THE ROOT CAUSE OF THE UK POST OFFICE SCANDAL
The Post Office scandal of 2024, was not created last year, many many years ago, and it is not as though the press had never made mention of the problems that it was causing. But it took a fringe satirical magazine to devote enough space to explain in review, the scope and depth of the problems that the UK Post Office had created. However, it the took a scriptwriter turning this material into a television drama in order to get the attention of the public at large.
It was not a non-fiction book or even a television documentary program that set off the UK Post Office scandal. It was a television drama featuring actors, and not participants. That show caught the attention of the headline-hungry tabloids, and their sensationalism caught the attention of UK Members of Parliament. The result was high-level political panic.
Suddenly the Prime Minister got involved in the resulting blame-game. A woman named Paula Vennels who had been Group Chief Executive Officer of Post Office operations, who had been in charge of Post Office operations, had already left that office and been awarded the title of Commander of the Order of the British Empire (CBE) for her service. Had she considered what an OBE really represented in terms of slavery, subjugation and exploitation by the UK Establishment, she might have refused being given such and 'honor'. In fact, the UK populace than began to chant that she should give her award back, as if an OBE is something to be proud of in the overall scheme of geopolitical life on this Planet.
But blame for the UK Post Office scandal resides with Charles Windsor, now calling himself King Charles III, because no one forced him to become king. He did this quite willingly and in so doing he inherited the corrupt mess created by General George Monck who set his puppet on the throne of a new monarchy with the title of King Charles II. That was in the year 1660, and that is when the UK Post Office of today was brought into existence as a means of censoring communications between political opponents.
That is also the foundation of events that led to both the creation on March 27, 1964, and the destruction of 'Radio Caroline' on August 14, 1967. But no one seemed to both about investigating that story. The mainstream press and the listeners were more interested in what disc jockeys had for breakfast, and where their next meal would come from once the offshore 'pirate' radio stations were branded as illegal activities for UK citizens to engage in.
The Prime Minister realized that he had to defuse this bomb before it set off an uncontrolled explosion and destroyed everyone and everything associated with its root cause.
But what was the root cause, and more to the point, what was the origin of the UK Post Office?
It was not a non-fiction book or even a television documentary program that set off the UK Post Office scandal. It was a television drama featuring actors, and not participants. That show caught the attention of the headline-hungry tabloids, and their sensationalism caught the attention of UK Members of Parliament. The result was high-level political panic.
Suddenly the Prime Minister got involved in the resulting blame-game. A woman named Paula Vennels who had been Group Chief Executive Officer of Post Office operations, who had been in charge of Post Office operations, had already left that office and been awarded the title of Commander of the Order of the British Empire (CBE) for her service. Had she considered what an OBE really represented in terms of slavery, subjugation and exploitation by the UK Establishment, she might have refused being given such and 'honor'. In fact, the UK populace than began to chant that she should give her award back, as if an OBE is something to be proud of in the overall scheme of geopolitical life on this Planet.
But blame for the UK Post Office scandal resides with Charles Windsor, now calling himself King Charles III, because no one forced him to become king. He did this quite willingly and in so doing he inherited the corrupt mess created by General George Monck who set his puppet on the throne of a new monarchy with the title of King Charles II. That was in the year 1660, and that is when the UK Post Office of today was brought into existence as a means of censoring communications between political opponents.
That is also the foundation of events that led to both the creation on March 27, 1964, and the destruction of 'Radio Caroline' on August 14, 1967. But no one seemed to both about investigating that story. The mainstream press and the listeners were more interested in what disc jockeys had for breakfast, and where their next meal would come from once the offshore 'pirate' radio stations were branded as illegal activities for UK citizens to engage in.
The Prime Minister realized that he had to defuse this bomb before it set off an uncontrolled explosion and destroyed everyone and everything associated with its root cause.
But what was the root cause, and more to the point, what was the origin of the UK Post Office?
|
|
On December 2, 1988, co-author Mervyn Hagger was watching the C-Span television channel which was devoted primarily to coverage of the U.S. Congress and related issues, when the upcoming scheduled program named Roy Hattersley as their featured guest. It was a studio interview conducted from Washington. D.C., with Roy Hattersley who was in London.
|
It was a also a call-in show, and so Mervyn began to record the program and he called-in to 'book' a chance to ask Roy Hattersley, who was the Deputy Leader of the UK Labour Party, why the UK does not have a written constitution. You can hear the questions asked and the answers given on the recorded interview.
There is a background story to both the call-in questions, and to the manner in which they were asked. Mervyn had just come out of the shower and was dripping-wet in an air-conditioned room! It is almost possible to hear teeth chattering from the effect of cold air on a wet, warm body! But the reason for the specific questions asked was due to events that had taken place after 1980 when 'The Trio' first met each other and Don Pierson in Eastland, Texas.
Roy Hattersley was featured as a guest on its call-in interview program. So Mervyn called-in and was put on hold - just after he had come out of the shower, and so he was dripping wet - and that is when he was told that he was next!
There is a background story to both the call-in questions, and to the manner in which they were asked. Mervyn had just come out of the shower and was dripping-wet in an air-conditioned room! It is almost possible to hear teeth chattering from the effect of cold air on a wet, warm body! But the reason for the specific questions asked was due to events that had taken place after 1980 when 'The Trio' first met each other and Don Pierson in Eastland, Texas.
Roy Hattersley was featured as a guest on its call-in interview program. So Mervyn called-in and was put on hold - just after he had come out of the shower, and so he was dripping wet - and that is when he was told that he was next!
"And we're joined now for an hour-long live viewer call-in by Roy Hattersley, a Labour Party member of the British Parliament ....
- Next call Arlington, Texas for Roy Hattersley. Go ahead, please.
- Yes, good morning, Mr. Hattersley. The Labour Party has been as ideological as Margaret Thatcher's Conservatives. I grew up in Labour Britain that crushed the offshore radio stations of 1967, enjoyed by me and by millions of listeners and the labor britain but or jobs go down the drain in the early nineteen thirties now that the labor party of the fresh that champion the cause of human rights of the average person why doesn't labor rally around a new centerpiece push for a written constitution and adopt as its hero promised yet family ancestor Freeborn John Lilburne?
- Well, let me just deal with those two first bits. I mean, the reason we crushed, it's a very dramatic word, but I won't argue with it, the offshore radio stations is our infusion of the rule of law. They were illegal operators. They were blocking channels that people paid money for. And any government that thought you ought to organize a properly disciplined society would have wanted to put them out of business.
- On the other point of course, we increased the number of people in employment in Britain. We didn't have unemployment up to, in honest figures, three and a half million unemployed standing in Dole queues waiting for a job.
- But let me go on to your main question, why don't we have a written constitution?
- I think there are three reasons, and each of them could occupy the whole hour and I'll try to put one sentence to describe each one.
- First of all it doesn't fit our parliamentary system of government.
- If we incorporated a written constitution into our processes, any government could overturn it by a single line bill. The tradition of Great Britain, the spirit of Great Britain, the feelings of the people of Great Britain is that we run by individual items of legislation and you can't superimpose a written constitution onto a system where people are expecting and reacting and supporting something quite different.
- That's one.
- Point two is that giving the powers over human rights, let's say, to a declaration, to a statement, to a constitution is putting the interpretation of those powers in the courts. And in our experience the sort of freedom we want to see, the sort of extensions of liberties are not best interpreted by courts but implemented by politically motivated, intentionally politically motivated parliaments which leads me to the third point.
- and it's related to the second written constitutions by their nature entrench the privileges and freedoms of those people who enjoy them already it's a written constitution that enables the electors or the voters in California to vote for a tax cut because they don't want to pay any more in welfare.
- You never get a written constitution that enables the electors to demand a higher taxes and more welfare. The European Declaration of Human Rights entrenches the rights of people to send their children to private schools. It doesn't entrench the rights of people who can't afford it to have a decent education for their children in the state school system.
- I think written constitutions entrench the negative view of freedom, the absence of restraint, rather than the positive view of freedom, the provision of opportunities.
- I'm sorry you get a philosophical answer, but serve your right for asking me a philosophical I'm sorry you get a philosophical answer, but serve your right for asking me a philosophical question.
".... Uh, I just feel that sometimes, not too often, uh, I can, I can throw a rock into a pond and, and watch the ripples, um, create a certain amount of discussion .... "
An example of this ripple effect appeared on January 4, 2024 when the British ITV network began airing a four-part documentary series called'Mr Bates versus Post Office'. However, a more accurate title would have been 'Mr Bates versus the British Crown', because the British Post Office was created by the British Crown and the British Crown is still responsible for the actions of the British Post Office.
The script for the referenced televised drama claims to be based upon real events, and its dramatization has upset many viewers who have seen it. That is due in part to the cavalier attitude reflected in the words and actions of Post Office officials portrayed on screen. They appear to believe in the mantra that "The King can do no wrong" and that idea stems from the concept that"The King is the law." What is overlooked in this blame game is the stark fact that the UK Post Office is an extension of the UK Crown. That is where legal responsibility for the activities of the UK Post Office actually resides.
Therefore, it should follow-on that the person who needs to answer for misdeeds by UK Post Office officials, is the person who represents the UK Crown, because it is a corporation sole.
Today that person is Charles Windsor.
But accepting responsibility is not how the British system works.
The script for the referenced televised drama claims to be based upon real events, and its dramatization has upset many viewers who have seen it. That is due in part to the cavalier attitude reflected in the words and actions of Post Office officials portrayed on screen. They appear to believe in the mantra that "The King can do no wrong" and that idea stems from the concept that"The King is the law." What is overlooked in this blame game is the stark fact that the UK Post Office is an extension of the UK Crown. That is where legal responsibility for the activities of the UK Post Office actually resides.
Therefore, it should follow-on that the person who needs to answer for misdeeds by UK Post Office officials, is the person who represents the UK Crown, because it is a corporation sole.
Today that person is Charles Windsor.
But accepting responsibility is not how the British system works.
"JUST FOLLOWING ORDERS"
The UK Crown has a Royal Family as its figurehead, but obfuscation began when they switched their family name during World War I in order to obfuscate their German roots. Their minions in the UK Post Office system of management seem to have imbibed the German explanation that was often used by Nazi officials that they were "just following orders."
Before someone complains about our analogy, we want readers to remember that the UK Crown once dominated much of the world by enslaving populations under the jurisdictional banner of the British Empire. This was not a voluntary capitulation to subjugation by native populations, any more than the average person born in the British Isles granted permission from birth to be ruled over by a class who saw themselves as superior human beings by reason of birth parentage.
This could be a very complicated story because it follows that the radiating ripples can also be followed individually as parallel lines of study occupying the same time and space. But seen in perspective, those same parallel lines not only come together as an optical illusion, but they also come together as a matter of fact.
At the center of converging lines is that 'rock', or pebble described by Charles Windsor. It represents the UK Crown corporation sole which disrupted the world by its creation of the British Empire. The UK Crown also created and controlled the UK Post Office. Due to its omniscient presence in every form of communication originating under the jurisdiction of the British Crown, the UK Post Office has become the focal point of this story.
We intend to reveal how the UK Post Office came to represent the enemy of individual freedom, and how it resulted in the creation of 'Radio Caroline' as an "organized crime station."
Before someone complains about our analogy, we want readers to remember that the UK Crown once dominated much of the world by enslaving populations under the jurisdictional banner of the British Empire. This was not a voluntary capitulation to subjugation by native populations, any more than the average person born in the British Isles granted permission from birth to be ruled over by a class who saw themselves as superior human beings by reason of birth parentage.
This could be a very complicated story because it follows that the radiating ripples can also be followed individually as parallel lines of study occupying the same time and space. But seen in perspective, those same parallel lines not only come together as an optical illusion, but they also come together as a matter of fact.
At the center of converging lines is that 'rock', or pebble described by Charles Windsor. It represents the UK Crown corporation sole which disrupted the world by its creation of the British Empire. The UK Crown also created and controlled the UK Post Office. Due to its omniscient presence in every form of communication originating under the jurisdiction of the British Crown, the UK Post Office has become the focal point of this story.
We intend to reveal how the UK Post Office came to represent the enemy of individual freedom, and how it resulted in the creation of 'Radio Caroline' as an "organized crime station."
Return to Index
Editing in progress preparatory for a print edition.
This text remains fluid and subject to change.
This text remains fluid and subject to change.
Copyright 2024 by Yesterday Never Happened (UK) Ltd