On May 18, 1:29=A0pm, chris <christiane.stock...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> On 18 mei, 06:38, Dan Christensen <dch...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On May 17, 3:52 pm, PL <pl.nos...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> > [snipping ****tions of PL's posting already debunked here, or too lame
> > to bother with]
>
> > > >>>>>> Your activities as a lying pro-castro lobbyist are well
do***en=
ted in
> > > >>>>>> SCC.
> > > >>>>> Oh, really?
> > > >>>> Not my words: you bragged about contacting various people in
supp=
ort of
> > > >>>> the Cuban regime with an aim to influence their public
statements=
..
> > > >>> [snip]
> > > >>> How amusing. Can you give us even one example of what you are
talk=
ing
> > > >>> about here?
> > > >> Contacting certain medical doctors (US and SA based) on Cuba.
>
> > > > Just confirming sources
>
> > > not what I heard and certainly not confirmed by your actions.
>
> > My actions were to confirm that you were deliberately spreading lies
> > about these people.
>
> (cut)
>
> Mr. Christensen, in each of the cases above according to my research
> it was you that ended up being branded as the one that was spreading
> lies.
And which "lies" might those be? Please be specific.
> Nowhere ever any of these experts has changed his of her public
> statements - the result you were lobbying for - no?
My "lobbying???" Get real!
> If I am mistaken here then please post the messages where they new
> public statements were re****ted.
The US medical expert about which PL was spreading lies has asked to
remain anonymous. Can't blame him really. South African Dr. Michael
Thiede, about which PL was spreading similar lies, wrote to me saying,
"Actually the stats office seems to be quite rigorous." PL had quoted
him out of context on data relating to financial matters. Write to him
yourself if you don't believe me.
> All I saw from you is stuff where you claim other people said this or
> that without any proof whatsover.
> In one case a text was posted (that you did not ever even try to
> dispute as not being genuine and which must therefore have been known
> to you in my opinion) where the party you quoted said in terms that
> could not be misunderstood that what you had posted was a
> misrepresentation to say the least.
Again, as I think PL himself will confirm, the US medical expert in
question has asked to remain anonymous. It is difficult to be more
specific without revealing his identity.
> I have personally seen that you are in most cases unable to come up
> with any proof when challanged remember the golfing claims you made)
> or say blatant lies (on the nature of the Club Med in Varadero).
I have provided direct quotes from PL about his lobbying exploits --
his lobbying at family functions, over squash games, and of some
"Belgian ministers" at Club Med in Cuba. It speaks volumes that you
can so easily dismiss this as mockery!
> So sorry: not enough for anyone and by any standard.
I disagree.
> As far as Genocide Watch is concerned, there again we see a lot of
> unsubstantiated claims on your part and a body of hard evidence on the
> part of those that exposed your inconsistencies.
So, I take it you have been unwilling to contact GW yourself. That or
you didn't like their answer.
The entire controversy here revolves around just who was the source
for some outrageous claims GW had yanked from website 3 years ago. Mr.
Stanton told me it was from a book by Rudy Rummell. Why PL has
objected so strenuously to this has always been a mystery to me. And
he puts forward no alternative source himself. But thanks for
demonstrating that, in your own desperation, you have now joined your
fellow Stooges (Curly and Moe?) in this pathetic grasping at straws!
Dan
Visit my CUBA: Issues & Answers website at
http://www.netcom.ca/~dchris/Cuba=
FAQ.html
|
