Monday, April 06, 2009
LIB DEMS RETROACTIVELY ALTER DISCUSSION TO PROTECT PERJURER ASHDOWN - ALSO THE COVERT REASON FOR EXPELLING ME
Some time ago I did a post on one of the people involved in expelling me from the LiBDems being herself purged. This brought up a certain amount of discussion on another blog which is fairly long but, since it involved discussion with Norman Fraser, the guy who made up the charges on which I was expelled.
The charge Norman wrote against me was primarily about letters I had had published in the Scottish press, all on traditional liberal low tax & low regulation lines or about the need for nuclear power to keep the lights on or about items on my blog primarily on the same lines, though with a dew stating facts about Yugoslavia all on the public record.
"47 Neil, whenever we hear your version of why you were expelled you somehow never mention the main thrust of my submission. That was that your blogging was an embarrassment to the Party..... On 13/11/05 (and this post can still be accessed) you called Ashdown a perjurer and implied that he was involved with child sex slavery in Bosnia. How relevant to expulsion do you think these examples were? To repeat, you were not expelled from the Party for being a ‘Classical Liberal’, you were expelled because you are a self-obsessed, offensive idiot."
Well that is interesting. Irrespective of my alleged IQ it is a matter of record that the charge Norman wrote against me was primarily about letters I had had published in the Scottish press, all on traditional liberal low tax & low regulation lines or about the need for nuclear power to keep the lights on, or items on my blog primarily on the same lines, though with a few stating facts about Yugoslavia all on the public record.
Thus officially I was expelled for being a liberal but according to the guy asked to write up the "charges" (which initially they didn't want me to see in case it made a defence possible) this was simply a cover story. The hidden reason for my expulsion is that I was & am opposed to genocide, child rape & Nazi war crimes & that is something which, unofficially but rigidly no member of the party may be.
I don't think it enhances the party's claim to "liberalism" that they didn't really expel me for that. The fact they use being a traditional liberal as a cover stry for expelling me shows how totally oppoed to traditicnal liberalism the party has become.
That it is simply impossible to remain a party member if you do not publicly endorse Nazism & racial genocide is not something I think any decent person can approve of. Of course they do not disapprove of all genocide. "Jenny Tonge, who endorsed suicide bombers (but only in killing Jews) was not expelled by merely sent to the Lords" (post 53). I don't think that the intent can be disputed.
############################
Going through it I found that a post (well 3 #79,80,81 but they are all the same post repeated) had been retroactively inserted into the discussion. This obviously explains why I hadn't taken them/it apart (or even made fun of the duplication). This post is an attempt to defend Nazi Ashdown from the charge of perjury. I think it must be taken as the "official party line" on his perjury. I should point out that I had sent an email to almost all LibDem MPS & MSPS suggesting that they either disown some of Norman's most obvious lies, used to justify the MPs voting for racial genocide, or say why they were true. Mot a one of them did either proving that that not a one of them could, but clearly this means the thread became worth such retroactive rewriting. Also the fact that Norman produces 3 links, whereas he has more often stuck to 1 - from something as accessible as the guardian - suggests more than usual concern. I also assume that retrocatively inserting comments is not easy.
This is the inserted item (#79.80,81):
"You do not dispute that Ashdown testified to seeing ethnic cleansing in villages not visible from where he was. You do not explain how that could possibly be anything other than deliberate perjury (neither has he).[quoting me]
I presume that you are alluding to Andy Wilcoxon’s article for Slobodan Milosevic. Org which alleges perjury by Ashdown based on rebuttal testimony from General Bozidar Delic, called by Milosevic in his defence. Wilcoxon’s article is here http://www.slobodan-milosevic.org/news/smorg092805.htm but I prefer the Institute of War and Peace Reporting (IWPR) report here http://www.iwpr.net/?p=tri&s=f&o=253662&apc_state=henitri2005http://www.slobodan-milosevic.org/news/smorg092805.htm . I prefer it because it is a considerably more balanced account than Wilcoxon’s.
Anyone wishing to check the actual evidence should go to the actual ICTY transcript at http://www.icty.org/x/cases/slobodan_milosevic/trans/en/050928ED.htm where they will find, amongst other things Wilcoxon omits, that the Prosecution advanced evidence that the maps which Delic used were the fabrications of a Yugoslav Army disinformation unit.
You have repeatedly advanced Delic’s testimony as incontrovertible proof whereas in practice it is simple assertion. Deilic himself has been accused of war crimes in the precise area Ashdown was describing and so may not be an entirely disinterested witness. See http://www.hlc-rdc.org/Saopstenja/963.en.html ."
While it is perfectly possible for the ICTY Prosecutor to allege that the maps in question were fabrication it would have been simple to prove if it were true. In fact all that would have been required would have been for an independent person to go to where he said he was & take a photo either of the villages he testified he had seen being "cleansed" or the mountains the maps shown to be in the way. The fact that they did not proves even the prosecution (& obviously Party) knows Ashdown perjured himself to promote racial genocide.
ADDENDUM - I find the site in question is not taking any more comments, or a least not from the likes of me. I guess they know anyway.
The charge Norman wrote against me was primarily about letters I had had published in the Scottish press, all on traditional liberal low tax & low regulation lines or about the need for nuclear power to keep the lights on or about items on my blog primarily on the same lines, though with a dew stating facts about Yugoslavia all on the public record.
"47 Neil, whenever we hear your version of why you were expelled you somehow never mention the main thrust of my submission. That was that your blogging was an embarrassment to the Party..... On 13/11/05 (and this post can still be accessed) you called Ashdown a perjurer and implied that he was involved with child sex slavery in Bosnia. How relevant to expulsion do you think these examples were? To repeat, you were not expelled from the Party for being a ‘Classical Liberal’, you were expelled because you are a self-obsessed, offensive idiot."
Well that is interesting. Irrespective of my alleged IQ it is a matter of record that the charge Norman wrote against me was primarily about letters I had had published in the Scottish press, all on traditional liberal low tax & low regulation lines or about the need for nuclear power to keep the lights on, or items on my blog primarily on the same lines, though with a few stating facts about Yugoslavia all on the public record.
Thus officially I was expelled for being a liberal but according to the guy asked to write up the "charges" (which initially they didn't want me to see in case it made a defence possible) this was simply a cover story. The hidden reason for my expulsion is that I was & am opposed to genocide, child rape & Nazi war crimes & that is something which, unofficially but rigidly no member of the party may be.
I don't think it enhances the party's claim to "liberalism" that they didn't really expel me for that. The fact they use being a traditional liberal as a cover stry for expelling me shows how totally oppoed to traditicnal liberalism the party has become.
That it is simply impossible to remain a party member if you do not publicly endorse Nazism & racial genocide is not something I think any decent person can approve of. Of course they do not disapprove of all genocide. "Jenny Tonge, who endorsed suicide bombers (but only in killing Jews) was not expelled by merely sent to the Lords" (post 53). I don't think that the intent can be disputed.
############################
Going through it I found that a post (well 3 #79,80,81 but they are all the same post repeated) had been retroactively inserted into the discussion. This obviously explains why I hadn't taken them/it apart (or even made fun of the duplication). This post is an attempt to defend Nazi Ashdown from the charge of perjury. I think it must be taken as the "official party line" on his perjury. I should point out that I had sent an email to almost all LibDem MPS & MSPS suggesting that they either disown some of Norman's most obvious lies, used to justify the MPs voting for racial genocide, or say why they were true. Mot a one of them did either proving that that not a one of them could, but clearly this means the thread became worth such retroactive rewriting. Also the fact that Norman produces 3 links, whereas he has more often stuck to 1 - from something as accessible as the guardian - suggests more than usual concern. I also assume that retrocatively inserting comments is not easy.
This is the inserted item (#79.80,81):
"You do not dispute that Ashdown testified to seeing ethnic cleansing in villages not visible from where he was. You do not explain how that could possibly be anything other than deliberate perjury (neither has he).[quoting me]
I presume that you are alluding to Andy Wilcoxon’s article for Slobodan Milosevic. Org which alleges perjury by Ashdown based on rebuttal testimony from General Bozidar Delic, called by Milosevic in his defence. Wilcoxon’s article is here http://www.slobodan-milosevic.org/news/smorg092805.htm but I prefer the Institute of War and Peace Reporting (IWPR) report here http://www.iwpr.net/?p=tri&s=f&o=253662&apc_state=henitri2005http://www.slobodan-milosevic.org/news/smorg092805.htm . I prefer it because it is a considerably more balanced account than Wilcoxon’s.
Anyone wishing to check the actual evidence should go to the actual ICTY transcript at http://www.icty.org/x/cases/slobodan_milosevic/trans/en/050928ED.htm where they will find, amongst other things Wilcoxon omits, that the Prosecution advanced evidence that the maps which Delic used were the fabrications of a Yugoslav Army disinformation unit.
You have repeatedly advanced Delic’s testimony as incontrovertible proof whereas in practice it is simple assertion. Deilic himself has been accused of war crimes in the precise area Ashdown was describing and so may not be an entirely disinterested witness. See http://www.hlc-rdc.org/Saopstenja/963.en.html ."
While it is perfectly possible for the ICTY Prosecutor to allege that the maps in question were fabrication it would have been simple to prove if it were true. In fact all that would have been required would have been for an independent person to go to where he said he was & take a photo either of the villages he testified he had seen being "cleansed" or the mountains the maps shown to be in the way. The fact that they did not proves even the prosecution (& obviously Party) knows Ashdown perjured himself to promote racial genocide.
ADDENDUM - I find the site in question is not taking any more comments, or a least not from the likes of me. I guess they know anyway.
Comments:
<< Home
Thanks for pointing this out Neil. I tried to make the comment five times on Mr Dobson’s site on 21/3/09 but it was not accepted whereas a shorter comment was. This incidentally explains why the text appears in two versions. I retyped it in case the Word file had been corrupted. I’m glad to see it has finally surfaced.
With regard to your comment While it is perfectly possible for the ICTY Prosecutor to allege that the maps in question were fabrication it would have been simple to prove if it were true. In fact all that would have been required would have been for an independent person to go to where he said he was & take a photo either of the villages he testified he had seen being "cleansed" or the mountains the maps shown to be in the way. The fact that they did not proves even the prosecution (& obviously Party) knows Ashdown perjured himself to promote racial genocide.
As usual, I really wish you would read the material before trying to rubbish it. The IWPR post notes ”Delic brought his testimony to a close by declaring his willingness to travel to the area in question to prove his point. Prosecutor Geoffrey Nice in turn announced that Lord Ashdown was happy to return to the courtroom to clear up the matter. Presiding Judge Patrick Robinson even wondered out loud whether an on-site visit by judges might be a solution.”
Unfortunately Mr Milosevic died and the trial ended prematurely leaving the matter unresolved (and your version of events unproved).
With regard to your comment While it is perfectly possible for the ICTY Prosecutor to allege that the maps in question were fabrication it would have been simple to prove if it were true. In fact all that would have been required would have been for an independent person to go to where he said he was & take a photo either of the villages he testified he had seen being "cleansed" or the mountains the maps shown to be in the way. The fact that they did not proves even the prosecution (& obviously Party) knows Ashdown perjured himself to promote racial genocide.
As usual, I really wish you would read the material before trying to rubbish it. The IWPR post notes ”Delic brought his testimony to a close by declaring his willingness to travel to the area in question to prove his point. Prosecutor Geoffrey Nice in turn announced that Lord Ashdown was happy to return to the courtroom to clear up the matter. Presiding Judge Patrick Robinson even wondered out loud whether an on-site visit by judges might be a solution.”
Unfortunately Mr Milosevic died and the trial ended prematurely leaving the matter unresolved (and your version of events unproved).
# posted by 
: April 06, 2009
: April 06, 2009
Unfortunately Mr Milosevic was poisoned* while in ICTY custody so they never had to. Except, of course, that the mountains haven't moved. Had Ashdown not been committing perjury the "court" would certainly have wished to go there to prove it & indeed so would the media. The proof that Nazi Ashdown perjured himself to support genocide is literally mountaneous.
*I know you will say that never happened but it is as clearly proven as the ethnic cleansing of 350,000, the genocide of thousands, the sexual enslavement of children & the dissection of living teenagers your party supported never took place & which you have denied.
Your assurance that the retroactive rewriting was accidental seems to depend on your word which obviously is not credible.
*I know you will say that never happened but it is as clearly proven as the ethnic cleansing of 350,000, the genocide of thousands, the sexual enslavement of children & the dissection of living teenagers your party supported never took place & which you have denied.
Your assurance that the retroactive rewriting was accidental seems to depend on your word which obviously is not credible.
I have been able to make a post on Ruaraidh's blog. Maybe you should try again. I'd love you to continue your arguments on neutral ground.
# posted by : April 06, 2009
: April 06, 2009
I am pleased to find i am no longer being censored there. Though I am not quite sure the ground is "neutral" I am glad to see you willing to speak again.
"....where they will find, amongst other things Wilcoxon omits, that the Prosecution advanced evidence that the maps which Delic used were the fabrications of a Yugoslav Army disinformation unit."
What a sick Goebbelsian Nazi type of deliberate lie.
I challenge you, Norman Fraser, to produce even one splintered shred of evidence which would support your preposterous claim that the maps were fabrications.
The reason for my confidence is that many independent observers have already travelled to the exact same spot where Ashdown claimed to have been standing and supposedly witnessed "ethnic cleansing by the Serbian/Yugoslav army of Albanian villagers".
These independent observers clearly stated that there are mountains in the way so your entire premise is based on a foundation of despicable lies.
Adolf Hitler himself would have been proud of your Big Lie against the heroic Orthodox Christian Serbs!!
What a sick Goebbelsian Nazi type of deliberate lie.
I challenge you, Norman Fraser, to produce even one splintered shred of evidence which would support your preposterous claim that the maps were fabrications.
The reason for my confidence is that many independent observers have already travelled to the exact same spot where Ashdown claimed to have been standing and supposedly witnessed "ethnic cleansing by the Serbian/Yugoslav army of Albanian villagers".
These independent observers clearly stated that there are mountains in the way so your entire premise is based on a foundation of despicable lies.
Adolf Hitler himself would have been proud of your Big Lie against the heroic Orthodox Christian Serbs!!
Shalom Neil Craig,
The Hague ICTY prosecution in the Netherlands already admitted in 2002 that the map provided by them could be "faulty":
"After it was proved in court that Ashdown could not possibly have seen anything from the position he had previously claimed, above the Albanian village of Gegaj, he supplied the court with grid co-ordinates different from his original testimony, and these new co-ordinates put him inside Kosovo and not in Albania.
"That contradicted his March 2002 testimony. Moreover, on the map the prosecution supplied to try and verify Ashdown's testimony the village of Gegaj had been moved!
"When challenged on this point the prosecution reluctantly admitted it may be a faulty map!
"With such a witness and such a prosecution only the worst bigots could possibly see the Hague Tribunal as other than a kangeroo court and the worst example of "victors justice" - victors, indeed, in an illegal war."
http://home.freeuk.net/freenations/news-2005-11-14.html
The Hague ICTY prosecution in the Netherlands already admitted in 2002 that the map provided by them could be "faulty":
"After it was proved in court that Ashdown could not possibly have seen anything from the position he had previously claimed, above the Albanian village of Gegaj, he supplied the court with grid co-ordinates different from his original testimony, and these new co-ordinates put him inside Kosovo and not in Albania.
"That contradicted his March 2002 testimony. Moreover, on the map the prosecution supplied to try and verify Ashdown's testimony the village of Gegaj had been moved!
"When challenged on this point the prosecution reluctantly admitted it may be a faulty map!
"With such a witness and such a prosecution only the worst bigots could possibly see the Hague Tribunal as other than a kangeroo court and the worst example of "victors justice" - victors, indeed, in an illegal war."
http://home.freeuk.net/freenations/news-2005-11-14.html
Regretably we have quite a few of the worst sot of bigots around. I noted grom the transcript that though the prosecutor Mr Nice admitted that the 2nd map produced by the prosecution supporting Ashdown clearly had such alterations it was wrong of Milosevic to suggest any possibility the alterations could be deliberate.
A mention of Kosovo atrocities from the BBC!
Loads of spin, of course, and reminds the uninitiated of who the BBC thinks were the really bad guys at the end of the article.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7990761.stm
Loads of spin, of course, and reminds the uninitiated of who the BBC thinks were the really bad guys at the end of the article.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7990761.stm
# posted by : April 09, 2009
: April 09, 2009
"...but I prefer the Institute of War and Peace Reporting (IWPR) report..."
Yes of course you would prefer them Mr. Fraser, since the IWPR is a George Soros-funded propaganda front well known for making up deliberate, egregious and malicious lies against Israel and Serbia.
"...Delic himself has been *accused* of war crimes in the precise area Ashdown was describing and so may not be an entirely disinterested witness..."
NATO owns The Hague ICTY "court", thus this so called "court" is a sham.
NATO was a direct party to the conflict because it deliberately violated its own charter in launching an aggressive war against Serbia by bombing her from the air for 3 months, violated the UN Charter, and engaged in arming and training the terrorist KLA killers guilty of genocide and ethnic cleansing.
That hardly makes NATO and its puppet "court" in The Hague a "disinterested" party now does it, Mr. Fraser?
Yes of course you would prefer them Mr. Fraser, since the IWPR is a George Soros-funded propaganda front well known for making up deliberate, egregious and malicious lies against Israel and Serbia.
"...Delic himself has been *accused* of war crimes in the precise area Ashdown was describing and so may not be an entirely disinterested witness..."
NATO owns The Hague ICTY "court", thus this so called "court" is a sham.
NATO was a direct party to the conflict because it deliberately violated its own charter in launching an aggressive war against Serbia by bombing her from the air for 3 months, violated the UN Charter, and engaged in arming and training the terrorist KLA killers guilty of genocide and ethnic cleansing.
That hardly makes NATO and its puppet "court" in The Hague a "disinterested" party now does it, Mr. Fraser?
# posted by : April 14, 2009
: April 14, 2009
Well, Neil the IWPR report is more complete and tallies more accurately with the transcript, giving the side of the argument that Wilcoxon omitted. As I have pointed out, your tendency to deny the validity of all the evidence against Milososevic from whatever source does tend to put your objectivity into question.
# posted by : April 14, 2009
: April 14, 2009
The IWPR website says they are funded by "private foundations, individuals and government agencies". While they don't specify what governments & by how much I am going to a giant leap in the dark & guess that they weren't subsidised by Milosevic but by NATO states. That you consider NATO employees saying NATO employees aren't as genocidal as appears to be, the best evidence you can produce proves volumes.
Obviously if the LibDems aren't a racist party you will equally be able, tomorrow, to come up with evidence of current members saying that the Yugoslavs saying that the criminals were NATO & their hirelings proves the Serb's innocence. Personally I am more interested in evidence.
Post a Comment
Obviously if the LibDems aren't a racist party you will equally be able, tomorrow, to come up with evidence of current members saying that the Yugoslavs saying that the criminals were NATO & their hirelings proves the Serb's innocence. Personally I am more interested in evidence.
<< Home
