So on the 25th of January, 2010 on the Report on Greens blog I responded to a commenter by saying:
"If you want to discuss a blog post on davebagler.ca comment there. While at RoG lets focus on the issues being discussed by RoG. Of course maybe I'm just overly sensitive. Hell when John Shavluk called the World Trade Centre the Jewish world bank headquarters I thought he was being anti-Semitic."
First I should point out that this comment was in reply to comment regarding my views on antisemitism. I was admitting to being perhaps overly sensitive about antisemitism. So in the next sentence I give an example of how I might be overly sensitive.
I said:
I thought John was being anti-Semitic.
I might also be OK with it if you prefer to interpret that as me saying:
I thought John's comments were anti-Semitic.
I did not say:
John is anti-Semitic.
I certainly did not say:
John is an anti-Semite.
I have attached PDF copies (directly copied and pasted) of emails and comments John has left in response to the issue. When I first decided to the post this I was going to ask for advice. John thinks he can sue me? Maybe I should sue him back. Is this harassment? Did John break the law when he threatened to destroy me? Also can calling some one "sonny" be considered a capital crime?
However a friend pointed out that there probably isn't a point. They had seen the emails John sent to me (he didn't send them to me alone rather he sent them to a yahoo group with around 300 members) and they asked me a very good question:
"What if you're dealing with someone who's suffering from some serious... issues?"
My response:
"Yeah, you could be right. I guess I should probably just be nice."
So John, I apologize that I ever brought up your comment. I hope you understand that I wasn't calling you an anti-Semite and I'm sorry for any pain our misunderstanding may have caused.
Note: the emails are numbered in the order I created the PDF's not chronologically. Also make sure to read email 2, it's art. Also John has posted his comment 16 times and counting (at what point is it considered a denial of service attack?).
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| JS EMAIL 1.pdf | 63.19 KB |
| JS EMAIL 2.pdf | 85.23 KB |
| JS EMAIL 3.pdf | 98.81 KB |
| JS EMAIL 4.pdf | 86.7 KB |
| JS EMAIL 5.pdf | 91.83 KB |
| JS EMAIL 6.pdf | 88.13 KB |
| JS EMAIL 7.pdf | 92.63 KB |
| JS EMAIL 8.pdf | 111.64 KB |
| JS EMAIL 9.pdf | 90.96 KB |
| JS EMAIL 10.pdf | 87.52 KB |
| JS EMAIL 11.pdf | 104.61 KB |
| JS EMAIL 12.pdf | 103.61 KB |
| JS EMAIL 13.pdf | 101.38 KB |
| JS COMMENT.pdf | 12.26 KB |
Comments
Dave, if you want to argue
Dave, if you want to argue with Shavluk in future you might try simple statements like
"John Shavluk is a litigious turd."
This is "low and common abuse", and not slander.
No right-thinking citizen would have his opinion of Shavluk diminished by your statement (definition of slander) because - obviously - Shavluk is not a turd.
dave I just saw your apology
dave I just saw your apology and yes I acept this and want to say that
A) I AM NOT NOW NOR HAVE I EVER BEEN ANTI SEMETIC
B) I spent thousands of dollars to go to court to prove that
C) I will defend my name at all costs because of the people who I represent
I consider the matter closed and will stop the issuance of the statement of claim against you today
If you just do not like me please just ignore me
John
frivolous law suits? soon
frivolous law suits?
soon you will understand what frivolous really means sonny
because if you mean this one you are foolish
"" Dave Bagler said...If you want to discuss a blog post on davebagler.ca comment there. While at RoG lets focus on the issues being discussed by RoG.Of course maybe I'm just overly sensitive. Hell when John Shavluk called the World Trade Centre the Jewish world bank headquarters I thought he was being anti-Semitic.January 25, 2010 8:53 AM""""Oh my some are stupid!!!!hahhahahhaaaaaaaaPlease show me where I ever said thisYou have one week and when you find like e may did that I never ever said this please apologize or wait for the statement of claim because yes Mr.Bagler I am going to SUE YOU NEXT !!The fact that you are completely misinformed and obviously like may can not even read is no excuseYou have slandered me publicly and I hope you understand I do as I say and if I spend the money and have you served I will never ever back down...ask e mayPROVE YOUR STATEMENT OR APOLOGIZE NOW !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!You are disgusting in your tactics and if it helps lets just say I leaked this information about council ...so what?I did not but who cares who didIf Rob did great !!I always liked and respected him more than any other council and he is now completely forgiven his transgression against meYou how ever Mr Bagler are now very firmly in my cross hairs and I promise you and all here I will expose you as nothing more than a liar!!!!!!PROVE YOUR STATEMENT OR RETRACT ITOR BE DESTROYEDTick tick tickYour move sycophant"""""
this comment by you is slander dave I ask you for the last time to own up to your obvious mistake and will show this post in court now saved
act accordingly but know this
you have left me absolutely no choice
Post new comment