Monday, October 01, 2007
Mr Abbotts cop out!
Below are Chris Abbotts weak excuses for not putting my posting on his blog. He tries to wriggle out of posting my comment by saying It was an anonymous posting, but then he says I revealed my identity? He says that he reserves the right not to publish anything which is personal, which my posting is not, nor is it offensive or libellous. Have a look for yourselves, I posted it on my blog yesterday. If the facts contained in my posting were libellous, then surely I would have been sued, alas, I have not. The only time any kind of action has been remotely taken against me was when Councilor Dave Fitzpatrick was represented by Cleveland police over the civil issue of me posting the truth about him on my blog and that was thrown out by the CPS only recently.When you take into consideration the amounts of police time and resources and PUBLIC MONEY that were spent by the police trying to fit an offence to something that wasn't an offence on behalf of a councillor, then you are left with only one conclusion. What an absolute disgrace!
The thing is, Mr Abbott just hates the truth being known.That's what he finds offensive most.This man just cant stand the fact that people now know that he, along with others, have stooped to the absolute gutter in order to try and marginalise those involved in our campaign by starting untrue smear campaigns and making unsubstantiated claims in cleverly worded 'news' letters and resorting to tactics that you would never expect from councillors or its officers, hence him stating in his response that he will post my comment if I retract the names because he doesn't want you to know what he and others have done.
Funny how he wants me to retract names in order to get my posting on his blog, but he doesn't refute any of the things that I have said? He also cant bear to tell you what we found out under the freedom of information act, that there is no 106 agreement between the council and Persimmon tying Persimmon to providing any leisure in the Coatham scheme at all.
What I want to know is, was why we had to ask for the information under the freedom of information act about the lack of a 106 agreement, at all? Why hasn't our 'open and transparent' council told us this of their own free will? Perhaps thats because for over three years they've been telling people that Persimmon ARE providing leisure in Coatham. This obviously isn't the case with the council now wanting to BORROW £10,400,000 to build a leisure centre/pool.
Yes, Mr Abbott and the rest of the council for that matter, don't want you to know these things. What you should now be asking yourselves is why they don't want you to know the truth about their behaviour, or the Coatham housing scheme?
Comment on Coatham Links
Posted by Chris:This blog has received a comment, via the anonymous option, to this posting which was predominantly about Labour but did make reference to Coatham Links, the topic of the comment, which we have rejected.We reserve the right not to publish anonymous postings even when the writer identifies himself if we consider them to be offensive, personal or if we think they may be libelous. All three apply in this case.The blogger whose name appears on the bottom of the comment does not allow comments at all on his blog, at least that was the case the last time I looked.If the person concerned would like to re-send the comments with all the references to other people removed we will be happy to publish the points that refer to me, and any additional ones he may have, as a blog item and answer them point by point in good faith.
The thing is, Mr Abbott just hates the truth being known.That's what he finds offensive most.This man just cant stand the fact that people now know that he, along with others, have stooped to the absolute gutter in order to try and marginalise those involved in our campaign by starting untrue smear campaigns and making unsubstantiated claims in cleverly worded 'news' letters and resorting to tactics that you would never expect from councillors or its officers, hence him stating in his response that he will post my comment if I retract the names because he doesn't want you to know what he and others have done.
Funny how he wants me to retract names in order to get my posting on his blog, but he doesn't refute any of the things that I have said? He also cant bear to tell you what we found out under the freedom of information act, that there is no 106 agreement between the council and Persimmon tying Persimmon to providing any leisure in the Coatham scheme at all.
What I want to know is, was why we had to ask for the information under the freedom of information act about the lack of a 106 agreement, at all? Why hasn't our 'open and transparent' council told us this of their own free will? Perhaps thats because for over three years they've been telling people that Persimmon ARE providing leisure in Coatham. This obviously isn't the case with the council now wanting to BORROW £10,400,000 to build a leisure centre/pool.
Yes, Mr Abbott and the rest of the council for that matter, don't want you to know these things. What you should now be asking yourselves is why they don't want you to know the truth about their behaviour, or the Coatham housing scheme?
Comment on Coatham Links
Posted by Chris:This blog has received a comment, via the anonymous option, to this posting which was predominantly about Labour but did make reference to Coatham Links, the topic of the comment, which we have rejected.We reserve the right not to publish anonymous postings even when the writer identifies himself if we consider them to be offensive, personal or if we think they may be libelous. All three apply in this case.The blogger whose name appears on the bottom of the comment does not allow comments at all on his blog, at least that was the case the last time I looked.If the person concerned would like to re-send the comments with all the references to other people removed we will be happy to publish the points that refer to me, and any additional ones he may have, as a blog item and answer them point by point in good faith.
// posted by Chris McGlade @ 3:50 AM 
