5607Re: NSW Council election results (and Bob's geography)
- Apr 5, 2004--- In GreenLeft_discussion@yahoogroups.com, "ozleft" <ozleft@y...>
> Nobby Tobby accuses me of being a "fabricator of lies". Wow.my apologies, bob, i didn't know that you have that bad sources
> 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.
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 confirmsand in a later post you wrote
> me in my view that I didn't get anything wrong about the
> sequence of events in the Sydney Socialist Alliance branch.
> Quite obviously Nobby's account is completely incorrect,sigh... well, now that kieran "outed" himself - that's why it
> by way of omission.
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 atno. just one.
> which, in particular, two members of the ISO spoke strongly
> in favour of preferencing Labor over Clover Moore
> and that the understanding at the end of that meeting was thatso does your ALP branch discussions end with "understandings"?
> preferencing Labor was the position of the Sydney branch of the
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 theso what does an ISO meeting have to do with the SA branch?
> ISO, at which the ISO leaders persuaded a majority to support
> preferencing Clover Moore.
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,not "still" - it was (from the accounts of this list) obviously
> which decided to preference Clover Moore, with the ISO member who
> still favoured preferencing Labor, dissenting.
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") allwell, despite my apologies above, i have to flip back: you ARE
> through, and he accuses me, in this spirit, of being a "fabricator
> of lies".
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 tooalright, 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 isto
> give a frank and honest account of the sequence of events and thecan't be bothered. (1) you got the accounts, and (2) i am not
> alternative lines of argument in the Alliance, the DSP and the ISO.
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 himdead wrong again here, though not with the latter 3 words.
> to engage in a frank discussion of the events, so he falls back on
> crude, offensive and inaccurate accusations that I'm lying.
> But both groups are obviously bound, in reality, in the Socialist??? WE are the Sydney Central branch of SA, and WE are the ones,
> Alliance by the decision made by the leadership of the groups.
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...
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>