Re: can you post anything Mr. Christensen?


Nope Chris he can not

Dan Christensen wrote:
On Apr 27, 1:41 pm, chris <christiane.stock...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 14 apr, 07:53, Dan Christensen <dch...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:





On Apr 13, 12:36 pm, chris <christiane.stock...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 7 apr, 06:10, Dan Christensen <dch...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Apr 6, 1:43 pm,chris<christiane.stock...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
[snip]
Now, when shall we see some evidence of you finding those long-lost
balls of yours, Kennykins? Write to Stanton, as I did,
Mr. Christensen if you did contact Mr. Stanton and the reply is "on
the record", why don't you post it?
I did. In response to my request for the source for GW's claim about
Cuba, he wrote back that it was Rudy Rummell. What more is there to
say?
If this is a substantial issue you have to just contact Mr. Stanton
and ask him for a statement you can post.
It is a substantial issue only to these two desperate clowns here.
It should be a substantial issue to anyone that is interested in the
truth Mr. Christensen.
It isn't acceptable in any discussion to post claims without
substantiating them.
The claims I made are consistent with the facts:
1. The outrageous claims I refer to, which were previously at the GW
website, have subsequently been removed (in late 2005, as I recall).
PL has confirmed this time and again.
Are you claiming that that was your achievement as part of your
lobbying effort on behalf of the Cuban government?

I requested his source for the claims at his website. How is that
"lobbying?" You really seem to be reaching here, Chris.

as Chris points out your aim was to inflience the public statements
Lobbying comrade Dan.

You don't seem to see the issue here Mr. Christensen.
PL is right in pointing out that the numbers aren't the issue, but the
fact that Cuba under Castro is on their list.

Their credibility was shot when they were somehow forced to remove
their previous claims citing 75,000 deaths in Cuba. (snip)

The fact that that death toll is uncertain due to continued reports that make it rise only reinforces the basic conclusion


I always see you argue numbers, but never that issue.

2. Notwithstanding PL's pathetic grasping at straws, these claims were
also consistent with Rummell's claims.
upon verification I can say that what PL has posted is correct in all
ways.
You did get the numbers wrong and I indeed would find that very
strange if you had indeed had contact with the organization in
question.


Again, if you don't believe me -- and I don't really care if you do at
this point

as you claim you don't care but in private it must piss you over major that your lies are clearly exposed.
Chris makes the correct point: you got the numbers wrong in your post and here again.
that destroys any credibility you might crave comrade Dan

(snip)

3. There is also still no indication at the GW website that they
themselves have ever investigated any "genocide" in Cuba, as PL seems
to be suggesting here.
Mr. Christensen, for this argument to have any validity and for it not
to sound like a base copout Cuba would have to be a nation that would
allow local verification.

If that were true

do you deny that Cuba does not allow international human rights organizations in comrade Dan?

-- it isn't -- where do you suppose GW's original
data came from? Someone just made it up? (Most likely.)


Nope.
It reflected then consensus of the time.
You slander of GW just exposes you as the desperate propaganda liar you are

To my knowledge Cuba doesn't not allow any local verification by
international organizations.

Here is what Human Rights Watch (snip)

evasive.
Please give the dates of the last visit of AI, HRW and the IRC.


It seems to me that visits from the
International Red Cross, Amnesty International and similar
organizations are very few and very far between.

That hasn't stopped AI from reporting (snip)

evasive.
Address the issue.
Chris is making a very good point here and you are running like hell Mr. Cowardly Liar.

Furthermore: a lot of the data is available form other than government
sources that clearly refuse co-operation and as such can form the
basis of an informed decision about the basic attitude of the Cuban
government though it may indeed be very hard to ever ascertain with
100% certainty how many people dies.


See above.

and Chris clearly did

4. No mainstream human rights group like Amnesty International, Human
Rights Watch or the UN has ever backed GW's outrageous claims
regarding Cuba.
as PL has pointed out: the deal with the issues of respect of human
rights and document individual cases.

They also report on acts of genocide.

Like the acts of democide and politicide of the Cuban regime (extra judicial killings, people dying fleeing the country, ...)


These organizations have though reported on what any level headed
person would see as extra-judicial killings of individuals and even
groups of people

You mean "groups of people" flying military-style pysop missions to
overthrow the Cuban government? Or "groups of people" hijacking Cuban
vessels? (snip)

extra-judicial killings condemned by the whole world desperate Dan.
But thanks for showing Chris what you are all about.
You are indeed discrediting yourself.

and on abuses of human rights.
It seems to me that these reported facts by these organizations and
reports from other sources could be a very sound basis for Genocide
Watch to form it's opinion on the organizational structure and
attitudes behind these acts.

Again, no mainstream group like AI or HRW will support GW's claims,

(snip)

they just document the events that show the attitude as Chris says.

I find your argument therefore nonsensical.


Try to imagine how little I care.

We know it pisses you of Comrade Dan.

And if that's not good enough for you, you can write to Mr. Stanton
yourself, as I did at genocidewa...@xxxxxxxx I really couldn't care
less if a couple of wingnuts on the internet don't believe me.
Mr. Christensen: as you have pointed out so often yourself it is up to
the person making the claim to back it up.
All the facts in this matter go against you.

On the contrary. (See above.)

Nope.
Chris is right.
Your lies were exposed and twice you got the numbers wrong.


The burden of proof is on you and you can't hide behind this ludicrous
game of words if you do not want to discredit yourself any further.


Did you write to Stanton? I did, and have every confidence in my
position.


As far as your claims about genocide watch go you haven't posted
anything.
In fact: your record shows only errors in the numbers.
75,000 compared to 76,000??? Get real! It seems you have taken to
grasping at straws as well, Chris!
From the records in this usnet group I can see that these numbers are
again incorrect.
You have a serious problem in being consistent Mr. Christensen.
That hardly creates any trust in your statements.


They are very close.

Thanks for admitting you got it all wrong in your lies.

I don't know why there is a discrepancy --

Just a result of a stupid liar at work, no?
Rummel : 73,000 GW: 75,000
Dan = Serial Liar

PL
.

Relevant Pages