaar! street actins... For obvious reasons...
In fact the Lib Dem CD had NO statement against Crossrail. None that remotely came anywhere near what a Tower Hamlets Councillor said when she spoke at the KHOODEELAAR! demonstrator on 1 March 2006.
\
That councillor was Louise Alexander. She sued to be on the Council until the start of March this year when she gave up on personal grounds.
What she said on 1 March 2006 and what her motion said [in effect supporting almost all the KHOODEELAAR! demands on that occasion] remains the only contribution by any councillor on Tower Hamlets who has in fact done the most to say No to Crossrail within the framework of the existing Council at the time.
Why couldn't Janet Ludlow do what Louise Alexander could do and did do?
What had stopped Janet Ludlow from saying the things against the Crossrail hole that Louise Alexander was able to say and go on the records saying?
Has there been another 'leader' on the Tower Hamlets Council for the almost vanished Lib Dems group?
If there is a 'leader', what is the 'leader' 'leading' the councillors about and in what direction, IF ANY?
[To be continued]
No comments:
Post a Comment