Tofino
VIP Member
Entitled little tit.
43. The claimant's letter to Sir Mark Sedwill (sent by Fiona Mcilwham on 10 February) expressed the claimant's disbelief that such important conversations were being had without any attempt by anyone to consult the claimant. The claimant could not see how he could have his security removed, unless the current risk to him and his family had decreased, [redacted text]. The claimant asked who would be willing to put him and his family in a position of extreme vulnerability and risk - *a position that no one was willing to put my mother in 23 years ago - and yet today, with greater risk, as mentioned above, with the additional layers of racism and extremism, someone is comfortable taking accountability for what could happen. I would like that person's name who is willing to take accountability for this choice please ...". As well as the claimant's biggest concern being "(redacted text]", he believed that it was "essential to our safety to keep MET security, [redacted text]. The claimant said he had been told "[redacted text]". The claimant said the biggest threat was " redacted text]. The claimant considered that the decision was being imposed upon him *without a sensible amount of consultation as some form of punishment for protecting my family and putting them first". He suggested a 6-12 month review in order to establish sensible protection measures so that this new model was given a better chance of success. He would like "to see a full report of the current risk matrix please, and the justification that countries outside of the UK somehow change the international threat to us"
43. The claimant's letter to Sir Mark Sedwill (sent by Fiona Mcilwham on 10 February) expressed the claimant's disbelief that such important conversations were being had without any attempt by anyone to consult the claimant. The claimant could not see how he could have his security removed, unless the current risk to him and his family had decreased, [redacted text]. The claimant asked who would be willing to put him and his family in a position of extreme vulnerability and risk - *a position that no one was willing to put my mother in 23 years ago - and yet today, with greater risk, as mentioned above, with the additional layers of racism and extremism, someone is comfortable taking accountability for what could happen. I would like that person's name who is willing to take accountability for this choice please ...". As well as the claimant's biggest concern being "(redacted text]", he believed that it was "essential to our safety to keep MET security, [redacted text]. The claimant said he had been told "[redacted text]". The claimant said the biggest threat was " redacted text]. The claimant considered that the decision was being imposed upon him *without a sensible amount of consultation as some form of punishment for protecting my family and putting them first". He suggested a 6-12 month review in order to establish sensible protection measures so that this new model was given a better chance of success. He would like "to see a full report of the current risk matrix please, and the justification that countries outside of the UK somehow change the international threat to us"
