Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

5607Re: NSW Council election results (and Bob's geography)

Expand Messages
  • nobbytob
    Apr 5, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In GreenLeft_discussion@yahoogroups.com, "ozleft" <ozleft@y...>
      wrote:

      > Nobby Tobby accuses me of being a "fabricator of lies". Wow.
      > I don't much like being accused of lying by someone who shelters
      > behind a pseudonym but then half identifies himself as a member
      > of the Sydney branch executive committee of the Socialist Alliance.

      my apologies, bob, i didn't know that you have that bad sources
      of information, resp. that lack of ability to put your pieces
      together. so "liar" was a tiny little bit too much accusation.
      as for the allged "pseudonym" - no it isn't, but for reasons
      similar though different to ed lewis' i prefer to be just Nobby.


      > Nobby Tobby's weird, unpleasant and convoluted post confirms
      > me in my view that I didn't get anything wrong about the
      > sequence of events in the Sydney Socialist Alliance branch.

      and in a later post you wrote

      > Quite obviously Nobby's account is completely incorrect,
      > by way of omission.

      sigh... well, now that kieran "outed" himself - that's why it
      was only ALMOST unanimous (and not anymous - although i made
      jokes about others making this error, these two words are
      phetically much too similar to not type in the wrong one, and
      typing is something that you do without much concentration...).
      (why do others conclude straight away, that i meant unanimous,
      but not you, bob? i though you have an army of "informants" on
      the ground ;-)
      [note: they are just informants for you, not comrades?]


      > there was a meeting of the Sydney branch of the Alliance at
      > which, in particular, two members of the ISO spoke strongly
      > in favour of preferencing Labor over Clover Moore

      no. just one.


      > and that the understanding at the end of that meeting was that
      > preferencing Labor was the position of the Sydney branch of the
      > Alliance.

      so does your ALP branch discussions end with "understandings"?
      we take votes - or at least straw polls. but then, democracy is
      not one of your strengths...

      AND YOU ARE DEAD WRONG ON THIS ONE. i told you so, a vote was
      taken, and it was almost unanimously against the ALP machine,
      reflecting the discussion.


      > My further understanding is that there was then a caucus of the
      > ISO, at which the ISO leaders persuaded a majority to support
      > preferencing Clover Moore.

      so what does an ISO meeting have to do with the SA branch?
      is this ISO meeting, of which you seem to have quite much
      information about, your only proof of leadership pressure
      to change <whose?> opinions in favour of clover moore, which
      is where the opinions have been anyway?


      > Another meeting of the Sydney branch of the Alliance was then held,
      > which decided to preference Clover Moore, with the ISO member who
      > still favoured preferencing Labor, dissenting.

      not "still" - it was (from the accounts of this list) obviously
      her first meeting and discussion on this question. you are wrong
      in almost every sentence of your account, bob, i hope you realise
      that. did you say earlier on "completely incorrect" to my account?
      well, i tell you: i was dead right, as i do check my facts before
      posting them, and also, i was right in the heart of that decision-
      making process, unlike you!


      > Nobby Tobby now says it was all unanimous (or "anonymous") all
      > through, and he accuses me, in this spirit, of being a "fabricator
      > of lies".

      well, despite my apologies above, i have to flip back: you ARE
      quite obviously a B.liar: "unanimous (or "anonymous") all through"?
      well, (1) so you did realise that i meant unanimous - now, i even
      call you dishonest! and (2) i clearly said ALMOST unanimous, so
      how comes you conclude "all through"? BOB, this is the way your
      argumentations work: always deviate a little bit from the truth
      to serve you own political interest and die-hard positions - and
      that for decades...


      > Brother Nobby Tobby seems to be a pretty nasty piece of work,

      thanks for that - doesn't bother me, if it comes from you.
      i'm not your brother, i am a rank & file socialist, and you are
      just a piece in the ALP machine, self-assigend to keep the left
      flank (the real socialists) busy with your rantings...
      not with me bob, my aim with this is, to once (and for all, when
      it comes to me) reveal your methods, and i WILL leave you alone
      with that. there's work to be done out there, in the real world.
      as others have mentioned before: people prefer to not waste their
      time with your crude pieces of mail.


      > throwing around accusations of fabrication and lying far too
      > easily.

      alright, this time i spent more time - read: made it harder for
      me - before reconfirming my analysis.


      > If he believes I got it wrong, the obvious way to make his case is
      to
      > give a frank and honest account of the sequence of events and the
      > alternative lines of argument in the Alliance, the DSP and the ISO.

      can't be bothered. (1) you got the accounts, and (2) i am not
      answerable to someone who is hostile to hard-working socialists.
      ha! are you seriously demanding all the lines of argument in all
      those 3 organisations? i am not even a member of ALL of them...
      well, you will even get another one, and you can read it even
      online later on - let's see if you know, where you can find the
      appropriate source. a hint: it's part of SA's open democracy.


      > Obviously, Zinovievist organisational arrangements don't allow him
      > to engage in a frank discussion of the events, so he falls back on
      > crude, offensive and inaccurate accusations that I'm lying.

      dead wrong again here, though not with the latter 3 words.


      > But both groups are obviously bound, in reality, in the Socialist
      > Alliance by the decision made by the leadership of the groups.

      ??? WE are the Sydney Central branch of SA, and WE are the ones,
      who analyse and discuss our local politics. this again is a classic
      example of - you guessed it - DEMOCRACY!
      and hard to comprehend for you, i know...

      Nobby.
    • Show all 28 messages in this topic