Sunday, September 23, 2007

possible arsenal owner not very nice?

from boing boing

"Several British MPs' personal websites and blogs (including that of the popular London mayoral candidate Boris Johnson) were forced offline earlier today when Alisher Usmanov, an Uzbek billionaire (he's the guy who bought an entire auction for £20m on Monday) complained about a blog posting by Craig Murray, a former British ambassador to Uzbekistan. Fasthosts, Murray's ISP, pulled the plug on his blog, apparently also killing the sites of several other customers.

Murray is the author of the fascinating "Murder in Samarkand - A British Ambassador's Controversial Defiance of Tyranny in the War on Terror", which - to say the least - does not portray Usmanov in a good light. Schillings, the lawyers acting on behalf of Usmanov, have already succeeded in getting Murray's host to alter some of his posts to present Usmanov in a different light. They also appear to have sent threatening emails to owners of Arsenal Football Club fan sites (Usmanov is an Arsenal shareholder), threatening libel action if any of Murray's statements appear on their sites.

The Google cache of Murray's blog makes for some interesting reading.

Yet More Schillings Bollocks

On my article about Alisher Usmanov which so incensed his lawyers Schillings, let me ask this question. Has anybody seen an argument posted or published from any credible source to argue that what I say about Usmanov is untrue?

I ask the question because one of the edits to this log my webhost made at Schillings' behest was to say that my claim was "regarded as false by many people". I have altered that edit, because there is no justification for such a claim. I have yet to see evidence of anybody, not one solitary person, arguing that I am wrong about Usmanov, other than his lawyers. Who are these "Many people", and why are they peculiarly silent?

I am very sympathetic to my webhost having to change things for Schillings, but not to the extent of altering things to become defamatory of me!!!

2 comments:

transfattyacid said...

I think you are allowed under the libel laws to say 'not very nice'. If you define 'nice' as neat and precise. Though you might be in deep water if you suggest that he is not pleasant.

chris said...

The question mark is the key!!