HomeCounter-Racism Radio NetworkCounter-Racism Television NetworkArticlesProjectsCounter-Racism Work/Study ProjectShopping MallContact
Secure DonationsSecure Donations  FAQFAQ  SearchSearch  MemberlistMemberlist  RegisterRegister  ProfileProfile  Log inLog in

Non-white person's word against the R/WS in the work place
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Counter-Racism Work/Study Project Forum Index -> How to Counter Racism (White Supremacy) in the Work Place
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Edward Williams
Site Admin


Joined: 12 Apr 2003
Posts: 3110
Location: I am from everywhere I've ever been and everywhere I've never been

PostPosted: Sat Aug 01, 2009 7:23 am    Post subject: Re: Reply with quote

Darkmatter wrote:
I just wanted to add one other thing, I suddenly thought some people might be thinking OMG this person has been suspended. I believe that if the focus is producing justice and following the logic, this process is watertight. I hope I haven't said anything to discourage other people, because I have messed things up. That is entirely down to me because I didn't listen to all of Edward's advice.

Remember that I started this process after months of being mistreated and not doing anything about it. I started using it right at the point where I thought they were going to fire me anyway, so I didn't have anything to lose. In actual fact, using this process probably has already prevented them from doing firing me, I've made it much harder for them to do that now. I also don't know what they are planning to do when the two weeks are over.

What I suspect will happen, and I could be totally off base here because the white people who practice racism (white supremacy) are completely unpredictable especially when they are in unfamiliar territory, is that they will call you in and give you a long speech about how you are endangering you career path when you speak and/or act as you have been in the last few weeks and how they are going to let you back to work...and they will be saying these things without actually saying them but because of the words they use you will get the feeling this is what they mean. I have had this speech many times.. and by many managers even at the same company. If this is what happens try to use something that is called Compensatory Conversation Control...meaning basically that you don't say anything after they are talking except answer questions. You look them straight in their eyes when they are talking and when they finish, if they did not ask you any questions, you either thank them for what they have said by only saying 'thank you', you ask a question for clarification if something they said confused you, or you say nothing at all. This helps your focus, keeps you from making unneeded statements and gives the impression to the person who is talking that you are in command of the conversation even without talking. I don't know why the last one is so...but I have been told it by running the experiment.

I have this experiment in my lab book but I have not posted it on the WSP but I will post it today. Compensatory Conversation Control.

Now they could just fire you but they can do that at any time anyway. If they do you probably have more than enough evidence to pursue an injunction against them if you decide to do so.

I wouldn't worry about it much if I were you. They are going to do what they are going to do anyway. This approach just makes the more refined racists (white supremacists) back up off you and take another look at the situation and makes the less refined racists (white supremacists) refine their behavior. But the most important part of this approach is that, when used correctly, it keeps the non-white person from being harmed and gets them the help they need when they need it. By keeping a non-white person from being harmed and getting the non-white person the help they need when they need it.

Darkmatter wrote:
The other really important thing for me is the fact that I came face-to-face with the white supremacists and stood my ground, that is something I've never done before, well not on the job anyhow. I found that even though I made some mistakes, when I used words in the correct way I got the desired response, so I actually know for a fact that it works. Things only went awry when I deviated from what I should have been saying, I actually had what I wanted to say written down, but that is how easy it is for someone to lose their focus. I did make too many statements, (Edward was spot on) which I do a lot, more than most people I know. I just need to work on following the logic as well as using the language precisely, and be careful not to go off on a tangent.

Thanks

I decided when I used this method for the first time that I didn't have anything to lose anyway. After the first time I used this method I knew it was an invaluable lesson. People will not really understand how words work until they use a method like this one where the ability to feed themselves or their family is placed on the line...their back is against the wall...and they have nothing to count on except what the Creator of the universe gave them...their brain. An invaluable lesson. As you refine your approach by running counter-racism science experiments during the use of the approach you will begin to see even more.
_________________
What is the reason YOU were born into a SYSTEM of INJUSTICE if not to replace it with a SYSTEM of JUSTICE?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Edward Williams
Site Admin


Joined: 12 Apr 2003
Posts: 3110
Location: I am from everywhere I've ever been and everywhere I've never been

PostPosted: Mon Aug 17, 2009 12:07 pm    Post subject: Re: Reply with quote

Darkmatter wrote:
Kim Kim wrote:
Darkmatter wrote:

Thank you your response, I really appreciate what you've said and am relieved to learn that the information I have shared has been of constructive value. I have today sent Edward a copy of the e-mail I sent to human resources and also a letter I have received (yesterday) from my line manager since I last posted on here. I was holding off, for a response to my e-mail to HR, they have yet to reply. The letter I received yesterday, I think will be of constructive value also, it is an example how malicious & deceitful the white supremacists get if they feel they're being backed into a corner.

Hopefully I can post both on here later today or tomorrow.


You're welcome and I'm looking forward to your posts.


Hi there. Just to keep you guys updated. I am still not back at work, but apparently not because I have been suspended. They have basically found some loophole in their own policies and procedures, where they can prevent me from coming back to work until I see occupational health. This way they can punish me but make it look as if they're \\\"helping\\\" me. Apparently I am mentally ill/aggressive because I reported to them a possible violation of the rule of law and did it in such a way as to produce justice. This mental illness/aggression has conveniently occurred at the exact same time that I reported a possible subversion of Parliamentary Sovereignty. I suppose what they're really saying is that I am a nigger, therefore I should not be complaining about being mistreated and I should certainly not be doing so in a logical manner, therefore I am not behaving like a stereotypical nigger, ergo something must be wrong with me.

I have another meeting next week, after this I will post all the e-mails/letters between myself and my employer, what was said and done in the first meeting and the one scheduled for next week.

What do the people who work in the field known as 'occupational health' do that nobody else does?
_________________
What is the reason YOU were born into a SYSTEM of INJUSTICE if not to replace it with a SYSTEM of JUSTICE?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Edward Williams
Site Admin


Joined: 12 Apr 2003
Posts: 3110
Location: I am from everywhere I've ever been and everywhere I've never been

PostPosted: Tue Aug 18, 2009 12:19 am    Post subject: Re: Reply with quote

Darkmatter wrote:
Edward Williams wrote:
Darkmatter wrote:
Kim Kim wrote:
Darkmatter wrote:

Thank you your response, I really appreciate what you've said and am relieved to learn that the information I have shared has been of constructive value. I have today sent Edward a copy of the e-mail I sent to human resources and also a letter I have received (yesterday) from my line manager since I last posted on here. I was holding off, for a response to my e-mail to HR, they have yet to reply. The letter I received yesterday, I think will be of constructive value also, it is an example how malicious & deceitful the white supremacists get if they feel they're being backed into a corner.

Hopefully I can post both on here later today or tomorrow.


You're welcome and I'm looking forward to your posts.


Hi there. Just to keep you guys updated. I am still not back at work, but apparently not because I have been suspended. They have basically found some loophole in their own policies and procedures, where they can prevent me from coming back to work until I see occupational health. This way they can punish me but make it look as if they're 'helping' me. Apparently I am mentally ill/aggressive because I reported to them a possible violation of the rule of law and did it in such a way as to produce justice. This mental illness/aggression has conveniently occurred at the exact same time that I reported a possible subversion of Parliamentary Sovereignty. I suppose what they're really saying is that I am a nigger, therefore I should not be complaining about being mistreated and I should certainly not be doing so in a logical manner, therefore I am not behaving like a stereotypical nigger, ergo something must be wrong with me.

I have another meeting next week, after this I will post all the e-mails/letters between myself and my employer, what was said and done in the first meeting and the one scheduled for next week.

What do the people who work in the field known as 'occupational health' do that nobody else does?


As far as I am aware, they exist to prevent employees from abusing the system in terms of sick leave. If an employee has a lot of unexplained days off sick, then they're usually referred for an Occupational Health. Or if a employee has a drink/drug problem, and they may pose a threat to others they will probably be referred to Occupational Health. I have no idea why they're asking me to to see OH as I have had about 3 days off sick in an 18 period. They're probably trying to discredit me, saying I'm insane, get the Occupational Health to verify the false claim, then anything I say after that will be treated with suspicion.

Doesn't matter what they are trying to do. Follow THE LOGIC. That could be one of the questions you ask them when you meet with them. Listen carefully at their answer and follow THE LOGIC. Other people other than the people who work in the field of work known as 'Occupational Health' are setup to handle people with a drinking problem who may be a threat to someone else so that is not an answer to the question that was asked.

The question is:

What do the people who work in the field known as 'occupational health' do that nobody else does?

What do they do that nobody else does? This question, when answered truthfully, will yield not only the purpose of the people in terms of what they do but also, to some degree, how they do it if you follow THE LOGIC. There are people who are not in the so-called field of 'occupational health' that are setup to handle people that abuse sick leave. So make sure you not only have an understanding of what you are asking but also an understanding of what their answer is when they give it. If you do not have an understanding of what they mean when they say what they say ask additional questions.
_________________
What is the reason YOU were born into a SYSTEM of INJUSTICE if not to replace it with a SYSTEM of JUSTICE?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Edward Williams
Site Admin


Joined: 12 Apr 2003
Posts: 3110
Location: I am from everywhere I've ever been and everywhere I've never been

PostPosted: Tue Aug 18, 2009 7:02 pm    Post subject: Re: Reply with quote

Darkmatter wrote:
Edward Williams wrote:
Darkmatter wrote:
Edward Williams wrote:
Darkmatter wrote:
Kim Kim wrote:
Darkmatter wrote:

Thank you your response, I really appreciate what you've said and am relieved to learn that the information I have shared has been of constructive value. I have today sent Edward a copy of the e-mail I sent to human resources and also a letter I have received (yesterday) from my line manager since I last posted on here. I was holding off, for a response to my e-mail to HR, they have yet to reply. The letter I received yesterday, I think will be of constructive value also, it is an example how malicious & deceitful the white supremacists get if they feel they're being backed into a corner.

Hopefully I can post both on here later today or tomorrow.


You're welcome and I'm looking forward to your posts.


Hi there. Just to keep you guys updated. I am still not back at work, but apparently not because I have been suspended. They have basically found some loophole in their own policies and procedures, where they can prevent me from coming back to work until I see occupational health. This way they can punish me but make it look as if they're 'helping' me. Apparently I am mentally ill/aggressive because I reported to them a possible violation of the rule of law and did it in such a way as to produce justice. This mental illness/aggression has conveniently occurred at the exact same time that I reported a possible subversion of Parliamentary Sovereignty. I suppose what they're really saying is that I am a nigger, therefore I should not be complaining about being mistreated and I should certainly not be doing so in a logical manner, therefore I am not behaving like a stereotypical nigger, ergo something must be wrong with me.

I have another meeting next week, after this I will post all the e-mails/letters between myself and my employer, what was said and done in the first meeting and the one scheduled for next week.

What do the people who work in the field known as 'occupational health' do that nobody else does?


As far as I am aware, they exist to prevent employees from abusing the system in terms of sick leave. If an employee has a lot of unexplained days off sick, then they're usually referred for an Occupational Health. Or if a employee has a drink/drug problem, and they may pose a threat to others they will probably be referred to Occupational Health. I have no idea why they're asking me to to see OH as I have had about 3 days off sick in an 18 period. They're probably trying to discredit me, saying I'm insane, get the Occupational Health to verify the false claim, then anything I say after that will be treated with suspicion.

Doesn't matter what they are trying to do. Follow THE LOGIC. That could be one of the questions you ask them when you meet with them. Listen carefully at their answer and follow THE LOGIC. Other people other than the people who work in the field of work known as 'Occupational Health' are setup to handle people with a drinking problem who may be a threat to someone else so that is not an answer to the question that was asked.

The question is:

What do the people who work in the field known as 'occupational health' do that nobody else does?


To my knowledge, they don't do anything that nobody else does. They assess employee's ability to do their duties on the job, but other medical professionals could also carry out this function. If this is the logical answer, how does it reveal the purpose of the people in terms of what they do or how they do it?

They will have to say they do something that nobody else does otherwise why do they exist? If they are just duplicating the same efforts that someone in your ogranization is doing is that in accordance with Parliamentary Sovereignty and the Rule of Law?

Darkmatter wrote:
Edward Williams wrote:
What do they do that nobody else does? This question, when answered truthfully, will yield not only the purpose of the people in terms of what they do but also, to some degree, how they do it if you follow THE LOGIC. There are people who are not in the so-called field of 'occupational health' that are setup to handle people that abuse sick leave. So make sure you not only have an understanding of what you are asking but also an understanding of what their answer is when they give it. If you do not have an understanding of what they mean when they say what they say ask additional questions.


I think when I answered the question the first time, I was answering it in terms of \"within\" the organisation.

I asked human resources why I was being referred, this is the answer they gave.

\"In line with organisational policy, and as a condition of employment, medical assessments may be required from time to time arranged through the Occupational Health department. In addition managers can refer staff for an independent medical opinion on matters relating to employment and health.\"

When I ask them this question. What do the people who work in the field known as 'occupational health' do that nobody else does?. I expect them to use the same answer they gave above.

_________________
What is the reason YOU were born into a SYSTEM of INJUSTICE if not to replace it with a SYSTEM of JUSTICE?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Edward Williams
Site Admin


Joined: 12 Apr 2003
Posts: 3110
Location: I am from everywhere I've ever been and everywhere I've never been

PostPosted: Wed Aug 19, 2009 6:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Darkmatter wrote:
Hi this is an e-mail conversation I had with Mr Williams (where I'm asking questions about the investigation at work), which I am now posting on here.

Q: At this stage is there any way that I can make them carry out the investigation using Parliamentary Sovereignty?
A: Yes, you use the words. And in the process of using the words you ask questions.

For example, I have been asked 'What do you mean when you say 'due process'?'. I responded by saying 'When I say 'due process' I mean 'doing things in the correct way''. See...I am asked a direct question so I giver a direct answer. Then I am told 'That 's not what 'due process' means'. OK...so I ask a question...'Does 'due process' mean 'doing things in an incorrect way'?'.

No one wants to go on record as saying the Constitution of the United States is all about doing things in an incorrect way. This strategy works very well. Ask questions. You can direct a conversation in the way you want it to go just by asking questions.

Are you exploring the 'whistle blowing policy' because it has been determined that someone has subverted the Rule of Law? what is the 'whistle blowing policy' designed to do? What happens as a result of using the 'whistle blowing policy'? These are questions that you should ask yourself and prepare a list of questions for the meeting. They are going to try to avoid talking about Parliamentary Sovereignty and the Rule of Law at all costs. Doesn't' matter. It's all words. Only words. So you use words too. They are going to try to use words in such a manner that the effect is you are mistreated. You try to use words in such a manner that the law of the land protects you and everyone else. This is critical.

Q: Is there any way I can word it so that they have to conduct the investigation using PS & RofL.
A: Yes, the same way as described above.

This will give me opportunity to also post what was said and done in this meeting compared to the first one I had, where I was basically told \"I was in trouble for surfacing the problem\" i.e. by threats of suspension etc. and demonstrate how they were able to do this using their own Policies and Procedures!

When you are talking about Rule of Law there is no such thing as 'basically'. They either said it or they did not say it. Stick to the specifics.

-----

Thanks for your suggestions Mr Williams, I found them really helpful.

It seems to me when the white supremacists use words, they can immediately back those words up with action, and they know this. When I use words, they know and I know, I can't immediately back those words up with action, so my words don't have as much impact as their words. Does this make sense or doesn't it work that way?

Sure. The white people who practice racism (white supremacy) know when they look at you that they have more power than you. This is the reason to use words in such a manner that you get the smartest and most powerful white people to help you.

Darkmatter wrote:
I have been reading and listening to some of the suggestions on the Work/Study page (which I found really useful) and reporting a violation to the Inspector General was mentioned a few times. Is there a UK equivalent?

I do not know. The way it should work is there are three basic categories:

Inquiry
Investigation
Indictment

We should, as much as possible, stay in the Inquiry lane. I always ask people in the meetings...when they say they do not handle Constitutional issues at that level...

What is the next step I should take to get what appears to be a violation of the United States Constitution addressed?

And I let them tell me. See...still in the Inquiry lane. Then I follow the direction I'm given. Now they could tell me not to seek to get it addressed but that makes them look even more suspicious. That kind of response goes on record as that person looking like they are the ones who are subverting the Constitution of the United States so they are hesitant or reluctant to say that. You have to know what you are looking at.

I have tapes that were sent to me a person that was told by his job to go to the State's Attorney General who then sent him back to his job he was working who then sent him back to the State's Attorney General who then sent him back to the job he works...this went back and forth 5 times until the State's Attorney General sent him to the Federal Attorney General. The Investigative office for the Federal Attorney General is the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI). The FBI then contacted his job because everyone there was now under investigation. So everyone was running around trying to figure out what to say and what to do. See how that works? His job and the State's Attorney General kept telling him where to go when he asked a similar question like the one I posted above. Once the FBI came to his job to start interviewing people the problem was recorded on a federal level and there was no way for anyone to make the problem go away because they now, if they did not have one before, have a record with the federal government as being under investigation for subverting the Constitution of the United States.

The white people who practice racism (white supremacy) are always gonna test you to see how far you are willing to go with what you are doing. If you are not prepared to go all the way, meaning to the Supreme Court of the United States of America for me and to the Parliament for you...or even further...then what are we talking about? We have to be prepared to go as far as we need to go to produce justice or we are just spinning our wheels.

Darkmatter wrote:
I did a bit of digging and the Attorney General may be the UK equivalent, but I'm finding it difficult to establish exactly what this person does. Mainly because the language used is confusing to me. Does anyone know the answer?

Also, where do I find the conversation control tool posted on WSP?

Thank you.

I've explained how Compensatory Conversation Control works. Do you have any questions related to how it works?
_________________
What is the reason YOU were born into a SYSTEM of INJUSTICE if not to replace it with a SYSTEM of JUSTICE?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Edward Williams
Site Admin


Joined: 12 Apr 2003
Posts: 3110
Location: I am from everywhere I've ever been and everywhere I've never been

PostPosted: Thu Aug 20, 2009 2:19 pm    Post subject: Re: Reply with quote

Darkmatter wrote:
Edward Williams wrote:
Darkmatter wrote:
Hi this is an e-mail conversation I had with Mr Williams (where I'm asking questions about the investigation at work), which I am now posting on here.

Q: At this stage is there any way that I can make them carry out the investigation using Parliamentary Sovereignty?
A: Yes, you use the words. And in the process of using the words you ask questions.

For example, I have been asked 'What do you mean when you say 'due process'?'. I responded by saying 'When I say 'due process' I mean 'doing things in the correct way''. See...I am asked a direct question so I giver a direct answer. Then I am told 'That 's not what 'due process' means'. OK...so I ask a question...'Does 'due process' mean 'doing things in an incorrect way'?'.

No one wants to go on record as saying the Constitution of the United States is all about doing things in an incorrect way. This strategy works very well. Ask questions. You can direct a conversation in the way you want it to go just by asking questions.

Are you exploring the 'whistle blowing policy' because it has been determined that someone has subverted the Rule of Law? what is the 'whistle blowing policy' designed to do? What happens as a result of using the 'whistle blowing policy'? These are questions that you should ask yourself and prepare a list of questions for the meeting. They are going to try to avoid talking about Parliamentary Sovereignty and the Rule of Law at all costs. Doesn't' matter. It's all words. Only words. So you use words too. They are going to try to use words in such a manner that the effect is you are mistreated. You try to use words in such a manner that the law of the land protects you and everyone else. This is critical.

Q: Is there any way I can word it so that they have to conduct the investigation using PS & RofL.
A: Yes, the same way as described above.

This will give me opportunity to also post what was said and done in this meeting compared to the first one I had, where I was basically told 'I was in trouble for surfacing the problem' i.e. by threats of suspension etc. and demonstrate how they were able to do this using their own Policies and Procedures!

When you are talking about Rule of Law there is no such thing as 'basically'. They either said it or they did not say it. Stick to the specifics.

-----

Thanks for your suggestions Mr Williams, I found them really helpful.

It seems to me when the white supremacists use words, they can immediately back those words up with action, and they know this. When I use words, they know and I know, I can't immediately back those words up with action, so my words don't have as much impact as their words. Does this make sense or doesn't it work that way?

Sure. The white people who practice racism (white supremacy) know when they look at you that they have more power than you. This is the reason to use words in such a manner that you get the smartest and most powerful white people to help you.

Darkmatter wrote:
I have been reading and listening to some of the suggestions on the Work/Study page (which I found really useful) and reporting a violation to the Inspector General was mentioned a few times. Is there a UK equivalent?

I do not know. The way it should work is there are three basic categories:

Inquiry
Investigation
Indictment

We should, as much as possible, stay in the Inquiry lane. I always ask people in the meetings...when they say they do not handle Constitutional issues at that level...

What is the next step I should take to get what appears to be a violation of the United States Constitution addressed?.


Another excellent question. Can I pre-empt it and not wait for them to say they do not handle constitutional issues? One of the people attending the meeting next week has already said that she doesn't know what I mean when I say someone has subverted the Rule of Law. Clearly they are being wilfully ignorant, not sure how this helps them, but I think that's the game they're playing. So I was just thinking maybe I could just say something like, you don't seem to know what you're doing so I have to go to the authorities now.

That would not be my suggestion because it becomes difficult at that point to stay in the Inquiry lane. You don't want to violate 'due process' trying to get 'due process'. Stay in the Inquiry lane as best you can. Ask them what the next step is for supporting and defending Parliamentary Sovereignty and the Rule of Law. Let them tell you and you follow that process.

Always make sure in stay in the position to do as you are told.

This means you will have to ask questions in such a manner that you are not harmed and also in such a manner that you get the help you need when you need it.

Darkmatter wrote:
Edward Williams wrote:
And I let them tell me. See...still in the Inquiry lane. Then I follow the direction I'm given. Now they could tell me not to seek to get it addressed but that makes them look even more suspicious. That kind of response goes on record as that person looking like they are the ones who are subverting the Constitution of the United States so they are hesitant or reluctant to say that. You have to know what you are looking at.

I have tapes that were sent to me a person that was told by his job to go to the State's Attorney General who then sent him back to his job he was working who then sent him back to the State's Attorney General who then sent him back to the job he works...this went back and forth 5 times until the State's Attorney General sent him to the Federal Attorney General. The Investigative office for the Federal Attorney General is the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI). The FBI then contacted his job because everyone there was now under investigation. So everyone was running around trying to figure out what to say and what to do. See how that works? His job and the State's Attorney General kept telling him where to go when he asked a similar question like the one I posted above. Once the FBI came to his job to start interviewing people the problem was recorded on a federal level and there was no way for anyone to make the problem go away because they now, if they did not have one before, have a record with the federal government as being under investigation for subverting the Constitution of the United States.


This is very interesting. I'm quite stunned to be honest, just by asking a question, things ended up going that far. Brilliant piece of information, thanks.

Edward Williams wrote:
The white people who practice racism (white supremacy) are always gonna test you to see how far you are willing to go with what you are doing. If you are not prepared to go all the way, meaning to the Supreme Court of the United States of America for me and to the Parliament for you...or even further...then what are we talking about? We have to be prepared to go as far as we need to go to produce justice or we are just spinning our wheels.


I was getting ready to tell them at the meeting I'm prepared to go to the Attorney General. The reason for this is, in theory I could be accused of being part of the subversion, if I don't report this to the authorities, is this right?

No. You are bringing it up and requesting information, help and direction in getting it addressed. Think bigger. Everyone is the "authority" when it comes to supporting and defending Parliamentary Sovereignty and the Rule of Law. The presumption is if there is anyone, in the known universe, who is against Parliamentary Sovereignty and the Rule of Law they are against you and everyone else. That is the premise...that is THE LOGIC and that should be the position. Think bigger. The white people who practice racism (white supremacy) use the same strategy. They say you are either with them or against them. Same thing. Anyone who is against you is also against the company you work for and also against Parliamentary Sovereignty and the Rule of Law because you and the company you work for supports and defends Parliamentary Sovereignty and the Rule of Law.

Darkmatter wrote:
Is there a question I can ask to find out if they're actually going to investigate this or whether they're just stalling?

If you are asking the questions we are talking about on this forum and additional questions using the same logic then you are following the process they are giving you to support and defend Parliamentary Sovereignty and the Rule of Law. They tell you what the process is and the longer they try to get around it the more suspicious they become. Not only suspicious by you but suspicious for the Parliament as well if you decide to take it that far. Note the responses people give you, the time it takes for them to respond, what people ask you to do. Chances are you will find that anyone not supporting and defending Parliamentary Sovereignty and the Rule of Law is digging themselves into a deeper hole.

Darkmatter wrote:
asked them to send me a copy of their policies and procedures for making a referral to occupational health. I have evidence that they're supposed to get my consent before making a referral and I'm supposed to be told exactly why the referral is being made, they've done neither. I have written confirmation they're in the process of making the referral. Now I'm being told that they can't send me the document I asked for because it is currently being 'REVIEWED'. Just like you said, policies and procedures are subject to arbitrary changes by the people who are doing the investigation, which is exactly what is happening.

Happens all the time. This is the reason you stick to supporting and defending Parliamentary Sovereignty and the Rule of Law. They ain't gonna be able to change the minds of everyone in Parliament to rewrite a law just to get you fired. So you have a certain amount of cover there.
_________________
What is the reason YOU were born into a SYSTEM of INJUSTICE if not to replace it with a SYSTEM of JUSTICE?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Edward Williams
Site Admin


Joined: 12 Apr 2003
Posts: 3110
Location: I am from everywhere I've ever been and everywhere I've never been

PostPosted: Mon Aug 24, 2009 5:35 pm    Post subject: Re: Reply with quote

vstew wrote:
I've been following this dialogue throughout; constructive to say the least!

I'm curious: what if the white people who practice racism respond to the question, "What is the next step I should take to get what appears to be a violation of the United States Constitution addressed?", by saying 'I don't know.' What should be the question posed in response to that answer, Mr. Williams?

I would then ask if they know, meaning the people in the meeting, of anyone that knows the process for finding out if someone is subverting the Constitution of the United States.

Now here you have people in a meeting who say they support and defend the Constitution of the United States but they don't know the process for supporting and defending the Constitution of the United States?

How can a person support the Constitution of the United States without knowing how to go about finding out if someone is subverting it? How can a person defend the Constitution of the United States without knowing how to go about finding out if someone is subverting it? Defend it from whom? How? Why would you need to defend the Constitution of the United States if no one is subverting it? Who are you going to defend it from? Are you going to defend the Constitution of the United States from other people who are also supporting and defending it? Or are you going to defend the Constitution of the United States from people who are int he process of violating it? Subverting it? Misusing it? Abusing it?

See...THE LOGIC will take you where you need to go if you just ask questions. And mainly ask questions to yourself and answer those questions to yourself without lying to yourself. Take your time and walk through THE LOGIC. Step by step.

If they say they don't know anyone who knows what the process is for finding out if someone is subverting the Constitution of the United States, and stick to that statement, then I ask another question...

Does anyone have an issue with me attempting to find someone who can tell me the process for supporting and defensing the Constitution of the United States?

Now the answer to this question is critical. If they don't know anyone...OK...logic doesn't support that answer if they support and defend the Constitution of the United States...but OK...let's say they say they don't know anyone and they don't want me to try to find anyone they put themselves in harms way by making themselves suspects of violating the Constitution of the United States. So when they say they don't have an issue with me finding someone who can explain the process for supporting and defending the Constitution of the United States then I go to the manager of the highest ranked person in that meeting and I go to that manager with the 'blessing' of everyone in that meeting because they had no issues with me going to someone else.

And I start the process with that manager and take the process all the way through and if they give me the same answers and I'm at the point with that manager that I was with the people in the meeting I ask the same questions in the same manner using the same logic and go to that person's manager...until I find someone somewhere who can tell me what the process is for supporting and defending the Constitution of the United States. Now I may have to go all the way to Mr. Obama and explain the entire situation to him with the names of all of the people along the way and their responses. Or I may end up in the Supreme Court. If so...then so be it.
_________________
What is the reason YOU were born into a SYSTEM of INJUSTICE if not to replace it with a SYSTEM of JUSTICE?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Edward Williams
Site Admin


Joined: 12 Apr 2003
Posts: 3110
Location: I am from everywhere I've ever been and everywhere I've never been

PostPosted: Wed Sep 02, 2009 8:27 pm    Post subject: Re: Reply with quote

Darkmatter wrote:
Darkmatter wrote:
Any comments/suggestions/thoughts on any aspect of any of the above would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.


I should have also added if anyone has any questions, please feel free to ask them. Thank you.

Mr Williams, I have so many questions I would like to ask. I don't want to take up too much of your time, so I will be as brief as possible.

I've observed two things that seem to have occurred naturally in the way I have implemented this process.

1. I am sending e-mails, asking questions regarding individual issues. So, I might ask questions about inconsistencies I have observed in their e-mails or what was said in a meeting. For example, in the first meeting, they stated that the OH referral was being completed because I had not taken any holiday leave for 4 months and as a result they were concerned that I was fatigued/stressed etc. They then changed their story to \"noticeable change in behaviour\" after they learned I had recently seen my doctor for annual health check and that he had said I was fit and healthy.

2. The meetings I have, where I ask questions relating PS & RofL.

It seems to me that there are two lines of enquiry. The first, my employers either answer or ignore individual questions I ask about specific issues via e-mail - which is more grievance/complaint based. The second line of enquiry answering/ducking questions regarding the rule of law - which is more using the British constitution based.

Q My question is, is this supposed to happen or could things have developed this way because of something I am doing incorrectly?

Not having all of the information of what was said and done in every situation it would be impossible for me to answer that question. For example you say that they have lied about some things without saying exactly what they have lied about and what the effect of thta lie is. But it doesn't matter. As long as you keep the conversation headed toward and focused on finding out if someone is subverting you in your duties to support and defend Parliamentary Sovereignty and the Rule of Law everyone who also supports and defends the same should be helping you.

It is a matter of putting Parliamentary Sovereignty and the Rule of Law out front and the company you work for behind it and you are behind the company you work for. Everyone can either stand out in front...facing...Parliamentary Sovereignty and the Rule of Law all by themselves or stand next to you, behind the company you work for which is behind...under...in support of...in defense of...Parliamentary Sovereignty and the Rule of Law.

Darkmatter wrote:
In the second meeting, I asked several questions about PS & RofL e.g. whether the British Constitution governs the way the organisation performs its service in Britain. Whether either of them are interested in subverting PS & Rof L and got the same answer. Don't know will get back to you. They are supposed to be investigating a possible violation of PS &RofL, yet they're incapable of answering basic questions about it.

Q What should be my next step?

Wait for them to get back to you. One thing I have done in the past when I have been investigated is to count the number of days from the point of infraction and the first e-mail or meeting about the investigation and use that number of days to ask questions about the entire process. For example, if someone has alleged that I performed an act that resulted in a investigation I find out what day the act was allegedly committed then I find out what is the day I'm notified of it and count the number of days in-between. Let's say for example that number of days is 64. That becomes the precedent for investigations so when I make the allegation that I have probable cause to believe that someone is subverting the Constitution of the United States...that allegations starts the 64 day clock. By day 65 I should have answers to all of my questions or there is probable cause to believe someone is subverting 'due process'...since due process for starting an investigation based on allegations is 64 days. Basic logic. Once you begin to follow THE LOGIC you don't even have to ask other people what you should be doing next. THE LOGIC will tell you what to do next.

Darkmatter wrote:
With regards to the OH referral which contains false information. They have lied, I clearly cannot sign it because it contains false information, but if I don't sign it I can't return to work.

Q Can you give me any suggestions on how I should approach this?

You have to do what you have to do. You don't need me to tell you what to do. You can choose to not sign it and find another job or you can sign it, go back to that job, and leave it alone or you can sign it, go back to that job, and continue your inquiry...there are many things you can do but that is a decision you have to make all on your own. No one can make it for you.

Darkmatter wrote:
Also, I'm not sure what I should be doing next.

Q Is there anything I should be doing whilst waiting for their response to e-mails/questions asked in meetings.

Follow THE LOGIC and ask questions when necessary. Say nothing when necessary.

Darkmatter wrote:
Q Is there anything I can do push them along, as they seem to be stalling?

I think I answered this question in the reference to what I have done in the past following 'due process' in terms of counting the number of days and using that as the measurement.

Please let me know if you have any further questions or concerns.
_________________
What is the reason YOU were born into a SYSTEM of INJUSTICE if not to replace it with a SYSTEM of JUSTICE?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Edward Williams
Site Admin


Joined: 12 Apr 2003
Posts: 3110
Location: I am from everywhere I've ever been and everywhere I've never been

PostPosted: Sun Sep 06, 2009 6:51 pm    Post subject: Re: Reply with quote

Kim Kim wrote:
Just wondering why quotes containing quotes of quotes are being quoted?


Is that a question? If so, who are you directing your question to?
_________________
What is the reason YOU were born into a SYSTEM of INJUSTICE if not to replace it with a SYSTEM of JUSTICE?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
SynQ



Joined: 11 Apr 2006
Posts: 20
Location: a world ruled by white supremacy

PostPosted: Mon Sep 07, 2009 3:51 pm    Post subject: Re: Reply with quote

vstew wrote:
I've been following this dialogue throughout; constructive to say the least!


I agree, this has been most constructive.
_________________
Need money? Ask White people to make a Compensatory Investment Request to help you eliminate Racism/White Supremacy. Non-white people can't afford to do it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
SynQ



Joined: 11 Apr 2006
Posts: 20
Location: a world ruled by white supremacy

PostPosted: Mon Sep 07, 2009 4:47 pm    Post subject: Re: Reply with quote

Darkmatter wrote:
With regards to the OH referral which contains false information. They have lied, I clearly cannot sign it because it contains false information, but if I don't sign it I can't return to work.

Q Can you give me any suggestions on how I should approach this?


One thing that I have done when I have found false information written in a document at my work, when I was told that I must sign it, was cross out that false information, added my initials next to my corrections, then I added the truth on a blank part of the page (sometimes there was a place, specifically for this purpose), with an arrow going from the crossed out information to the true information, and I initialed the true information. I signed it where my signature is supposed to go, and made a copy of it. When there was no room for me to write the truth, I have written a letter explaining the truth, made a copy of it, and requested that the letter be attached to the evaluation and placed in my employee file. I found out many years, latter that what I added is called an "addendum". The only result was that it was in my employee file, but, it was there for anyone who had access to my file to see, which meant that they could see the truth. I had learned from another matter regarding a promotion, that I could access my employee file by asking (there was a formal procedure that the company had for me to follow) the HR Department. When I saw the file, the information that I added to it was still there.

It appears to me that what I did could work in your situation as well.
_________________
Need money? Ask White people to make a Compensatory Investment Request to help you eliminate Racism/White Supremacy. Non-white people can't afford to do it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Edward Williams
Site Admin


Joined: 12 Apr 2003
Posts: 3110
Location: I am from everywhere I've ever been and everywhere I've never been

PostPosted: Wed Oct 07, 2009 6:14 am    Post subject: Re: Reply with quote

Darkmatter wrote:
Unbelievable! In response to my question and similar questions concerning this organisation's policies and procedures, I received the following.

\"Thank you for your email.  In order to provide a full and comprehensive response to your questions we need to await the outcome of the investigation which is continuing.  I understand that a progress report on the investigation will be provided early on next week and we will contact you again then.\"

This doesn't make any sense. I asked if the British Constitution governs how this organisation provides its service in Britain and they say, we can't answer this question regarding how this organisation performs its duties, until we conclude the investigation into your allegation of a possible subversion of Parliamentary Sovereignty and the Rule of Law.

They have spent the best part of 2 months avoiding answering any questions regarding whether anyone in the organisation supports and defends Parliamentary Sovereignty and the Rule of Law, and/or whether the organisation itself is operating within the laws of this country. I am completely baffled by this apparent \"open\" hostility towards the laws of this country. The only explanation I can think of for this, is that they're not taking me seriously. They don't think I have the will or ability to see the process through to its conclusion and therefore don't think they will ever be put in a position where they will have to explain their apparent aversion to the law of the land.

If they're unwilling/unable to answer basic questions regarding the organsiation's policies and procedures and the laws of this country, how effective are they going to be in investigating whether any laws have been subverted?


I'm sorry, I do not have the answer to that question. What is 'due process' of how long it takes to complete the investigation?
_________________
What is the reason YOU were born into a SYSTEM of INJUSTICE if not to replace it with a SYSTEM of JUSTICE?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Edward Williams
Site Admin


Joined: 12 Apr 2003
Posts: 3110
Location: I am from everywhere I've ever been and everywhere I've never been

PostPosted: Sat Oct 24, 2009 10:51 pm    Post subject: Re: Reply with quote

Darkmatter wrote:
I'm just about to post a quick update on my ongoing mistreatment at the hands of the white supremacists. Just before I do that, I wanted to share something I saw on the BBC's Question Time last night.

There was a big hullabaloo regarding one of the guests scheduled to appear on the programme, the leader of a white supremacists organisation called the British National Party.

A crowd of about 500 mainly white protesters gathered outside of the BBC studios, shouting and screaming \"shame on you BBC\" etc., Nick Griffin you're a Nazi etc. Some protesters were arrested as things began to get out of hand. It was the main story on the news, this so-called \"right-wing\" (a polite way of saying racist white supremacist in the UK) politician shouldn't be allowed to sit on a panel with other respectable supposedly non-racist politicians. I was laughing to myself watching all of this unfold and just thought, a few months ago, (before reading the code) I would have been one of those people getting upset about it. Instead I thought to myself, just let the man get up there and say what he has to say, then ask him what he intends to do about whatever he has to say.

He was seated next to Bonnie Greer (nice move by the BBC), who promptly informed him she had brought some books for him to read. I've always liked Bonnie Greer. I finally managed to get my hands on that extraordinary piece of literature - the Isis Papers. So I'm sitting there, literally reading the Isis Papers and have this programme on in the background. Mr BNP then made two statements that made me sit up and pay attention. When asked what he thought about mixed marriages (i.e white person and non-white person) he said or was quoted as saying \"It's sad when a \"unique\" genotype becomes extinct\". Presumably he means unique as in not the \"norm and standard for hue-man beings. He was then quoted as saying \"The immigration policy of successive UK governments, is the greatest deliberate act of genocide against the \"British\" people, against our ancient \"RACE\" and \"NATION\". This guy is basically talking about white people's fear of Genetic Annihilation and their deep seated inferiority complex they have about their whiteness.

If any of you guys haven't had the chance to watch this, I would definitely recommend it.

What do you mean when you say 'genetic annihilation'? I have heard many people use this term without being able to explain exactly what they mean and it match exactly what they see.

Does it mean the white person who has sexual intercourse with a non-white person ceases to exist? Does it mean the white person who has sexual intercourse with a non-white person is no longer able to mistreat people on the basis of color? How do you know when a white person has been genetically annihilated just by looking at them? And what is that supposed to mean to a person who is mistreated on the basis of color? What can a non-white person do with that information? Can they get a better credit rating?

Darkmatter wrote:
Back to work situation.

I am currently working in a temporary position in another organisation, because the white supremacists are still breaking the law by preventing me from returning to work. I recently spoke to a legal expert and explained a little about what had happened, emphasizing the unlawful OH referral and how this is being used to prevent me from returning to work. This person asked me to repeat what had happened regarding the meeting, then the letter I received the following day informing me not to return to work. She asked me if I was sure that the OH referral was made straight after the meeting to discuss the issue I surfaced. I explained to her, that's exactly what happened, she paused and then told me that it was likely to be a \"restriction of trade\" \"constructive dismissal\" claim. I got the impression she thought what had happened was pretty clear cut.

I sought legal advice because I wanted to try and work out what my employers might be expecting me to do next, i.e., resign and make a claim for constructive dismissal. I'm not going to do this as I know that constructive dismissal claims are notoriously difficult to prove, so I'm not prepared to take the risk. Instead I will continue to use Parliamentary Sovereignty and the Rule of Law and see how long they're willing to pursue their strategy. They haven't been paying me since they prevented me from returning to work, so they probably thought I would have given up by now. Unbeknownst to them I have another job, so they can carry on breaking the law for as long as they want to. In the meantime I will continue to build on the solid case I have against them.

I received what should have been a progress report, but actually turned out to be a letter, which basically stated that the person who's been conducting the investigation for the past 8 weeks, still isn't clear about what I'm saying. In other words, she hasn't been conducting any investigation, because she underestimated me and thought I would have gone away by now. Interestingly, the word \"sorry\" is beginning to make an appearance!

I will post the letter on here later...

That is interesting.
_________________
What is the reason YOU were born into a SYSTEM of INJUSTICE if not to replace it with a SYSTEM of JUSTICE?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Edward Williams
Site Admin


Joined: 12 Apr 2003
Posts: 3110
Location: I am from everywhere I've ever been and everywhere I've never been

PostPosted: Wed Oct 28, 2009 6:04 pm    Post subject: Re: Reply with quote

Corsican153 wrote:
Quote:
If you have a question you can ask it or you can respond to questions that are being asked if the questions are not directed at someone specific. All posts such as the one you made will be deleted.


Can questions be asked here?
Does this forum promote lies?
Does this forum discourage the truth from being told?


Are you directing these questions at anyone in particular or can anyone answer the questions you have posted?
_________________
What is the reason YOU were born into a SYSTEM of INJUSTICE if not to replace it with a SYSTEM of JUSTICE?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Edward Williams
Site Admin


Joined: 12 Apr 2003
Posts: 3110
Location: I am from everywhere I've ever been and everywhere I've never been

PostPosted: Tue Nov 03, 2009 7:20 pm    Post subject: Re: Reply with quote

Corsican153 wrote:
Quote:
Are you directing these questions at anyone in particular or can anyone answer the questions you have posted?


As the administrator of this forum, I was directing those questions specifically at you.


Quote:
Can questions be asked here?

Yes.

Quote:
Does this forum promote lies?

No.

Quote:
Does this forum discourage the truth from being told?

The objective is to reveal truth such that the effect is that no person is mistreated and also such that the person who needs help the most gets the most help.

As I'm sure you are aware, since you are a white person, many white people reveal truth all the time. Even the white people who mistreat people on the basis of color reveal truth. What the white people who mistreat people on the basis of color, meaning the racists (white supremacists), do not do is to reveal truth in a manner that justice and correctness are promoted.

Not only must everyone here reveal truth but that revelation of truth must be married to the promotion of justice and correctness at all times, in all places and in all areas of people activity.

In direct answer to your question this forum DOES discourage the revelation of truth if that revelation of truth is not married to the promotion of justice and correctness at all times, in all places and in all areas of people activity.
_________________
What is the reason YOU were born into a SYSTEM of INJUSTICE if not to replace it with a SYSTEM of JUSTICE?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Counter-Racism Work/Study Project Forum Index -> How to Counter Racism (White Supremacy) in the Work Place All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Page 2 of 6

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
Web CalendarShopping MallDonations