Church and State blog: May 2017

Tuesday, May 30, 2017

Is it the intention of the Central London County Court to now burn us for the £80 refund they approved last April? (WITH UPDATE 1/6/2017)

Re: Blocks on public access to our Church and State website since 26 July 2016

From my earlier blog post's Update 1 June (8.36am):

"I have just updated my blog post of 16 January with this morning's 464th block on public access to our Church and State website since 26 July 2016. The blog post also not only reveals a record-breaking 52 such blocks in one week at the end of April (an unprecedented escalation that kicked off with our focus on Denmark's cartoon crisis; 94 blocks last month), but it reveals the daily targeting to fluctuating degrees of category pages throughout the site which continues to this day."

An unprecedented ten blocks in one day on 7 May with our publication of Atheist Ireland republishes 25 blasphemous quotes in solidarity with Stephen Fry. Nineteen blocks last week; ten blocks so far this week; one block since midnight today.

The War on Free Expression

County Court at Central London, Royal Courts of Justice

27 May: The Central London County Court: We still have not received help with our court hearing fee and this after receiving District Judge Avent's order two days after the expiration of our statutory 21 days to apply for permission to appeal (WITH UPDATE 27/5/2017)

UPDATE 1 June (9.47am): We are still waiting for our £80 cheque from the Court in full refund of the money we paid for the court hearing that took place on 20 February. This is a cheque that was approved on 26 April, according to the Court's telephone service on 9 May. We are also waiting for British Telecom's Executive Level Complaints (Consumer) to provide us with a copy of an engineer's report dated 24 May without a Subject Access Request under the jurisdiction of the Telecommunications Ombudsman. See my previous blog post of 27 May, British Telecom: Will BT Executive Level Complaints provide us with a copy of the engineer's report dated 24 May without a Subject Access Request under the jurisdiction of the Telecommunications Ombudsman? (WITH UPDATE - DAY 11 1/6/2017).

From My Picks:

20 February: The Central London County Court: District Judge Avent dismisses Declan's claim against the Greater London Authority-commissioned St Mungo's that alleged the falsification and fabrication of data against us (WITH UPDATE 16/3/2017)

'Let me recommend an important web site churchandstate.org.uk. Operating out of London this well-designed and exciting web site covers church-state, population, climate change and other issues. Check it out.' - Edd Doerr, President, Americans for Religious Liberty

Saturday, May 27, 2017

British Telecom: Will BT Executive Level Complaints provide us with a copy of the engineer's report dated 24 May without a Subject Access Request under the jurisdiction of the Telecommunications Ombudsman? (WITH UPDATE - DAY 11 1/6/2017)

The two Internet cuts below were the first two such cuts that have occurred since our contract with British Telecom (BT) commenced on 28 May 2014.*

1st Internet cut: 26 May 2017
2nd Internet cut: 27 May 2017 (graphic above)

* We have filed these first two internet cuts since May 2014 in a folder we have created called "BT Internet Cuts", with the date and time part of the graphic for each cut. We pay BT £65.53 per month (£786.36 per year) for BT Infinity fibre optic broadband.

Within hours of Declan's complaint to BT CEO Gavin Patterson on 24 May about the handling of the bad TV reception we had been accustomed to getting of late through our BT YouView box, the engineer Alexander Boyce confirmed in a double-signed handwritten note that there would be no charge for his visit because he could not say that we had damaged any BT equipment or that the fault (viz. intermittent TV reception through our BT YouView box) was the result of our home wiring.

24 May: British Telecom: Declan's complaint to the CEO of BT about the handling of the bad TV reception we have been accustomed to getting of late through our BT YouView box (WITH TREBLE UPDATE - Day 5 26/5/2017)

We are still waiting for BT Executive Level Complaints (Consumer) to confirm whether any charges have been raised on Declan's account by Boyce. Nor have we been provided with a copy of his report dated 24 May. Will BT Executive Level Complaints provide us with a copy of this report without a Subject Access Request (SAR) under the jurisdiction of the Telecommunications Ombudsman?

DAY 11 UPDATE 1 June (9.46am): On 28 May Declan copied BT CEO Gavin Patterson into the complaint below to BT Executive Level Complaints (Consumer). We are still waiting for a reply. We can't understand what is so special about a supposedly run-of-the-mill report by a regular BT engineer, and what it is about Declan's straightforward request for same that BT Executive Level Complaints are finding so difficult to handle.

For the attention of Gavin Patterson, Chief Executive, British Telecom

Miranda Bracey
Executive Level Complaints (Consumer)
British Telecom

Address removed for email

28 May 2017

Dear Ms Bracey,

Thank you for your email. Please could you confirm what charges, if any, have been raised by your engineer Alexander Boyce following his visit to my property on 24 May. Please could you also provide me with a copy of his report without the fee my Subject Access Request (SAR) dated 25 May would likely incur.

I can confirm that I am currently watching TV with a signal strength that remains stable at 92% and quality that remains stable at 100%. Mr Boyce told me that any signal strength above 50% is acceptable when it comes to home wiring. I therefore fail to understand how any charges could have been raised by him in his report.

Yours sincerely,

Declan Heavey

M: 07880437681

Internet cut updates:

None since 27 May.

The Central London County Court: We still have not received help with our court hearing fee and this after receiving District Judge Avent's order two days after the expiration of our statutory 21 days to apply for permission to appeal (WITH UPDATE 27/5/2017)

Re: Blocks on public access to our Church and State website since 26 July 2016

From my earlier blog post's Update 27 May (7.15pm):

"I have just updated my blog post of 16 January with this evening's 452nd block on public access to our Church and State website since 26 July 2016. The blog post also not only reveals a record-breaking 52 such blocks in one week at the end of last month (an unprecedented escalation that kicked off with our focus on Denmark's cartoon crisis; 83 blocks so far this month), but it reveals the daily targeting to fluctuating degrees of category pages throughout the site which continues to this day."

An unprecedented ten blocks in one day on 7 May with our publication of Atheist Ireland republishes 25 blasphemous quotes in solidarity with Stephen Fry. Sixteen blocks last week; seventeen blocks so far this week; two blocks today.

The War on Free Expression

County Court at Central London, Royal Courts of Justice

On 20 February District Judge Avent ruled in Declan's claim against the Greater London Authority-commissioned St Mungo's, a homeless charity, that data we alleged to be false, fabricated and nonsensical (and left us vulnerable to eviction for non-cooperation with the support provider) constituted no more than "a difference of opinion as to wording" and that no breach of the Data Protection Act 1998 had occurred. Although originally listed for a one-day hearing, the trial only lasted two hours, i.e. one hour short of the preliminary hearing last October. Declan says it was the most hostile atmosphere that he has ever experienced in a courtroom. It left him reeling, he says, after no more than five minutes. At the end of the judge's summation, Declan asked for leave to appeal. "What for?" the judge asked. "Because this is just 'a difference of opinion as to wording,'" Declan responded, quoting him verbatim. "No," the judge replied, and that was that.

We are in a supported tenancy because of Declan's physical health condition. We were forced to sleep rough on the streets of London for almost 4 years in total - from 4 November 2006 to 13 July 2009, and again from 14 April 2013 to 17 May 2014. Before we came off the street the second time, Declan was diagnosed with asthma and a chest infection; in fact, he became so weak that on 15 April 2014 the Royal London Hospital wrote: "If possible should try to find accommodation off the street." So when in May 2014 a supported housing tenancy came through (under a programme commissioned by the Greater London Authority for entrenched rough sleepers), we took it. Because the flat only came with a fridge and cooker, we had to sink the deposit we had for a flat into making it habitable. And that was only the beginning...

Our statutory 21 days to apply for permission to appeal DJ Avent's order below expired on 13 March. We only received his order in a late post two days later on 15 March; and this despite the fact that the Information Commissioner's Office found the Ministry of Justice in breach of the Data Protection Act in respect of an application to contest the court's jurisdiction that we did not receive in a timely manner in a previous case (see my blog post of 15 March, Complaint to the Secretary of State for Justice. We still do not have District Judge Avent's order and today is the 2nd day after the expiration of our statutory 21 days to apply for permission to appeal). Now, according to the Court's telephone service on 9 May, Declan's application for a full refund of the £80 hearing fee was approved on 26 April but the cheque has yet to be cleared by the Court's finance section. "That's up to their working time, sir," he was told. So, for the time being, I will keep posting variants on this blog post every so often until they get around to refunding us the money.

A difference of opinion as to wording?

Paragraph 23 of Declan's Witness Statement dated 14 November 2016.

23. Still to this day, I do not know the service to which the staff action/intervention "Signposted to another service" referred. No mention was made of the action note in St Mungo's Defence, notwithstanding the extraordinary lengths I had gone before the defence was filed to highlight the seriousness of blatantly retaining data that was false, fabricated and without meaning (vague to the point of having almost any kind of interpretation).

UPDATE 27 May (9.47pm): We are now not just dealing with blocks on public access to our Church and State website and the daily targeting to fluctuating degrees of category pages throughout the site, but also as from yesterday, Internet cuts. See my previous blog post this afternoon, We lose our Internet connection for the second time in two days, having not previously been disconnected from the Internet since our contract with British Telecom commenced on 28 May 2014 (WITH UPDATE 27/5/2017).

British Telecom: We lose our Internet connection for the second time in two days, having not previously been disconnected from the Internet since our contract with BT commenced on 28 May 2014 (WITH UPDATE 17/6/2017 RE: 18th Internet cut since 26 May 2017)

Re: Blocks on public access to our Church and State website since 26 July 2016

From my earlier blog post's Update 17 June (8.50am):

"I have updated my blog post of 16 January with last night's 499th block on public access to our Church and State website since 26 July 2016. The blog post also not only reveals a record-breaking 52 such blocks in one week at the end of April (an unprecedented escalation that kicked off with our focus on Denmark's cartoon crisis; 94 blocks last month), but it reveals the daily targeting to fluctuating degrees of category pages throughout the site which continues to this day."

An unprecedented ten blocks in one day on 7 May with our publication of Atheist Ireland republishes 25 blasphemous quotes in solidarity with Stephen Fry. 12 blocks last week; 15 blocks so far this week; four blocks yesterday; no blocks since midnight today (as of 17 June at 8.50am).

The War on Free Expression

We have a distinguished list of 121 Honorary Associates from around the world, including two Nobel Prize winners. Nonetheless (or perhaps as a result), we are now dealing not just with blocks on public access to our Church and State website and the daily targeting to fluctuating degrees of category pages throughout the site, but Internet cuts as well. British Telecom is one of the world's leading communications services companies. We pay BT £65.53 per month (£786.36 per year) for BT Infinity fibre optic broadband. We have had difficulties of late in our dealings with BT over intermittent TV reception through our BT YouView box, but these difficulties have had absolutely nothing to do with our internet connection which has remained connected since our contract with BT commenced on 28 May 2014: that is, until yesterday. I have filed these first two internet cuts since May 2014 in a folder I have created called "BT Internet Cuts", with the date and time part of the graphic for each cut:

1st Internet cut: 26 May 2017
2nd Internet cut: 27 May 2017 (graphic above)

UPDATE 17 June (8.22am): Presented at the end of this update is last night's 18th recorded internet cut since 26 May. On 2 June BT Executive Level Complaints (Consumer) emailed Declan the content of an engineer's report from his visit to our home on 24 May to investigate the intermittent TV reception we had been getting through our BT YouView box. See my blog post of 1 June, BT Executive Level Complaints (Consumer): Declan complains to BT Chairman Sir Michael Rake to no avail? (WITH TREBLE UPDATE - Day 12 2/6/2017). Declan copied Sir Michael Rake into this reply requesting BT's deadlock letter for the Telecommunications Ombudsman to investigate whether the home wiring relating to our TV aerial socket could have possibly been the problem (the fault was restricted to Freeview channels that are not dependent on a connection to the internet):

For the attention of Sir Michael Rake, Chairman, British Telecom

Miranda Bracey
Executive Level Complaints (Consumer)
British Telecom

Address removed for email

2 June 2017

Dear Ms Bracey,

Thank you for your email. I do not accept that the intermittent TV reception I had been experiencing of late through my BT YouView box may have been the result of my home wiring (hereinafter referred to as the "Complaint"). I therefore hereby request a letter of deadlock from BT that provides me with the company's full and final position on my Complaint and refers me to the ombudsman service.

Yours sincerely,

Declan Heavey

UPDATE 17 June (continued): Yesterday BT Executive Level Complaints conceded in a deadlock letter that our home wiring was not in any way causing problems with our BTTV service. It is however noteworthy that the internet cuts we had been experiencing increased dramatically after another BT engineer attended on 12 June; and this despite the fact that he not only provided us with a brand new phone socket but that he also could not find a problem with our line. Our concern since the second internet cut on 27 May has been whether we will have the internet to increase our connections across northern Europe, particularly in Denmark, Norway and the Netherlands. Last night we had a record-equalling four internet cuts in one night. The night before that, we had to suspend work on our Church and State website after exactly the same treatment. So I am concentrating my research on Denmark.

Denmark Ditches Blasphemy Laws

INTERNET CUTS

1st 26 May 2017, 1.39pm
2nd 27 May 2017, 12.32pm
3rd 3 June 2017, 8.45pm
4th 4 June 2017, 11.49am
5th 4 June 2017, 1.32pm
6th 9 June 2017, 10.50pm
7th 13 June 2017, 9.48am
8th 13 June 2017, 12.48pm
9th 15 June 2017, 6.50am
10th 15 June 2017, 8.01pm
11th 15 June 2017, 9.48pm
12th 15 June 2017, 10.18pm
13th 15 June 2017, 11.02pm
14th 16 June 2017, 12.22am
15th 16 June 2017, 7.22pm
16th 16 June 2017, 8.02pm
17th 16 June 2017, 10.49pm
18th 16 June 2017, 11.32pm

12 out of 18 internet cuts within the first four days of the BT engineer's visit on 12 June. Five cuts the day before yesterday; five cuts yesterday; no cuts since midnight today (as of 17 June at 8.22am).

Re: Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ)

Paragraph 12 of Declan's updated complaint to the United Nations under Article 19 (freedom of expression) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

12. It is important to underscore that the discriminatory surveillance suffered by the Applicant and his wife is not an isolated event. Rather, it is emblematic of a larger pattern of surveillance by law enforcement officials in the UK that has been well-documented by international and domestic human rights bodies. For example, GCHQ's Joint Threat Research Intelligence Group (JTRIG) specialises in the "4 D's": deny, disrupt, degrade, deceive. It has been branded by the press as the spy agency's "deception unit". Though its existence was secret until 2014, JTRIG has developed a distinctive profile in the public understanding, after documents from NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden revealed that the unit had engaged in "dirty tricks" like deploying sexual "honey traps" designed to discredit targets, launching denial-of-service attacks to shut down Internet chat rooms, pushing veiled propaganda onto social networks and generally warping discourse online. Previous reporting on GCHQ established its focus on what it regards as political radicalism. Beyond JTRIG's targeting of Anonymous, other parts of GCHQ targeted political activists and groups deemed to be "radical", even monitoring human rights NGOs. The President of the London-based Privacy International, Simon Davies, asks: "If spying on human rights NGOs isn't off limits for GCHQ, then what is?"

Citizenfour Official Trailer 1 (2014) - Edward Snowden Documentary HD

JOIN THE CONVERSATION #CITIZENFOUR

From a fascinating excerpt from Glenn Greenwald's book "No Place to Hide: Edward Snowden, the NSA, and the U.S. Surveillance State":

All of the evidence highlights the implicit bargain that is offered to citizens: pose no challenge and you have nothing to worry about. Mind your own business, and support or at least tolerate what we do, and you'll be fine. Put differently, you must refrain from provoking the authority that wields surveillance powers if you wish to be deemed free of wrongdoing.

'Let me recommend an important web site churchandstate.org.uk. Operating out of London this well-designed and exciting web site covers church-state, population, climate change and other issues. Check it out.' - Edd Doerr, President, Americans for Religious Liberty

From My Picks:

20 February: The Central London County Court: District Judge Avent dismisses Declan's claim against the Greater London Authority-commissioned St Mungo's that alleged the falsification and fabrication of data against us (WITH UPDATE 16/3/2017)

Help Support Church and State

Please consider donating to Network for Church Monitoring!
All proceeds from the sale of these e-books are used to keep our Church and State website up and running.

Purchase straight from Amazon's Kindle Store:

From the Dissident Left: A Collection of Essays 2004-2013 for $4.67

The Life and Death of NSSM 200: How the Destruction of Political Will Doomed a U.S. Population Policy for $6.64

American Democracy and the Vatican: Population Growth and National Security for $4.99

The Pope and the New Apocalypse: The Holy War Against Family Planning for $2.99

Wednesday, May 24, 2017

British Telecom: Declan's complaint to the CEO of BT about the handling of the bad TV reception we have been accustomed to getting of late through our BT YouView box (WITH TREBLE UPDATE - Day 5 26/5/2017)

UK Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ)

It's not just our Church and State website that's under attack (74 blocks on public access to the site this month; 16 blocks last week; 1 block so far today) despite the fact that a leading web hosting provider, SiteGround, is paid $1,000 per year to host our site and manage the server. This afternoon Declan wrote to British Telecom CEO Gavin Patterson to complain about the handling of the bad TV reception we have been accustomed to getting of late. BT is one of the world's leading communications services companies. Yesterday BT Customer Care informed Declan that he will be charged £129.99 on his next BT bill if their engineer reports today that our fault has nothing to do with their network but is the result of our home wiring, our equipment or their network has been damaged within the boundary of our property. This is Declan's email to Patterson:

Gavin Patterson
CEO
British Telecom

Address removed for email

24 May 2017

Dear Mr Patterson,

Yesterday British Telecom informed me that I will be charged £129.99 on my next BT bill if your engineer Alexander finds on his visit this afternoon that my fault has nothing to do with your network but is the result of my home wiring, fault with my equipment, or your network has been damaged within the boundary of my property.

I have informed your Customer Care Team that the fault is intermittent TV reception through your YouView box. This afternoon I am not experiencing reception problems through your YouView box or through the property aerial, so I do not believe a case can be made that the fault is the result of my home wiring or fault with my equipment, or indeed that your network has been damaged within the boundary of my property.

I trust that I will not be charged £129.99 on my next BT bill and that this frustrating intermittent TV reception problem through your YouView box can be resolved.

Yours sincerely,

Declan Heavey
Managing Director
Network for Church Monitoring

"Let me recommend an important web site - churchandstate.org.uk. Operating out of London this well-designed and exciting web site covers church-state, population, climate change and other issues. Check it out." - Edd Doerr, President, Americans for Religious Liberty

22 May: British Telecom: We pay BT £65.53 per month but Declan is told that there is nothing they can do about the bad TV reception we have been accustomed to getting of late (WITH UPDATE - Day 3 24/5/2017)

DAY 4 UPDATE 25 May (12.50pm): This is our fourth day in a row dealing with BT. Declan has been told by BT Customer Care that none of his repeated requests for the engineer's report has registered on their system. The engineer assured us yesterday that we would not be charged for his visit, and that BT would have no problem providing us with a copy of his report this morning. In fact, the engineer was so helpful that it would be our intention to ask for him again if the fault persists, so long as his report contains no surprises. We are all hoping that the frustrating intermittent TV reception problem we have been experiencing of late has been resolved, although the engineer explained that only time can really tell. Now Declan's request for this report is being dealt with by BT Executive Level Complaints (Consumer), but it appears that we may not see the report until next Wednesday, if at all. Of course Declan will make a Subject Access Request (SAR) for the report if he thinks he has to; we just can't understand what is so special about a supposedly run-of-the-mill report, and what it is about Declan's straightforward request for same that BT Executive Level Complaints are finding so difficult to handle. Declan has just received this email from Trevor Potts on behalf of BT CEO Gavin Patterson:

Hello Mr. Heavey,

Thanks for your email to Libby Barr. I'm sorry to learn you’re having problems with your BT service.

Our team are now dealing with your case and will own to resolution.

So we can understand your issue please give us a little time to investigate, a dedicated case handler will be in touch by Wednesday at the latest.

Before then, if you’re a bit worried or something's changed just drop us a note at elc@bt.com or contact us on 0791 888 4688

Best wishes,

Trevor Potts
Executive Level Service Team; BT Consumer

DAY 4 UPDATE 25 May (10.16pm): Following our first internet cut as BT customers this afternoon, Declan wrote back to Trevor Potts requesting assurance that we will not be charged for the engineer's visit yesterday. Declan attached a double-signed note that the engineer left us before leaving our flat. The engineer first wrote that there would be no charge for his visit, and then added that he could not say that we had damaged any BT equipment or that the fault is the result of our home wiring. Declan copied BT CEO Gavin Patterson into the email. Our contract with BT commenced on 28 May 2014. The internet cut this afternoon lasted 26 minutes (from 1.39pm - 2.05pm).

DAY 5 UPDATE 26 May (10.55am): Where is all this going? No assurance as yet from BT Executive Level Complaints that we will not be charged for the engineer's visit on 24 May, notwithstanding the engineer's written assurance that there would be no charge for the visit. Yesterday Declan also wrote to Tracy Reid of BT Executive Level Complaints requesting that she delete erroneous fault details for 25 May. He copied BT CEO Gavin Patterson into the complaint. He sent her this follow-up email this morning:

For the attention of Gavin Patterson, Chief Executive, British Telecom

Tracy Reid
Executive Level Complaints (Consumer)
British Telecom

Address removed for email

26 May 2017

Dear Ms Reid,

I refer to my email to you yesterday and again respectfully request that you please delete from my online account fault details for 25 May 2017 under the title Phone fault 02084703021 - Completed (please see attachment). The diagnostic run reads:

"We have run a line test and we cannot find a problem with your line. The problem may be with your own equipment so we need you to carry out some tests. To get help with that click on the 'Help Section' on top right. If you have already checked your equipment and still have a problem then please call 0800 800 151. If you have made an appointment already the details will be shown below. There is no need for you to do anything further."

Please note that I have never reported a fault with my phone, nor do I have a problem with my line.

I am even more worried now that BT intend charging me for the engineer's visit on 24 May to resolve my frustrating intermittent TV reception problem of late, notwithstanding the engineer's written assurance that there would be no charge for his visit because he could not say that I had damaged any BT equipment or that the fault is the result of my home wiring. In addition to deleting fault details for 25 May 2017, please could you also reassure me that I will not be receiving any extra charges on forthcoming bills for anything so far.

I am deeply concerned that I may need to seek legal advice as to how to proceed in this matter. I am however still hopeful that these two issues can be resolved amicably by BT Executive Level Complaints (Consumer) without any undue delay.

Yours sincerely,

Declan Heavey

M: 07880437681

DAY 5 UPDATE 26 May (12.45pm): Declan phoned BT Executive Level Complaints following his email to Tracy Reid above. He was unable to speak to her, and no one from BT Executive Level Complaints has returned his call. Most certainly we are worried at this point in time. The reluctance of BT Executive Level Complaints to provide us with a copy of the engineer's report aside, why is it so difficult for them to assure us that we will not be charged £130 for his visit on 24 May, particularly in light of his written assurance that there would be no charge for his visit because he could not say that BT equipment had been damaged or home wiring impaired? At the moment our TV signal strength through our BT YouView box is stable at 92%, and signal quality is 100%. The engineer told us that any signal strength above 50% is acceptable when it comes to home wiring! Do I now have to publish his note too? Are we going to be told that the engineer's double-signed handwritten note is of no value to us and has been overridden by a false and fabricated report that renders us liable to £130 on top of our next £65 monthly bill? Are we looking at the Small Claims Court here?

DAY 5 UPDATE 26 May (5.52pm): BT Executive Level Complaints have still not confirmed whether any charges have been raised on Declan's account by the engineer, nor have we been provided with the engineer's report, nor have we been provided with any explanation as to why a phone fault we never reported cannot be removed from Declan's online account. We guess they are closed for the long weekend, so damn it the engineer's name is Alexander Boyce and I am now going to publish his double-signed handwritten note which we will use to contest any charges that have been raised as a result of the report that he has submitted for BT's senior engineering team to investigate. It is quite clear from this note that Boyce provided us with written assurance that there would be no charge for his visit because he could not say that we had damaged any BT equipment or that at the time the fault (viz. intermittent TV reception through our BT YouView box) was the result of our home wiring:

Monday, May 22, 2017

British Telecom: We pay BT £65.53 per month but Declan is told that there is nothing they can do about the bad TV reception we have been accustomed to getting of late (WITH UPDATE - Day 3 24/5/2017)

UK Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ)

It's not just our Church and State website that's under attack (71 blocks on public access to the site this month; 16 blocks last week; 5 blocks so far today) despite the fact that a leading web hosting provider, SiteGround, is paid $1,000 per year to host our site and manage the server. Tonight Declan phoned British Telecom Technical Support about the bad TV reception we have been accustomed to getting of late. BT is one of the world's leading communications services companies. Because our TV signal came through when the technical advisor took the call, Declan was told to monitor the situation for two days and get back to them if necessary. There was nothing they could do, he was told, when the signal was good enough on their end. Last night Declan was enjoying a Sunday night film with Sean Penn, that is, until the last twenty minutes of the film was scrambled! This is what the TV looked like when Declan made the call to BT Technical Support tonight:

DAY 2 UPDATE 23 May (12.20pm): Declan twice called BT Technical Support this morning about the problems we were experiencing watching Breaking News (about the Manchester bombing) on BBC 1 through our BT YouView box. It is not inconceivable that the YouView box we are paying BT good money for is no longer of much use to us, unless of course we intend spending time we do not have dealing with BT on a daily basis. This we obviously have no intention of doing, so we are now running the TV on Freeview using the outside aerial. We have been receiving the breaking news item on BBC 1 without reception problems; in fact, the signal on all the Freeview channels is better than we have ever had through our BT YouView box. A third BT technical advisor has just arranged an engineer visit for tomorrow afternoon. It remains to be seen what, if anything, this engineer will be able to do about the intermittent TV reception we have been receiving of late through our YouView box despite the good money we are paying for BT Infinity broadband (£786.36 per year).

DAY 3 UPDATE 24 May (4.05pm): We are still waiting for that engineer visit. Yesterday British Telecom informed Declan that he will be charged £129.99 on his next BT bill if this engineer reports that our fault has nothing to do with their network but is the result of our home wiring, fault with our equipment or their network has been damaged within the boundary of our property (this is quoting verbatim from the third ACR recording of all the calls Declan made to BT yesterday). So far today we are not experiencing reception problems through our YouView box or through the property aerial, so we should have no case to answer. See my blog post this afternoon, British Telecom: Declan's complaint to the CEO of BT about the handling of the bad TV reception we have been accustomed to getting of late through our BT YouView box.

Friday, May 19, 2017

Royal Mail: Complaint to the CEO of Royal Mail about 'door-stepping' incidents following the loss of our employment contracts to the United States (WITH UPDATE 23/5/2017)

Our employment contracts are currently being held up at Kennedy Airport, New York. The item has been there since last Saturday. The last time Declan mailed the item to the United States on 25 February, not even the first Royal Mail collection office (Romford Mail Centre) was recorded on the track and trace report. We received the princely sum of £9.25 from Royal Mail in this morning's post to refund that postage, but we haven't been receiving letters through our letter box since Declan reported the apparent loss of the item last March. He copied Royal Mail CEO Moya Greene into this complaint to Royal Mail's Customer Service Team about these incidents of door stepping that are becoming increasingly concerning at this point in time:

For the attention of Moya Greene, Chief Executive, Royal Mail

Emma Stanton
Royal Mail Customer Service Centre

Address removed for email

19 May 2017

Dear Ms Stanton,

Complaint: 1-3891637251 - Royal Mail

Since your email of 21 March about the loss of my and my wife's employment contracts to the United States, letters are not being put through our letter box. I understand from speaking with one of your colleagues this afternoon that these incidents have been recorded as "door stepping" under the above case number.

I can confirm that this morning I received a cheque for £9.25 from Royal Mail to refund my postage on the loss of the aforementioned item to the United States. I have not been given the reason why the tracking stopped on this item, with not even the first Royal Mail collection office (Romford Mail Centre) recorded on the track and trace report.

Please could you advise what action I should take the next time my or my wife's mail is left in an insecure place.

Yours sincerely,

Declan Heavey

UPDATE 23 May (2.45pm): Yesterday our employment contracts reached their destination in North Carolina, but we were also door-stepped again despite Declan's complaint to Royal Mail CEO Moya Greene last Friday. Declan complained about yesterday's door-stepping incident and received this response from Moya Greene yesterday morning:

Dear Mr Heavey

Thank you for your e-mail. I am sorry to hear that you have had problems with the handling of your enquiry and have asked my senior team to look into this for you straightaway.

Yours sincerely

Moya Greene
Chief Executive Officer

Hopefully, this means that we will receive all future mail through our letter box and Declan will not have to seek legal advice as to how to proceed in this matter. Yesterday I updated my blog post of 16 January, The blocks on public access to our Church and State website continue unabated (WITH UPDATE 18/5/2017). I updated the blog post with last night's 428th block (the 5th of the day) on public access to our Church and State website since 26 July 2016. The blog post also reveals the daily targeting to fluctuating degrees of category pages throughout the site which continues to this day. For example, the second article below has over 1/2 million Facebook likes/shares (not zero):

All of the evidence highlights the implicit bargain that is offered to citizens: pose no challenge and you have nothing to worry about. Mind your own business, and support or at least tolerate what we do, and you'll be fine. Put differently, you must refrain from provoking the authority that wields surveillance powers if you wish to be deemed free of wrongdoing.

Help Support Church and State

Please consider donating to Network for Church Monitoring!
All proceeds from the sale of these e-books are used to keep the Church and State website up and running.

Wednesday, May 17, 2017

Facebook's 20th block against our Church and State website since 1 December 2015 (WITH UPDATE 19/6/2017)

Re: Blocks on public access to our Church and State website since 26 July 2016

From the Update 19 June (8.05am) below:

"I have updated my blog post of 16 January with yesterday's 505th block on public access to our Church and State website since 26 July 2016. The blog post also not only reveals a record-breaking 52 such blocks in one week at the end of April (an unprecedented escalation that kicked off with our focus on Denmark's cartoon crisis; 94 blocks last month), but it reveals the daily targeting to fluctuating degrees of category pages throughout the site which continues to this day."

An unprecedented ten blocks in one day on 7 May with our publication of Atheist Ireland republishes 25 blasphemous quotes in solidarity with Stephen Fry. 21 blocks last week; five blocks yesterday; no blocks since midnight today (as of 8.05am).

The War on Free Expression

This morning public access to our Church and State website has been denied once again. I have just updated my blog post of 16 January with this morning's 422nd block on access to the site since 26 July 2016. Our Network for Church Monitoring (N4CM) Facebook page has also been scrambled. This, as revealed below, is Facebook's 20th block against our Church and State website since 1 December 2015. Don Collins, President of the Washington, DC-based International Services Assistance Fund, writes: "Glad you compiled this odious record of mistaken blockage. What possesses the site? Surely after multiple postings they must know your content is neither lewd nor extreme." This is a screenshot of what our N4CM Facebook page looks like at the moment:

The screenshot makes my case to Facebook this morning:

For the attention of Mark Zuckerberg, Chairman, Chief Executive and Co-Founder of Facebook

17 May 2017

Dear Facebook,

Our Network for Church Monitoring (N4CM) Facebook page has been scrambled for the administrator at https://www.facebook.com/networkforchurchmonitoring.

This morning I am unable to see any of my postings on our four laptops and two browsers, nor am I able to post anything or manage the wall (please see my screenshot attached). The wall is currently running on posts I scheduled last night. When I log out from Facebook and then click on a link to the N4CM Facebook page, all appears to be fine. In other words I am apparently experiencing an administrator's block only.

This is Facebook's 20th block since 1 December 2015.

1st 1-4 December 2015 (4 days)
2nd 5-7 December 2015 (3 days)
3rd 6-9 January 2016 (4 days)
4th 12-15 January 2016 (4 days)
5th 20-22 January 2016 (3 days)
6th 13-16 February 2016 (4 days)
7th 23-26 March 2016 (4 days)
8th 20-23 May 2016 (4 days)
9th 25-30 May 2016 (6 days)
10th 1-3 July 2016 (3 days)
11th 7-8 September 2016 (2 days)
12th 21-22 September 2016 (3 days)
13th 27-28 September 2016 (2 days)
14th 29 September - 3 October 2016 (5 days)
15th 4-5 October 2016 (2 days)
16th 18-23 October 2016 (6 days)
17th 9-14 December 2016 (6 days)
18th 4-6 January 2017 (3 days)
19th 20-23 January 2017 (4 days)

Don Collins, President of the Washington, DC-based International Services Assistance Fund, writes: "Surely after multiple postings [Facebook] must know your content is neither lewd nor extreme." Don often sends me material to publish on our Church and State website, which I then post to our Facebook wall.

Please note that we currently have an international list of 117 Honorary Associates, including two Nobel prize winners. Since Facebook's 16th block last October, 87 distinguished scholars have given us permission to add their names to the list.

Thank you in advance for your assistance in this matter.

Yours faithfully,

Lola Heavey
Webmaster
Network for Church Monitoring

"Let me recommend an important web site - churchandstate.org.uk. Operating out of London this well-designed and exciting web site covers church-state, population, climate change and other issues. Check it out." - Edd Doerr, President, Americans for Religious Liberty

2 October 2016: Complaint to Facebook Chairman, Chief Executive and Co-Founder Mark Zuckerberg on day 4 of Facebook's 14th block since 1 December 2015

Re: Facebook

Draft paragraph 42 of Declan's next updated complaint to the United Nations under Article 19 (freedom of expression) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

42. On 13 August 2011, then Home Office Minister Lynne Featherstone wrote to Facebook on the Applicant's behalf, asking that they explain why the Applicant's wife had been barred. The bar was subsequently lifted; however, since 1 December 2015, Facebook have blocked the Applicant's wife from posting to a page(s) and/or groups on twenty separate occasions, and up to six days at a time (each of these blocks is well accounted for in the N4CM blog). On 22 December 2015, Shadow Home Office Minister Lyn Brown made an enquiry on the Applicant's behalf to Steve Hatch, the Managing Director of Facebook UK, asking if he could offer an explanation as to the terms and conditions the Applicant's wife was alleged to have broken twice previously. To the best of the Applicant's knowledge, Mr Hatch did not respond to this letter. The Applicant's wife only ever posts to groups that are specific to an article's subject and that she is well familiar with, and she only ever posts articles that she has already published on the Church and State website. Nonetheless, Facebook have responded to only one of the Applicant's wife's twenty appeals since 1 December 2015, citing "technical problems" on 14 January 2017 in relation to the eighteenth block listed below.

1st 1-4 December 2015 (4 days)
2nd 5-7 December 2015 (3 days)
3rd 6-9 January 2016 (4 days)
4th 12-15 January 2016 (4 days)
5th 20-22 January 2016 (3 days)
6th 13-16 February 2016 (4 days)
7th 23-26 March 2016 (4 days)
8th 20-23 May 2016 (4 days)
9th 25-30 May 2016 (6 days)
10th 1-3 July 2016 (3 days)
11th 7-8 September 2016 (2 days)
12th 21-22 September 2016 (3 days)
13th 27-28 September 2016 (2 days)
14th 29 September - 3 October 2016 (5 days)
15th 4-5 October 2016 (2 days)
16th 18-23 October 2016 (6 days)
17th 9-14 December 2016 (6 days)
18th 4-6 January 2017 (3 days)
19th 20-23 January 2017 (4 days)
20th 17 May 2017 (day 1)

Facebook UK Managing Director Steve Hatch

UPDATE 19 June (8.05am): When it comes to stopping me from posting Church and State articles directly to a page(s) and/or groups, Facebook's 20th block since 1 December 2015 was confined to one day. This is not to say that there's not this and other kinds of Facebook blocks in store for us this month. This is my report to Facebook on 6 June citing four other kinds of blocks of late (the 4th block remains ongoing):

6 June 2017

Dear Facebook,

On 5 April I reported that the page listing all the groups I belong to was not working. With this rectified, I reported on 10 April that I couldn't schedule posts on my page. Then I reported on 12 April that my scheduled posts were not posting. Now, since 8pm last night, every time I post to my page a link to an excerpt from a book by one of France's leading public intellectuals, it disappears from the page as soon as it is posted (please see my video at https://youtu.be/QPyOaQUYqUs). Please could you fix this for me.

Thank you in advance for your assistance in this matter.

Regards,
Lola Heavey
https://www.facebook.com/networkforchurchmonitoring/

UPDATE 19 June (continued): We now have an international list of 121 Honorary Associates, including two Nobel Prize winners. Since Facebook's 16th block against our Church and State website last October, 91 distinguished scholars (in April, 22 academics) have given us permission to add their names to the list. Nonetheless, the blocks on public access to our Church and State website continue unabated. I have updated my blog post of 16 January with yesterday's 505th block on public access to our Church and State website since 26 July 2016. The blog post also not only reveals a record-breaking 52 such blocks in one week at the end of April (an unprecedented escalation that kicked off with our focus on Denmark's cartoon crisis; 94 blocks last month), but it reveals the daily targeting to fluctuating degrees of category pages throughout the site which continues to this day. For example, as I point out in my earlier blog post about the almost certain loss of our employment contracts to the United States by Royal Mail (as opposed to the United States Postal Service), the second article below has 1/2 million Facebook likes/shares (not zero):

UPDATE 19 June (continued): And it's not just Facebook blocks, blocks on public access to our Church and State website and the daily targeting to fluctuating degrees of category pages throughout the site that we are dealing with these days. We have also been dealing with Internet cuts since 26 May. I have updated my blog post of 27 May in respect of the 18th internet cut on 16 June. Before the first internet cut on 26 May, we had not previously been disconnected from the internet since our contract with British Telecom commenced on 28 May 2014.*

1st 26 May 2017, 1.39pm
2nd 27 May 2017, 12.32pm
3rd 3 June 2017, 8.45pm
4th 4 June 2017, 11.49am
5th 4 June 2017, 1.32pm (1st 2nd cut)
6th 9 June 2017, 10.50pm
7th 13 June 2017, 9.48am
8th 13 June 2017, 12.48pm
9th 15 June 2017, 6.50am
10th 15 June 2017, 8.01pm
11th 15 June 2017, 9.48pm
12th 15 June 2017, 10.18pm
13th 15 June 2017, 11.02pm (1st 5th cut)
14th 16 June 2017, 12.22am
15th 16 June 2017, 7.22pm
16th 16 June 2017, 8.02pm
17th 16 June 2017, 10.49pm
18th 16 June 2017, 11.32pm (2nd 5th cut)

No internet cuts for the last two days;
no cuts since midnight today (as of 8.05am).

* I have filed these first internet cuts since May 2014 in a folder I created on 27 May just past called "BT Internet Cuts", with the date and time part of the graphic for each cut. We pay BT £65.53 per month (£786.36 per year) for BT Infinity fibre optic broadband.

Friday, May 12, 2017

My blog post about the accountancy difficulties we experienced last year with SAIL Business Solutions has been vandalised (Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales case no. 036415)

Click to enlarge

NOW RESTORED: The Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales tell Declan he will hear from them next week (WITH UPDATE 8/11/2016)

From My Picks:

12 July 2019: Threat to life: Updated complaint to the United Nations under Article 19 (freedom of expression) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Mayor of London-commissioned St Mungo's highlighted

'Let me recommend an important web site churchandstate.org.uk. Operating out of London this well-designed and exciting web site covers church-state, population, climate change and other issues. Check it out.' - Edd Doerr, President, Americans for Religious Liberty

Wednesday, May 10, 2017

Now it's time to try to hold Royal Mail accountable for the loss of our employment contracts to the United States. Declan's claim for compensation submitted this afternoon (Royal Mail claim 170510-002411)

19 March: Royal Mail; Payback for 'adjudication' in this blog of District Judge Avent's dismissal of Declan's claim against the Greater London Authority-commissioned St Mungo's that alleged the falsification and fabrication of data against us? (WITH UPDATE - Day 28 5/4/2017)

From My Picks:

20 February: The Central London County Court: District Judge Avent dismisses Declan's claim against the Greater London Authority-commissioned St Mungo's that alleged the falsification and fabrication of data against us (WITH UPDATE 16/3/2017)

'Let me recommend an important web site churchandstate.org.uk. Operating out of London this well-designed and exciting web site covers church-state, population, climate change and other issues. Check it out.' - Edd Doerr, President, Americans for Religious Liberty

Church and State blog