Re: The Genetics of the British


"Jim Webster" <Jim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:dco1dt$87o$2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> "Pat Gardiner" <patgardiner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:dcncnp$4bb$2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>
>> "Jim Webster" <Jim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>> news:dcn4gd$lfl$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >
>> > "Pat Gardiner" <patgardiner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>> > news:dcldbf$egk$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >
>> >> I knew from past exchanges that your knowledge of insurance was
> somewhat
>> >> sketchy, so I indicated the possible implications.
>> >>
>> >> "you are the one who claims to be capable of earning big money and
> having
>> >> founding umpteen businesses."
>> >>
>> >> Leaving aside your rather loose English.
>> >>
>> >> You are making wild and untrue allegations yet again.
>> >
>> > so it wasn't you who wrote the following?
>> >
>> > Pat Gardiner Jul 1, 9:51 pm show options
>> >
>> > Newsgroups: uk.business.agriculture
>> > From: "Pat Gardiner" <patgardi...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> - Find messages by
> this
>> > author
>> > Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 20:51:24 +0000 (UTC)
>> > Local: Fri, Jul 1 2005 9:51 pm
>> > Subject: Re: PMWS - Canada (Part Two)
>> > Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original
>> > |
>> > Report Abuse
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > "Peter Duncanson" <m...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>> >
>> >
>> > news:7f8bc1l3c7osqkvdro38no76c6eflu2klc@xxxxxxxxxx
>> >
>> >
>> >> On Fri, 1 Jul 2005 19:46:54 +0000 (UTC), "Pat Gardiner"
>> >> <patgardi...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> >
>> >>>My warning was serious. Be careful with libel. You will see Oz, who is
>> >>>despite his strange behaviour is a very bright man, go into reverse.
> The
>> >>>bombshell is yet to hit him.
>> >
>> >
>> >>>But already he is finessing his words, in arrears. A bit late Oz! Your
>> >>>assets are at risk.
>> >
>> >
>> >> I am stunned and almost speechless!!
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Well, there you go, he trades on his reputation as a rich and
>> > successful
>> > businessman. We are all entitled to take him at his word.
>> >
>> > Quite seriously, I'm feeling pretty good now, and thinking of going
>> > back
>> > to
>> > full time work.
>> >
>> >
>> > Despite a bad heart, a dodgy lung and a nasty cancer, I'm getting
>> > pretty
>> > fit. That is a good news story. I need no sympathy.
>> >
>> >
>> > The last couple of years at work, I was earning, from memory, something
> in
>> > the order of 250K pa.
>> >
>> >
>> > Now, the kind of character assassination that has been going on here
>> > damages
>> > my reputation. That impacts upon my earning ability...
>> >
>> >
>> > Work it out for yourselves.
>> >
>> >
>> > A successful writ slapped on a big landowner, with a rather nasty taste
>> > for
>> > defamation, would restore any damage to my reputation nicely. Shipping
>> > would
>> > collapse in laughter.
>> >
>> >
>> > I imagine that Oz has taken the point.
>> >
>> >
>> > Regards
>> > Pat Gardiner
>> > PS I always did tell you that I checked out. You just did not bother to
> do
>> > the work.
>> > Interestingly the despised Americans did.
>> >
>>
>> I'm not quite sure what that was supposed to achieve. Oz did take the
> point.
>>
>> "Slug" is robust language, but does not in my book constitute defamation.
>>
>> I'm clearly not the form of life so described.
>>
>> Anyway, read my reply elsewhere and reflect on the wisdom of taking
> notice.
>>
>> I suggest that before making remarks that might be defamatory, check to
> see
>> how easily they can be disproved from Companies House. You would probably
>> not even need to pay. I expect the CLA have an internet account, access
> and
>> interpretation facilities.
>>
>> It would be quite normal to make those available to their Cumbrian
> Chairman
>> when he is being warned against possible legal action.
>>
>> They might be curious and might be inclined to take you to one side for
> some
>> good advice, but I would not be unhappy with that situation.
>>
>
> wriggle wriggle wriggle
>
> did you post that message or not?

Of course, I posted the message. What point are you trying to make? No don't
answer that.

Are you trying to persuade me to go after Oz rather than you?

Forget it. He found reverse. You have not.

Forget everyone else. You have been making repeated and damaging serious
libels on me; if you do it again, I will immediately take action against
you. personally.

You are not some 16 year old who knows no better.

And before you start your half baked nonsense about threats. That was the
final warning delivered publicly.

I'm not repeating one of the reckless libels, but you and the rest of the
"politburo" know its nature perfectly well. The other quite wrongly cast
doubts upon my business record.

You asked me about it and I answered you honestly and truthfully, even
giving you considerable detail so that you or any one doubting it could
check at Companies House.

I suggest you discuss the matter with your wife before replying. I have
already talked to my wife today and she agrees that the time has come to
take action.

If you even go anywhere near either of those libels again, my next telephone
call will be to a very expensive lawyer. Once I start the process, it
becomes difficult to stop and I have no intention of losing money on
protecting my reputation.

Forget about everyone else - this warning is directed at you. You gained
credibility by being appointed Chairman of the Cumbria Branch of the Country
Land and Business Association. That makes your remarks particularly
damaging.

If anyone else insists upon following your lead, I will deal with them on a
case by case basis.


--
Regards
Pat Gardiner
www.go-self-sufficient.com



>
> Jim Webster
>
>


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: The Genetics of the British
    ... >> Well, there you go, he trades on his reputation as a rich and successful ... but does not in my book constitute defamation. ... wriggle wriggle wriggle ...
    (uk.business.agriculture)
  • Re: Greatest Hits (Wal-Mart Exclusive) - Bruce Springsteen & The E Street Band
    ... One thing I notice in conversations like this one is that concerns about Bruce's integrity and concerns about Bruce's reputation get mixed-up or conflated as though they're a single issue. ... I for one would be disappointed if Bruce turned down a chance to reach a different audience only because it would look bad to a segment of the audience he already has. ... Sure, there's a certain amount of symbolism in this, since the company's business practices and impact on labor unions and small business communities seems to be in contradiction to the things that Springsteen stands for in his music. ...
    (rec.music.artists.springsteen)
  • Re: Libel on RMA
    ... criteria as it is available to a large number of people. ... RMA, it would be very difficult to prove that a statement on RMA ... actually affected someone's reputation in the eyes of others. ... with some sort of "business" thing that the person was doing. ...
    (rec.martial-arts)
  • Re: help.....attached letter
    ... and a cash and carry business. ... Anyway, do you think it would not be passing off if someone started up, say, ... Because the business would be very different from that of the retail ... goodwill and reputation eroded. ...
    (uk.legal)
Loading