Page 1

40 Lombard Street Barry Vale of Glamorgan South Wales CF62 8DQ 29 High Street Barry Y Barri CF62 7EB 13th of December 2012

Dear Alun Cairns MP, As per your email request earlier today please find this ‘letter of rejection’ you requested in order to take this forward. Please explain to me at a less urgent date, why the urgent concern I raised on the 7th December 2012 is only now being asked to be placed into a letter in order to take forward. And why a letter is even needed when you have been emailed the specific details of these concerns. On the 7th December 2012 I made clear to my Government that an unlawful and unconstitutional international treaty is in the process of being formed by the ITU and 178 world leaders at the World Conference on International Telecommunications (WCIT) in Dubai. It will be signed tomorrow. I’m disgusted that the prospect of support for my claim has only arrived on the evening prior to the signing ceremony. However I am extremely relieved that you are now acknowledging and participating in this situation. Please find below all the information I can provide to assist you as you ‘take this forward’. May 2012 

I raised ideas and concerns surrounding the lawfulness of EU Directives with the Vale of Glamorgan office. I also expressed these same ideas and concerns with the European Union, specifically naming the Data Protection Directive 95/46/EC and the US-EU Safe Harbour certification programme. I was not taken seriously by the EU and subsequently did not expect the EU to include these concerns in future debate.

November 2012 

Feeling highly unrepresented, I flew to Dubai myself in order to attend the ITU’s World Telecommunications open debate. The aim of which was to ensure my communities ideas and concerns get included in this open debate. The information was placed into a document called ‘Operation Tech Saxon’ and later published here.

2nd/ - 3rd of December 2012   

I was denied access to ITU event documents and online portal. I was granted access to the event but restricted to the silent communal areas outside the debate halls, which were heavily guarded. I was told there would be opportunity to address the audience. I put my name forward and followed this up with an email to the ITU. To date I have not received a reply. I did meet with the ITU Secretary General Dr Hamadoun I. Touré, obtained his business card, shared a picture and expressed my ideas and concerns to him directly. I also followed up our conversation up with an email but I did not received a reply. During the first week of ‘open debate’ my pass denied me access to much of the debate, a seat in the debate, a hearing devise to hear the discreet debate or a microphone to give me voice in the debate. I was forced to stand at the back of the room, facing the backs of an ignorant and indoctrinated crowd, reading the real time transcripts of this supposedly ‘open debate’ on a faded, overhead projector screen.

3rd - 6th December 2012  

My concerns and ideas did not get included in the supposedly open debate. Nearly each day I attended the event I was greeted by the ITU’s head of security, ‘Drew’, asked me questions such as “where I was staying and who was financing my trip to Dubai”. My social profiles regularly reported that he was viewing my profile. In its entirety I felt intimidated and victimised.

4th December 2012 

I emailed my express concern to the ITU that the entire debate was being done unlawfully and unconstitutionally. I also requested a seat in the debate as a representative of ideas and developments happening under common law which occur outside of the jurisdiction of the EU.

7th of December 2012 

As we neared the end of the first week I approached the EU’s chair and submitted a paper entitled Operation Tech Saxon which contained these ideas and concerns. I again, did not feel like the ideas and concerns being raised were taken seriously or likely to be included in the second week of the debate. With my seemingly low expectation of democracy, lawfulness and constitution I firmly believed it wise to exercise some understanding of the mechanics of jurisdiction and the Magna Carta Charter. I felt it necessary to operate under my equitable title ‘Sion Ap Buckler’ which as I understand, removes my activity from under EU/Crown and Government regulatory and statutory law jurisdiction thus placing me under common law jurisdiction where I have opportunity to exercise and express my rights and freedoms. In an attempt for support I emailed my local councillor; Stuart Egan, my assembly member; Jane Hutt, my MP; (you, Alun Cairns) and four members of the European Parliament including; Jill Evans, John Bufton, Derek Vaughn and Kay Swinburne.

8th December 2012 

I followed up my email to the ITU’s Secretary General to reiterate my concerns and ideas and emphasis that the debate is being conducted unlawfully and unconstitutionally. I did received a reply from the ITU Secretary General Dr Hamadoun I. Touré asking me to change the format of the attachment I sent. Despite there being no attachment just a publicly accessible webpage link. I immediately replied with a PDF attachment. To date I have not received a reply, despite several follow up emails on the 9th and 10th of December 2012.

10th December 2012  

I re-request an opportunity to address an audience by email to the ITU. To date my email has not been returned. I began getting emails from my representatives back in the UK. o Derek Vaughn reiterated the situation back to me. This was purposeless. I replied stating so. o Jane Hutt’s Office Manager emailed and said that Jane would be in touch shortly. To date she has not contacted me.

11th December 2012 

You replied stating that Derek Vaughn was in a stronger position to reply. I replied explaining he had ignored me and that I was being excluded from the debate. To which you replies seeking ‘a note, letter or rule’ to believe I am being excluded.

Jane Hutt’s Office Manager emailed and said that Jane has passed this matter to the Business and Technology Minister in the Welsh Government and also made her own ministerial team aware.

There is no such note, letter or rule excluding me from this supposed ‘Open Debate’. As I explain above, I am being physically denied access from entering the debate room by security, or I am being physically denied facilitation to be included in the debate whilst in the room. 

I went onto explain to you my understanding of the mechanics of jurisdiction and my understanding of lawfulness and constitutional behaviour which I believe are being violated in this supposed ‘Open Debate’.

I am in a catch 22 situation here in Dubai. I am representing a world community that seeks to exercise their inherent right and freedom to propose changes to social structure itself. Our respective Governments have been intrusted by their people to act in the interest of their people. THIS IS NOT HAPPENING. The WCIT attendees and the ITU will only accept and debate proposals from ‘Member States’ e.g. institutional thinking and monetary motivated bodies operating under regulatory and statutory law jurisdiction. Exacerbation of the problems this group seek to overcome is imminent as the fault is within the framework of the debate itself. Our supposed representatives at the debate are evidently not representing the real voice of the community. The event itself will not allow me to speak on behalf of this community directly. There is evidently an alternative agenda within the spirit of this debate. This open debate is NOT democratic, it’s NOT constitutional and it is NOT lawful. I have reported my findings to many who are in a position to intervene this corrupt international treaty. Those remaining ignorant of what I’m reporting are equally liable for the damage this treaty causes to our constitution.

Letter to Alun Cairns MP  

Letter to MP raising concerns about the WCIT and asking for the British goverment to intervein the treaty.

Read more
Read more
Similar to
Popular now
Just for you