The great con - Electionz.com or Electionz.con?

Wikipedia states that prostitute Georgina Beyer "began to take an interest in local politics, first winning election to a local school board."  That statement is blatantly and deliberately misleading. 

All depends on the definition of "winning" - Beyer was never 'elected' to the Board of Trustees of Kuranui College, as the Minutes prove (more on this later).  Furthermore, Beyer's involvement with the Board was utterly disastrous, and so was the involvement of former teacher at Kuranui College, Cathy Casey, currently Auckland City Councillor and former Labour party puppeteer, who was responsible for foisting Beyer on the Board.

Casey was the girlfriend of Matt McCarten, both of whom were involved in the Alliance Party, then the Labour Party.  McCarten is usually referred to by media as a "spin doctor", or paid liar.

It seems that Casey and McCarten hatched a plan to create a political career for Beyer in a cynical attempt to capture "the gay vote", beginning with a seat on the Kuranui College Board of Trustees.

Casey was the staff representative on the Board.  The Minutes of the Board meeting held on 21 October 1993 show that the Board was in disarray, and Casey was pulling the strings.  Of particular interest is the first item under General Business.  The Minutes show evidence of being altered after they had been typed up, with the addition of the following handwritten words:  "Dr Casey read a Curriculum Vitae on Ms Georgina Beyer and suggested that she would be a suitable candidate to fill the Carterton seat."  Enquiries to "Dr" Casey as to what she is actually a "Dr" of have been consistently refused, the Wikipedia page of "Cathy Casey" sheds no light on the affectatious title and the information on that page is extremely brief indeed (see link in first paragraph).

The Minutes record that there were 4 votes in favour of Casey's "suggestion", 3 against, and 1 abstention - hardly a glowing endorsement of the idea!  Following the recording of the motion the Board moved into committee (excluding the public) to discuss urgent matters of legal liability facing the Board as a result of their previous incompetence.  The full Minutes can be read at the link in the preceding paragraph.



The following month the Minutes of the Board meeting held on 18 November 1993 further evidence Casey's manipulative scheming, recording Casey's objection to a meeting with Beyer prior to "co-opting" Beyer to the Board:

So the claim on Wikipedia that Beyer's political career began with Beyer "winning election to a local school Board" is clearly nothing more than a pack of utter lies.  Beyer's entire political career was the stuff of smoke and mirrors - created by political puppetmasters Casey and McCarten.  Casey "read out" the CV instead of providing a written copy to the Board which prevented any validation of Casey's fanciful claims regarding Beyer's background, which were almost certainly a pack of lies.  Beyer was a transvestite prostitute who had never had a real job in his life - the son of a convicted thief - a thieving policeman no less George Bertrand,.  Beyer's rise to fame and fortune, like Labour party pet Jevan Goulter's (see page 26 onwards at the link), was based not on what they knew but who they knew, and how effectively they were able to blackmail them, including local journalists and media. 

The penultimate page of the November Minutes show Casey's opposition to due process regarding the proposed "co-option" of another member of the Board, Mrs Win Morris, and the penultimate page of the December Minutes show Casey and Beyer again trying to circumvent due process regarding another "co-option" to the Board, under paragraph (ii), "Co-option of a Maori Representative to the Board."

The next Board meeting, in February 1994, records the intensification of division and dysfuntion within the Board, and evidence of Casey moving a vote of no confidence in the Board.

Shortly thereafter the Board was relieved of its duties by the Minister of Education and Brian Lochore was appointed Statutory Manager on March 24.  So much for Beyer's much lauded involvement on the Board, and Casey's for that matter.

Between 1993 and 1995 Beyer formed a close association with "media celebrity" Paul Henry Hopes (commonly known as Paul Henry), and received considerable public exposure due to involvement in the taxpayer subsidised local radio show produced by Henry.

Following news of Beyer's "election" to the Carterton Mayoralty in 1995 there was intense sycophantic media cheerleading, contrasted by the media totally ignoring the many calls for a recount of the vote, and widespread incredulity by many members of the public who suspected voting fraud.

Casey was the author of a propaganda publication on Beyer's fictional "life story", and responsible for conning members of the Labour party, including Sonya Davies, into supporting Beyer's entry into politics.

Beyer's "election" as MP coincided with the appointment of a limited liability company operating from Christchurch, Electionz.com, to run almost all of the New Zealand elections.  Their website contains the following self promotional blurb: "With our internet voting (also known as online voting or e-voting), telephone voting, fax voting and postal voting options, no election is too large, too complex, or too small for our experienced, independent elections management team."

In fact, the company was under scrutiny from the media regarding serious flaws in its processes.

Mediaworks owned TV3 news reporters contacted the writer (Katherine Raue), who was standing as a candidate for the Council and the Mayoralty in 2007, requesting an interview regarding these flaws, including the fact that Carterton voters had been sent voter information packs for the candidates from Central Otago.  Postal voting was being introduced, which meant this was a serious issue, with only a limited time frame to correct the problem.  Many voters were confused and it was widely suspected that there were a considerable number of invalid or ill-informed votes cast.  Mediaworks broadcast the interview with Mrs Raue at the time on the evening news, and carried the video of the interview on their website for a time, but it abruptly disappeared following Mrs Raue's allegation of voting fraud started to gain traction, requests for a copy of the recorded interview have been refused, and the entire article regarding the matter has been re-edited and moved to a completely different URL on the Newshub site following the re-branding of Mediaworks as Newshub, after massive taxpayer funded cash injections from the Key government, made in the face of overwhelming advice to the contrary.

Beyer the prostitute was succeeded as Mayor of Carterton by Gary McPhee, a drunken, violent bullying bikie, who claimed to be the boss of the "Seven Day Club", a bikie gang devoted to drinking to excess for seven days in a row.  This 'club' managed to get their hands on a great deal of funding before letters to the funders were sent informing them of the true nature of the 'club'.

McPhee and another Council officer, Chris Keegan, who was appointed by McPhee because he was a "mate" rather than any actual ability to do the job, committed a vicious, violent home invasion and assaulted the occupants of a local flat.  Local Police refused to act on the numerous complaints they received regarding the matter, and in fact lied in the local 'news' paper, claiming that the reason they could not act was because no complaints had been received.  Of course this was a blatant lie - Police stated that their inquiries were prompted by calls from the occupants of the flat, who rang Police to report the violent assault and home invasion!

Local journalists at the Wairarapa Times-Age and corrupt local Police officers rushed into damage control mode and conspired to publish a series of propaganda articles beginning with a report taking up most of the front page, titled "EXCLUSIVE - McPHEE - WHY I DID WHAT I DID", complete with a historic photograph of McPhee wearing his best clothes and looking respectable instead of the dishevelled, drunken lout he was.  Like the Mediaworks interview, this report has since been edited and the photograph and actual caption removed on the Herald website.  The original report in the Wairarapa Times-Age has also been removed from the website, it is reproduced below:




Further investigation shows that this limited liability private company Electionz.com is controlled by one director, Stephen John Kilpatrick.  The company is controlled almost exclusively by "Steve" and his wife Geraldine, with a shareholding listed as "Hagley Trustees" representing two other private individuals, Peter John Cordner and Timothy John Hill.

It is evidence that the limited liability company is subject to no oversight whatsoever.  Mrs Raue was eligible for the return of her nomination deposits of $400, but Electionz.com appointed a staff member at Carterton District Council, Julie Hallam, as Receiving Officer.  Ms Hallam was up to her neck in the fraud at the former Carterton Community Centre, perpetrated by herself and others associated with the District Council, conflicts of interest were many, and the evidence of fraud indisputable.  Ms Hallam simply lied and claimed that no record of expenses had been received, and Mrs Raue discovered that there was no process to dispute that lie, no checks and balances, no way of holding the Receiving Officer to account.  Despite a number of letters to Police from senior lawyers Police refused to act regarding the evidence of fraud at the Community Centre, and instead embarked on a campaign to discredit Mrs Raue, charging her with Bill Sticking for allegedly putting up a notice advertising a public meeting to discuss the evidence of the fraud, instead of investigating the fraud and charging those responsible.

One of those responsible for the fraud was Beyer the Liar, who was Patron of the Carterton Community Centre at the time and had enjoyed a close association with the District Councillors who comprised the committee of the Centre - despite the fact that the Council was a major funder of the centre, and thereby establishing a clear conflict of interest.

Beyer was eventually forced to resign the day after a vote of no confidence in the government following the distribution of indisputable evidence of Beyer's interference in a police investigation regarding the fraud.

Gary McPhee is reported as dying from suspected suicide in 2016, comments on the 'news' reports regarding his death were heavily censored and limited to comments in praise of him, any criticism or differing views were swiftly deleted.

Recently RNZ broadcast two reports raising concerns about internet voting.  In the report titled "Is internet voting secure enough to use?" Vanessa Teague of the University of Melbourne outlines some of the reasons for concern regarding internet voting.

In a swiftly produced follow up report Steve Kilpatrick can be heard defending internet voting.  Anyone who is capable of thinking for themselves can soon work out that the man and his claims are simply not credible.

Even the oily whale is on about it.

Fran goes to Sudan:

Fran Mold has resigned from her job as chief of staff for Phil Goff the Mayor of Auckland, and announced that she's off to Sudan to take a job with the United Nations working alongside David Shearer, leader of the UN mission in Sudan.

Fran formerly worked as Phil Goff's chief of staff, and has recently completed a Masters of Philosophy in politics with a thesis on communications used by ISIS and Hammas to achieve political objectives.

Fran was always a cut above the average 'reporter', as this somewhat enhanced homage clearly shows:

Application for recall of decision - Minute of Kos P November 2016:

 In late October 2016 Dun Mihaka's Maori Agent applied for a recall of the decision of France J on the grounds that fresh evidence has become available and there was indisputable evidence of a substantial miscarriage of justice: 

"We wish to urgently apply for recall of the decision of the Court of Appeal on the grounds that fresh evidence has recently been obtained which is evidence that a substantial miscarriage of justice has occurred, and it has been confirmed that Mr Mihaka never received any Disclosure according to the Criminal Disclosure Act.

Judge Hastings recommended an amicus be appointed but the trial Judge (Kelly) decided not to do so - Mr Mihaka was a self represented litigant forced to represent himself because he couldn't afford to pay back a legal aid loan for something he was innocent of, he conducted his hearing in Te Reo, he was NOT properly warned of the consequences of giving evidence himself, or the fact that he didn't need to and at the end of the case for the prosecution the Judge should have realised that the evidence given on oath did not stack up against the Summary of Facts or the complainant's statement to Police, which are both attached.  The only agreed fact is that the complainant inappropriately touched Mr Mihaka while Mr Mihaka was asleep - twice according to the information provided by Police recently.

Judge Kelly shut Mr Mihaka down repeatedly as he tried to cross examine the prosecution witnesses and this was recognised by France J in his decision - if he had been allowed to cross examine adequately and provided with Disclosure these discrepancies might have been addressed!

I refer to paragraph 5 of this decision which states that the alleged incident occurred in the morning just after the complainant woke up and made coffee as described in the first four lines of para 5.  Attached is the statement of the complainant to Police and the Police Summary of Facts, both of which directly contradict the assertion in para 5 of the decision.  Both these documents state that the alleged incident occured at night as the complainant was going to bed - not in the morning when he got up - and on two different dates - as well as the date in the Police officer's notebook which is different again!

There is strong evidence of collusion between Housing New Zealand Corporation and Police regarding this matter, which is also currently before the Human Rights Review Tribunal, who have recently suggested sending it back to the District Court, and Mr Mihaka's lawyer has written to Police regarding defamation and slander after Housing New Zealand Corporation claims that they received information from Police regarding this matter which led them to evict Mr Mihaka - it is clear that the source of information was the complainant, not Police, and Police now DENY HNZC's claims - it is indisputable from an examination of the attached documents that this conviction is unsound, and that if Mr Mihaka had been provided with Disclosure as he was entitled, and properly warned about the consequences of giving evidence himself, he would have been in a position to cross examine the complainant effectively during the case for the prosecution, and ask for the charge to be dismissed prior to presenting ANY defence!

Finally, Maori have a tradition of oral information, not written, and we request the opportunity to present our case in person, orally, to the Court.  Mr Mihaka is seventy five years old and not able to write his entire claim down and we should not have to - both appeal lawyers should have realised that he had never received the Disclosure, and the discrepancies therein should have been addressed at the earlier appeals!  Both Mr Mihaka and I have very limited resources available to us, adding further difficulties to the requirement that we put our entire case in writing - this matter is currently before the HRRT and is URGENT.  We respectfully request a hearing, and a recall of this decision - France J was unaware of these documents and so was Mr Mihaka.

Katherine Raue

Maori Agent for Te Ringa Mangu Mihaka."

__________________________________________________

The Crown opposed our application for recall, their memorandum is at this link.

__________________________________________________

We recently received the Minute of Kos P of the Court of Appeal.

___________________________________________________________

The war on drugs - Department of Corrections:

Here is the decision regarding the matter of the Department of Corrections and their medical treatment and record keeping, which is a damning indictment on the care of prisoners in this country, and the outrageous incompetence of prison staff regarding this man's medication and treatment and the standard of information recording, which was described by an expert witness as demonstrating "a level of incompetence to a standard that is professionally embarrassing", and not only did it fall below acceptable standards, but that "the nursing care in relation to safe medical administration was a severe departure from the expected standards."  That's putting it mildly.

The decision can also be read at this link in a clearer format than the embedded file below.

Paragraph 17 states that prison custodial staff are permitted to issue prisoners with over the counter (OTC) medication such as Ibuprofen and Paracetamol, but paragraph 18 states "At Auckland Prison custodial staff are reluctant to administer (OTC) medication."  No explanation is offered for this statement, but it has been established that this is based on prison policy, a policy amounting to breach of human rights, and torture.

Under the heading "Documentation", paragraphs 21 to 23 list the requirements for recording information regarding the administration of medication to prisoners.  These requirements are clear, explicit and extensive.

Paragraphs 24 and 25 show that these requirements were apparently ignored:

From paragraph 26 onwards this report from the Human Rights Review Tribunal is harrowing reading.  The level of carelessness regarding the administration and recording of the medication prescribed for "Mr E" is truly shocking.  The Department of Corrections has a duty of care to prisoners, the 'care' afforded "Mr E" and other prisoners is completely and utterly unacceptable.

Roger Brooking is one of the few people documenting this, raising awareness of it and calling for change - this affects everyone.  His website documents a litany of similar damning information and provides a particularly thorough investigation of other cases of similar treatment.

Prisoners are released every day after they've been "corrected" by the Department of Corrections, they return to our communities and live among us, their children go to school and play with ours.  The Department of Corrections has a duty of care, and a duty to correct.  Treating people like this doesn't foster empathy, and no doubt contributes to the unacceptably high child abuse statistics in 'New Zealand'.  It's callous, negligent, careless, and it demonstrates very well just how badly our prisons are being run, and it also indicates that the system is broken - the fact that Mr E had to go to the Human Rights Review Tribunal indicates that he first had to jump through hoops at the Privacy Commission and/or the Health and Disability Commission, Human Rights Commission, etc.  Lucky he had a lawyer - the vast majority of people in his position don't, Criminal Bar Association v Attorney General makes it perfectly clear that lawyers avoid doing work for legally-aided clients or the poor.

The decision regarding Mr E, the Department of Corrections and their medical treatment and record keeping is a damning indictment on the Department, and the standard of governance in general.

The outrageous incompetence of prison staff regarding this man's medication and treatment and the standard of information recording was described by an expert witness, at paragraph 28, as demonstrating "a level of incompetence to a standard that is professionally embarrassing", and not only did it fall below acceptable standards, but that "the nursing care in relation to safe medical administration was a severe departure from the expected standards."




Read more at Roger Brooking's Brookingblog.

Email exchange with Acting Registrar regarding application for recall of France J's decision:

 24 August 2016

To the Registrar, High Court, Wellington

Attached is an urgent application for recall of the judgment of France J on the grounds that new evidence has become available which clearly establishes reasonable doubt regarding the evidence of the complainant and Police, the application includes a request for waiver of filing fee.

This decision is vitally relevant to proceedings currently before the Human Rights Review Tribunal, for this reason we request it be dealt with URGENTLY as a substantial miscarriage of justice has occurred, it is clear that the Court discriminated unfairly against Mr Mihaka and that his previous lawyers acted negligently in not bringing these matters to the attention of the Court during the previous appeals.

Mr Mihaka and I lack the necessary resources to copy and attach the attachments referred to in the application, they can be viewed at this link.

 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

7 September 2016:
To the Registrar of the High Court at Wellington:

I emailed an urgent application for recall of a judgment of Simon France J in the matter of Te Ringa Mangu Mihaka v Police, including an application for waiver of any applicable fee, to the High Court at Wellington on 25th August 2016 but have not had any response to the application or acknowledgment of receipt, and am writing to confirm that it has been received and is being actioned.

Please acknowledge receipt of the application urgently - this matter is the subject of imminent hearing in the Human Rights Review Tribunal and it is vital that the application for recall is acknowledged prior to this hearing.  There has been a serious, substantial miscarriage of justice, there is fresh evidence, and this application is URGENT.

 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

9 September 2016

Hello Katherine
I refer to the Application for Recall of Decision referred to in your email below.
Please advise the legislation you rely on to file the application and have the judgment of Simon France J recalled as I have not been able to find any reference in the Criminal Procedure Act 2011 which allows the filing of this application some 14 months after the decision was made.
I look forward to hearing from you.
Kind regards
Sheena

 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

to Sheena

11.9 - http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1908/0089/latest/DLM1819172.html?search=sw_096be8ed81324d21_recall_25_se&p=1&sr=3

Alternatively, 2.3 -
"the miscarriage of justice is serious and the information was not made available within 5 working days - the application was made as soon as the information was made available by the other party."
http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1908/0089/latest/DLM1818573.html

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Both rule references relate to Appeals and Reviews in the Civil jurisdiction of the High Court, not the Criminal jurisdiction, which is what your appeal relates to.  The criminal appeal process is governed by the Criminal Procedure Act not the Judicature Act.  I am therefore unable to accept the Application for Recall.

I respectfully suggest seek legal advice as to what other options might be available to you to have Mr Mihaka's conviction readdressed in the Courts.

Kind regards

Sheena

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Tena koe Sheena,
We refer to para 61 and others in the attached Law Commission report.
Na Katherine Raue
Maori Agent for Te Ringa Mangu Mihaka

 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

22 September 2016:

Hello Katherine,

I acknowledge receipt of your email.  I have forwarded these emails (dated 20/9/16) and the Application for Recall that was attached to your first email (dated 24/8/16) to the civil manager, Jay Fealofani.  I will speak with him regarding our previous correspondence and discuss a way forward.

Kind regards

Sheena

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Hello Katherine,

I have spoken to my colleague Jay Fealofani in the civil jurisdiction regarding your original attachment 'Application for Recall of Judgment' - he also has a number of years' experience in the criminal jurisdiction in the District Court. 

I understand that the grounds for the recall are due to a miscarriage of justice because fresh evidence has become available which was not previously considered by the Court.  Your Application then goes on to describe the miscarriage.

Mr Mihaka's Appeal original appeal to this court was in relation to a Judge alone trial held before Her Honour Judge Kelly in the District Court in April 2015.  His first right of appeal against his conviction and sentence was to this Court.  This court heard the appeal on 2 June 2015 and gave its decision on 11 June 2015.  As discussed previously there is no avenue in the Criminal Procedure Act for Mr Mihaka to recall the decision of this court.

In accordance with the Act Mr Mihaka has a second right of appeal to the Court of Appeal.  To commence a second appeal Mr Mihaka needed to file an Application for Leave to Appeal in the Court of Appeal within 20 working days after this Court's decision.

He is now in a position where the Application for Recall cannot be accepted for filing in this court and the time to appeal to the Court of Appeal has expired.  I can see no action available to him through the criminal jurisdiction and this Application will not be progressed any further.

As to whether Mr Mihaka has the option to file a Judicial Review in the civil jurisdiction, that I don't know however Mr Mihaka cannot expect to continue relitigating matters based on further evidence he has found.  He needs to seek legal advice around what his options are if he wishes to progress these matters.

Kind regards

Sheena

Sheena Spiers Criminal Manager (Acting) | High Court, Wellington  Phone: +64 4 914 3619 | Ext: 53619 www.courtsofnz.govt.nz

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

So, we have a stalemate.  The Crown makes all the rules of this game, and changes them to suit - retrospectively if so desired.  If you don't get your act together within 20 days you simply miss out - regardless of the magnitude of the injustice.

And all the time the colonial Crown government have been screwing down 'omnibus' changes to the  legislation regarding criminal and civil Court procedure, to limit the avalanche of claims resulting from the devolving of the system and the privatising of the justice system (along with everything else that's not nailed down), they've been limiting access to legal aid more and more to the point where it's just become an absolute joke - a black joke, a sick joke - a joke on people like Te Ringa Mangu Mihaka and all the other tangata whenua who clog up the 'justice system' and fill the jails, their lives in tatters and their reputations in ruins because of gossip and whispers.

Agent Raue will be framing a further plea to the Court applying sections 237 - 240 of the Criminal Procedure Act, this report will be updated shortly with the further plea.  We also have Plans C, D, E and FU up our sleeves and can come up with more plans if none of those work too.

Warnings about omnibus tax law changes:

Accountants are sounding the alarm about the government's new 'omnibus' tax law changes, claiming they are a get out of jail free card - looks like they based the changes on the Australian GST Act!

The Australian Goods and Services Tax Act 1999 is a hefty piece of legislation to try and make your way through, but it's well worth it when you arrive at section 165.55, which states the following example of creative use of the Queen's English:

[The] "Commissioner may disregard scheme in making declarations. 

         For the purposes of making a declaration under this Subdivision, the Commissioner may: 

                     (a)  treat a particular event that actually happened as not having happened; and 

                     (b)  treat a particular event that did not actually happen as having happened and, if appropriate, treat the event as: 

                              (i)  having happened at a particular time; and
                             (ii)  having involved particular action by a particular entity; and 

                     (c)  treat a particular event that actually happened as: 

                              (i)  having happened at a time different from the time it actually happened; or
                             (ii)  having involved particular action by a particular entity (whether or not the event actually involved any action by that entity)."

This is not unlike the recent decision of the NZ Court of Appeal in the matter of Criminal Bar Association v Attorney General in which the Honourable Judge uttered this:

"But the issue is not what is desirable as a matter of sound public administration, but what is lawful."

Syria - Plan B - the Saudi solution:

On 19 September 2016, following "peace talks" in March, US Secretary of State John Kerry admitted bombing Syria, but still tries to blame the victims.

The following day an aid convoy was bombed in what appears to be a blatant war crime.

While Donald Trump, America's answer to 'Dirty Harry' Duterte and Hilary Clinton continuing slugging it out, Kerry says

"Washington “acknowledges and regrets” the fatal airstrike on Syrian government troops by coalition jets, but blamed Syrian President Assad for “bombing people indiscriminately” and blocking the delivery of humanitarian aid."

The media continue to wag the dog, with the Guardian proclaiming that the US blame Russia for the attack but spinning the report with the headline to make it appear as though the UN statement that IF CERTAIN ALLEGATIONS ARE TRUE it COULD amount to a war crime - it clearly IS a war crime - it looks from the report as though the UN are saying more than they actually are.

Meanwhile, on Planet Key, John and Bron, leaders of the local Saudi Arabia Mutual Appreciation Society, are still hopeful that their little multi million dollar bribe to the Saudis will pay off, with John "warning the US of the dangers of not ratifying the TPP" - apparently citing his own experience with the Saudis following the very thinly veiled blackmail and bribery scandal around Key's 'gift' of an abattoir and millions of dollars of New Zealand tax payers' money to "a Saudi businessman" who was allegedly "disaffected in some way" by some vague reference to some imaginary "a decision of the previous government" - led by UN hopeful Helen Clark. 

After Key arrogantly announced that the abattoir deal WILL go ahead despite unanimous outrage from voters - Key announced yesterday "Let's see whether we get there with the Gulf, but I feel a bit more confident than I did" about the imaginary non existent trade deal with the bloodthirsty regime.

 The question now is, who's really driving the "peace process" and in which direction?  Saudi Arabia's Foreign Minister recently announced that it was time for "Plan B".  

“It was made clear that Bashar al-Assad has two choices – either he will be removed through political process or he will be removed by force,” 

Adel al-Jubeir addressed reporters after the International Syria Support Group (ISSG) meeting co-chaired by Russia and the US.

“We believe we should have moved to a ‘Plan B’ a long time ago,” he said. 

“If they do not respond to the entreaties of the international community... then we will have to see what else can be done.”

A picture provided by SPA shows Crown Prince Mohammed bin Nayef (1st row R), US Secretary of State John Kerry (1st row L), Saudi Defence Minister and Deputy Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (2nd row R) and Saudi Foreign Minister Adel Al-Jubeir touring at the King Khalid Military City. (AFP)

Already, speculation is RIFE.