I have taken my time to further respond to your threat to sue me for libel for many reasons. I waited to see if you would withdraw your Nazi accusations and apologise for such, you have done neither so I can only assume that you are confident in your assertions. I waited to see if you would rescind your libel action, I have no information that you have done so. Therefore I have spent some time on preparing my defence as I do not take threats of legal action lightly, no matter the obvious likelihood of dismissal of such. I assume that your solicitor will ask why someone would have made the allegation in question (your accusation of anti-Semitism) against you. Did you give them cause, was it provoked, was it justified? I would imagine your reply to be that you might have said something offensive. He may ask what it was that could have been so offensive, to have elicited such a response. You might tell him that you called someone a Nazi. He could ask who it was that you labelled as a Nazi and do you have proof that such is the case. Presumably it will be admitted that you called the First Minister of Scotland a Nazi on a published discussion forum. At this point your solicitor might through his hands in the air shouting, You did what? He may then take the time to explain to you that a lecturer was ordered to pay £10,000 damages and £7,200 costs to a former Conservative Party member who she had falsely labelled a Nazi on an internet message board. Your solicitor at this time should want to know if its possible that you may have offended anyone else. I suppose you would have to tell him that you also accused the yes brigade (reasonably identifiable as being Yes Scotland) as Nazis. Also that you called Salmond supporters (reasonably identifiable as the SNP) Nazis. You would of course also have to inform him that you accused me personally of being a Nazi, when you suggested that I was one of a kind with Salmond who is a Nazi. It would seem advisable at this time to inform your solicitor that a woman of German heritage had told you that she was deeply offended by your Nazi allegations, mentioning that she had been racially abused as a child. Then tell him that your reply to her included mention of being told that the only good German is a dead one, (which may be factually correct as you were merely repeating what had been told to you by your father, but it could also be a fact that the information was offered in a menacing manner). You would have to inform him that you suggested that she had a natural Nazi instinct, inviting her to shoot me in the back of the head, telling her to replace her Scottish thistle logo with a Swastika and to further call her a Fascist thug. Probably by now your solicitor is holding his head in his hands, asking whatever possessed you to make all these ridiculously false, libellous and criminal allegations. What possible justification could you have had to assault this woman with such loathsome racial abuse? This is where you might inform your solicitor that he need not worry, that you have the perfect defence, that of the truth. You can tell him, as you have those partaking in your online discourse, that stating facts is my line of business and my comments are based on evidence. Now, this is where things begin to unravel for you Im afraid. Your understanding of the law regarding libellous statements and racial abuse may well be based on the utterances of the Greek philosopher Epictetus, one cannot give offence, only take it but you could be about to discover that in this country at least, you can certainly be found guilty in a court of law of being offensive, in many degrees of seriousness. As well as the possibility of being sued for libel by various persons and groups, which is a civil matter, you would seem to have invited prosecution upon yourself in a criminal court to face a charge relating to racial abuse. Two criteria must be met in order for prosecution to proceed, there must be evidence and it should be in the public interest. Your documented repeated abuse and false accusations fulfil the requirements of the first. The fact that the racial offence was motivated by your given knowledge of the female victims Germanic heritage, would be ample for the second. If found guilty it could mean community service or a fine, possibly both. I shouldnt think prison would be justified in this instance (though up to three years is an option) considering your exemplary background, though you would have a criminal record and of course the shame of being recorded as a racist which is a crime of moral turpitude. Whether the charge sheet (if police come to your home to arrest you) or summons (if by post) would be for inciting racial hatred or racially aggravated harassment or some other charge would be dependant on evidence of course. I dont know what facts or evidence you may have concealed in order to aid your defence against any possible charges, but all the real facts and evidence so far published do not seem beneficial to, or supportive of, your cause. The very fact that you were advised on many occasions by different persons, that your comments were abusive and offensive but that you continued to assault with the same, would confirm that you acted knowingly or wilfully with intent to commit a libel/crime. It was not a single accusation by you but a sustained and concerted assault. Your defence could not then argue the case that you had acted negligently or recklessly, which may have been possible prior to you receiving complaints from others. The intent was also malicious. Comments were not true neither were they in the public interest, nor deemed to be reasonable comment. They were comments aimed at persons or groups, so as to harm reputations and inflict personal insult. You accused me of bad mouthing and mud-slinging telling me that I had no shame, no sense of fair play. You also accused me of telling lies. You accuse others of making spurious assumptions, false allegations and threats. My message directed to you, which you found offensive and which you purport to be libellous, was elicited by your accusation against myself and others, of Nazism. My reply (informing you that you were accusing many of being ant-Semitic) would be regarded in law as being reasonable comment, most importantly it would be considered truthful. It would be justifiable retort within the context of your false statement. When using a descriptive word with its connotations in an abusive or accusery manner towards someone, you should be aware of the full implications when doing so and of the generally accepted understanding of the meaning or significance of such word. Nazi immediately associates with holocaust, genocide, hatred of Jews. Therefore you accuse of anti-Semitism. My family are well aware of the depraved and evil nature of Nazism and of its consequences. After the end of WW2 my father (whos brother had been killed by the enemy age 18) was involved as a truck driver, in the transportation of holocaust survivors. He heard first hand, unimaginable accounts of the sadistic brutality of Nazism. My daughter visited Auschwitz as part of her religious studies while at school and was profoundly moved by her experience. She was horrified when confronted with the graphic visual evidence of the result of Nazi ant-Semitism. It is understandable why we would have been deeply offended by your accusations of anti-Semitism, when you informed everyone on a public forum that we were Nazis. My father was never a Nazi, I am no Nazi, my Daughter is not Nazi. We have never hated Jews. We are not associated with any person or group that hates Jews. I am positive others you accused will feel likewise, no matter what their personal experience, as they would still be aware of the implications of your false accusations. You stated that you were becoming quite depressed by the vitriol being expressed on these pages with ad hominem attacks masquerading as rational debate Again, after re-reading the messages posted (over 650) it was apparent that the discourse was fairly civil to begin with, until your second message where you launched a personal attack against Alex Salmond. You described him as detestable, a bully boy, a megalomaniac, cocky and ignorant. Previous to this, the worst personal insult directed by anyone at Salmond was that he was a buffoon, though someone did say that Darling was a shivering wreck.. Once you had started though, it seems you were unable to hold back. Further you called him; dirty little bugger, horrid little bully, self deluded, belligerent, dangerous dreamer, rouge, fascist and of course you called him a Nazi and likened him to Adolf Hitler and associated him with Harold Shipman. You said yes voters are a rabble, Nazis, Fascists, likened them to religious zealots, called them verminious. You appeared to be the only person who was using such abusive language. From your approximately sixty posts, eighteen included personal abuse towards Alex Salmond, thirteen were abusive to other people, the remaining concerned mostly information about yourself (properties in Edinburgh, good education, civilized friends, holidays, how much you spend on entertainment, eating out, shopping, your dislike of Glaswegians etc) some were unrelated to the debate and a few contained mention of politics. The reason I have went to so much trouble in collecting this information is that you have given cause to. It will be required when I defend myself against your libel charge. If you were to be successful in your prosecution (which would seem to be as likely as you volunteering to be Alex Salmonds right-hand man) then any monetary award would be measured by damage to your reputation or character. This will be assessed taking into account your relevant online activity and how you are perceived by others in that place. Considering all that has gone before, I do not think that your reputation or character could possibly have been damaged by me, as that would seem to have been already accomplished successfully, all by yourself. I am sure when any judge sees the evidence that they will reach the same conclusion. You would appear to be hateful, spiteful, self-important, devious, a liar and a bigot. You are seemingly arrogant, ignorant, superior, egotistical, snobbish, self-pitying, narcissistic. You say of yourself hypocrite is not a term that applies to me. - I would argue that it certainly is. You say This whole business is bringing out the worst in the Scots rather than the best. - Seems to be true in your case. Also you say I can fight dirty but I also fight fair. - You seem to be only able to fight dirty. You complain that All the contributions have centred on personalities. - Yours certainly have. You tell us that My comments are based on evidence. I do have eyes ears and a brain to process sensory information. - Obviously malfunctioning. In what I think was your last message, you asserted The hate mail I get gives me great confidence that I am getting the message out and that the nats cant stand it. - You are correct in that the nats or any decent person for that matter, cant stand the vile and abusive messages that you are getting out. That would be the reason you get hate mail in return, which may have been your intention in the first instance, as you are then able to complain of being attacked. You appear to be deluded if that gives you great confidence. You complain Ive been accused of being a Tory, a racist, an anti-Semite. - You address all pro-independence voters, no matter what their political allegiance, as being nats or Salmond supporters. As you obviously share the same view as David Cameron on the independence debate, why would you then be offended at being labelled a Britnat or Tory or Cameron Supporter? You are a racist. This accusation is not libellous. It is a fact which can be proven as previously outlined. No one accused you of being anti-Semite anywhere. You are the accuser. You are sick of fellow Scots slagging me off for trying to get at the truth. - I would suggest most of your fellow Scots are sick of you and your fanciful truth. You suggest that Alex Salmond is banking on youthful passion v mature intelligence. You blame the Scottish educational system of teaching anti-English sentiment. You finally inform that The Scotsman online has many considered and temperate contributions on its website, unlike the ravings and mindless insults posted here. - If you had not been posting then I would imagine the place you complain about could have resembled the Scotsman online. It was suggested to me when I showed your disgusting comments to others, that there may be a possible explanation as to why a person should behave in such an unreasonably despicable manner. Someone said that you could be having a nervous breakdown, which would account for your irrationality and incohesion. Another mentioned that it might be a sign of early onset dementia (I hope it is not so), which could explain your impairment in reasoning and your desire to be abusive when communicating. It could also account for your judgement lapses and confusion. If you are indeed suffering from some illness then I suggest that you show this correspondence to a family member, or perhaps your carer if you have one, in order that they may prevent you from directing inflammatory, abusive and racist comments at other innocent parties, further incriminating yourself. Unless I hear otherwise I will have to assume for now that you are in control of your faculties but that your mind has become distorted by your hatred of apparently almost everyone, compelling you to assault with your malicious and venomous comments, seemingly in a pathetic attempt to garner approval from the few who are like minded, in order to boost an already self-inflated ego. You have directed your contemptuous and bigoted insults at all pro-independence voters, all the citizens of Glasgow, all Scottish teachers and all the youth of Scotland. In fact you have insulted the majority of the citizens of your beloved homeland. I am surprised, given the fact that you have reported the facilitator of my libellous replies to your libellous and criminal comments, that they are still able to be viewed. Obviously then, my comments are of no concern. I am more surprised though that yours are also available, as by continuing to publish they also invite prosecution upon themselves. I will be sending a paper copy of the below message along with printed evidence to them, which will include your name, in order that they may be aware of their complicity in your offences. The same will also be sent to the office of the First Minister of Scotland, The headquarters of Yes Scotland in Glasgow, and the SNP headquarters in Edinburgh. I will also inform The University of Edinburgh.- I and others had assumed, by your display of that Universitys name following your own, that you were either expressing the views of said place or were a staff member of such. Anyone who was to peruse your comments could reach the same conclusion, so it is right and justified that they be given opportunity to disassociate themselves from your deplorable tirades. I will also post to their respective websites and facebook pages. Also to any press officers as I see fit. I will inform the Embassy of The Federal Republic of Germany in London. I will inform any newspaper or online version of such. The following information where it includes accusations or statements of truth is factually correct and can be proven, if desired, by following the links given. There is a person (top commenter) The University of Edinburgh, posting on huffingtonpost.co.uk concerning the debate between Alex Salmond and Alastair Darling; huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/08/25/alex-salmond-and-alistair-darling-clash-in-second-scotland-independence-debate_n_5711095.html?fb_comment_id=fbc_959426374083631_959969687362633_959969687362633#fbc9c2568 He considered the debate to be a punch up, which is what one expects in Glasgow He mentions his properties in Edinburgh. He mentions in detail his education and how very civilized his friends are. He tells us that stating facts is his line of business unlike Salmond. He says his comments are based on evidence. Some of his facts - He likens Alex Salmond the dirty wee bugger to Adolf Hitler and also somehow connects him with Harold Shipman. He describes yes voters as a rabble which I assume to mean lower class or uneducated. He goes on to accuse the yes brigade of being Nazis. A woman yes voter who had a German father complained to him about his Nazi slur. She explained that she had been racially abused as a child and was offended by his assault upon her. She was then told by him to change her thistle logo to a swastika, while informing her that his father had told him that the only good German was a dead one. He also told her that she was a Fascist thug. I replied to this person on numerous occasions, informing him that it was contemptible behaviour to accuse his pro-independence countrymen of being anti -Semitic. I further explained to him that anti-Jewish policy was a central tenet of Nazism, therefore to call someone a Nazi while being aware of the connotation when doing so, is indeed to accuse that person of hating Jews. After which he again called Alex Salmond a Nazi and said that I and others were verminous. In a subsequent unrelated post, he sickeningly made a joke about Adolf Hitler and the gassing of Jews. theguardian/media/2006/mar/23/digitalmedia.law A chatroom user was ordered to pay £10,000 damages and £7,200 costs for labelling someone a Nazi. This man has labelled Alex Salmond by name and could be considered to be similarly accusing Yes Scotland by inference yes brigade, as an organisation. likewise the SNP Salmond Supporters as various branches or groups of an organisation. I was also accused personally by identifiable inference youre one of a kind.. Salmond is a Nazi This man may be facing substantial fines and costs. He could also face criminal charges relating to racial hatred. He continued with seeming impunity to spew his vile accusations of Nazi, Fascist, Hitler etc against those with whom he disagrees. The sad thing is that this person is a Doctor, well educated, as he informs, and with very civilized friends. If his comments are a measure of how the well educated and very civilized members of the no brigade consider others not of their persuasion, then the sooner we have Independence from their influence the better. The reasons I will publish this information (where you will be named) 1 - To defend myself and others against your spurious allegations. 2 - To enable others to be aware of the vile hatred emanating from even the self professed well educated and civilised members of the unionists and to be aware of this before the date of the referendum for independence. 3- For others to use, to prosecute and prevent you from continuing your disgraceful behaviour elsewhere. (It would be a condition if found guilty that you refrain from online forum activity) I will also contact the woman you racially abused. I will supply her with details and contacts in order that she may report your crime. If the woman in question does not wish to do so, it is of no matter. Any person, whether victim or witness can report a crime which is based on a persons race or perceived race. The crime can be reported anonymously online if so desired, as long as evidence is available (you can still be prosecuted up to a year after offensive content has been published) The police must investigate a hate crime within five days. The Charges will always reflect the seriousness and extent of the offending, supported by the evidence. Im quaking as I wait for that knock on the door from the police. - Your waiting may soon be over. Ill take all the flak coming to me - It could be a substantial amount. The gloves are off now. - They certainly are. See you in court - You will. I notice that you are continuing with your repugnant behaviour. Your solitary contribution to another discussion being to crack a joke about Adolf Hitler and the gassing of Jews. Utterly deplorable! You must really be a most loathsome person. Unless you inform me within 24 hours that you are willing to apologise to all those you have insulted, in a manner of my choice, I will proceed with the actions previously outlined. Do not make the mistake of confusing me for one of your kind. I do not bluster, nor make hollow promise. I am desirous of continuation.
Posted on: Wed, 03 Sep 2014 11:58:14 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015