I wonder if the members who have already voted for Chris would have done so if they'd read about him putting pressure on a blogger yesterday to take down a link to an unflattering website!!

See: http://action-without-theory.blogspot.com/2007/12/huhne-rattled-by-anonymous-blog.html

 

Liberality - I don't think Chris has any problems with people being unflattering - its when it is a completely unfounded and malicious libel that he gets unhappy. And if the author of the website can be traced, legal is going to be taken.

 

Hi Liberality. Odd coincidence that your comments on various blogs so closely mirror in content and writing style the previous burst of comments from "Penelope", all pushing the same sites too.

Penelope's comments stopped shortly after she claimed to be a Lib Dem member and then refused to provide any evidence to verify that when I queried it with her.

Just after that, your own account on Blogger seems to have been registered and your comments started.

Of course, that could all be a coincidence and you could really be a different person, rather than someone who is using multiple guises to promote a set of anonymous blogs.

Apologies of course if you are someone else and you've been caught up in these matters by coincidence. You could always make matters clear by coming out of anonymity yourself?

 

Anna - Chris will have every right and reason to get unhappy if he HAS been libelled. I think everyone will agree with that. But I'm confused. What exactly is the "completely unfounded and malicious libel"?

I have read the offending website carefully and there seem to be several allegations - most of which appear to be sourced and referenced to previously-published information in national daily newspapers. Which are still on-line. (ie there doesn't seem to have been legal action by Chris resulting in the material being withdrawn.)

Moreover, Chris Paul has quoted extensively from the blog on the topic of Chris's investments in dubious companies. That info is still up on Chris Paul's blog. And that material is also in the Telegraph and Indy. I just Googled the topic and a lot of this information is there. So is THAT material libellous? If so - will you be taking action against the Telegraph? The Indy? Chris Paul? This is just so confusing! Please help us understand exactly what the issue is. Thanks.

 

Although you've not answered my question directly liberality, I think you have inadvertently.

Several of the phrases in your latest comment are so, so similar in wording to what "Penelope" has written on other occassions, that I think we can be fairly sure you really are the same person using several different fake online identities.

And if you really are indulging in such sock puppetry, it does cast a rather differnt light on your claimed concern about the substance doesn't it?

 

Mark - Amidst your various fevered misspellings ("occassions" "differnt") I have determined that you appear to be labouring under the misapprehension that I am a girl called "Penelope". Sorry to shatter your fantasies, but my name is Gerald and I fear I would be a grave disappointment to you. But good luck with finding her! Now, back to the actual topic....