AUSTRALIAN VETERAN MATTERS
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Saturday28November2020

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
Don Tate Fraud Liar Wannabe Closet Paedophile and Closet Gay
2,371 Posts in 149 Topics by 217 Members
Latest Member: Sweesiultew
* Home Help Search Login Register
+  AUSTRALIAN VETERAN MATTERS
|-+  AUSTRALIAN VETERAN MATTERS FORUM
| |-+  THE MAD GALAHS FORUM--This forum does not necessarily reflect AVMs opinion. CLICK HERE FOR AVMS OPINION
| | |-+  Tate-still alive and still lying.
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. « previous next »
Pages: [1] Go Down Print
Author Topic: Tate-still alive and still lying.  (Read 7013 times)
CD
Active Member


Karma: 0
Offline Offline

Posts: 147


« Reply #1 on: Friday14February2014 »

I had a spare 5mins and thought I would check up and see what really happened when Little Donny Boy led 7Pl (his words) into that huge bunker assault/ambush at 1745 hrs on 19 Jul 69.  You know, that horrific fire fight that wiped out a Section of the Pl. Well I had a bit of trouble because there wasn't too much written about Little Donny Boys "great last stand".
It was such a huge fire fight that it occupied exactly 3 and 1/2 lines in the 9RAR War Diary. WOW.
Also in the 9RAR year book it took up 11 lines and didn't even mention Little Donny's name. Does that mean we will see Donny Boy taking the 9RAR Assoc to court to get his name included?
Go on Donny Boy, you have annoyed most everyone else over the years why not have a go at the Assoc?
Logged
CD
Active Member


Karma: 0
Offline Offline

Posts: 147


« on: Thursday21November2013 »

Well, the tater boy has been quiet for some time now giving us all a rest from his vituperation, we needed the rest from his foul mouth.
Now comes another blast from little donny boy...........................read from the bottom up.

From: Donald Tate
Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2013 3:54 PM
To: Allen Petersen
Subject: Tate Rebuttal to Gary Moseley re HONOURABLE AND DISHONOURABLE MENTIONS IN ANZACS BETRAYED

 
G'day Allen- TATE REBUTTING MOSELEY
 
I would appreciate the courtesy of sending this response to the same people you sent Moseley's attack against me to....
 
So I get home from my last author talk yesterday afternoon ..what was it, oh yes, the 187th such talk.....and find another outburst from a bloke who did all he could to hide from the rough stuff in Vietnam- Gary Muesli......sorry, Moseley, ex-4RAR.
And I have to ask- how desperate is the military 'establishment' getting when they trot out this goose to try and stop veterans from reading 'Anzacs Betrayed'?
I mean, first it was the hero of Long Tan, Bob Buick who mouthed off about the 2nd D&E Platoon matter until his handlers told him to pull his head in and go off and administer the AVM- he was embarrassing them and himself.
Then, it was the paedophile's turn- Keith Tennent. Here was a bloke who anally rapes a nine year-old boy and officers went into bat for him and got him a lighter sentence than he should have got. In return, Tennent owed them a favour- and attacking me was the favour returned.
Didn't work though.
Then, there were an assortment of oddballs and cowards who slid out from under rocks and poked their heads out of hidey holes to throw a rock or two then scurry away.....
And now, the 'wannabee', Gary Moseley.
I say 'wannabee' because this clown is one of those men who did everything he could to get out of the jungle in Vietnam, took every opportunity to dodge it, despite every battalion being undermanned at most times. Applied for officer school (and scored a month off, including a fortnight in Singapore 'preparing'. Got to spend a week home at Christmas with daddy. Took his R&R and R&C when they became available (good on him, I guess, whereas when my turn for R&R came in my 7th month in the war, I passed it up so as not to leave my section short-handed)....and he even managed a record stint up at The Horseshoe.....'acclimatising'??
So Gary Moseley is now the new kid on the block- trying to make up for the paucity of his own war service to defend the honour of the 'establishment'- and big note himself in the process.
Talk about dredging the bottom of the barrel.
(One might think there are better fish Moseley might like to fry than me. For example, he might like to investigate Gary McKay's MC, Peter Cosgrove's MC, Ray Woolan's MC, the homosexual antics within HQ Company and in some battalions, the kangaroo court that tried Pte Peter Allen, and so on. Believe me, there's plenty of scope for a good ol' investigator like Gary Moseley to get his claws into without bothering with me).
Mind you, I'm beginning to think there's a bit of latent homosexuality on display here. I mean, Moseley has written me more than 50 times in a year. Normally, I'd be chuffed at the attention- but not when it's a bloke pursuing me. Perhaps he's secretly in love with me. After all, I'm still a handsome fellow....
If not, it's tantamount to stalking, at least.
I won't bother too much with most of the crap he came out with- it's a rehash of stuff that's come and gone and been answered ad nauseum. He is a master at twisting and contorting whatever I say- and as others have pointed out, is a manifest liar.
I will say that out loud- Gary Moseley is a LIAR.
(I have recorded them for posterity).
I do take umbrage at his signing off his emails as 'Superintendent', though. So what? Is it meant to impress? What's that...a couple of rungs above dickhead 'constable'- and it took him a full career to reach it? Wow....really, I AM impressed.
If he became a Superintendent, all it proves to me is that the Peter Principle still applies.
I was a High School teacher myself- and they're equal to about three, fat arsed 'Superintendents' in my considered opinion, if Moseley is any example of one. But I guess signing off as 'Superintendent' is meant to make some go weak at the knees.
Not me, Moz, old mate. I see it as nothing more than your narcissistic ego on the loose.
Oh by the way, when you strut your title- 'Superintendent' please add the fact that you are also reviled by police in NSW. Some ex-coppers would love to get you alone in a dark alley, wouldn't they? And you know why, too.
Does the term 'dog' sound familiar?
Now....Moseley has come out now to try and defend his tirade against the National Vietnam Veterans Museum a couple of months ago where he ranted like a blithering idiot about them launching Anzacs Betrayed at that venue.
It was such an hysterical outburst, I thought for sure he must have been about to get his period......a bit of PMS, but, I digress.
There is only one line from his recent missive worth analysing. He states, 'Please tell me how you can support a man who calls veterans, on no evidence, curs, cunts, cowards, drunks, psychos and paedophiles..' he asks poor old Bob Elworthy.
Moz- great question. Let me answer it for you, instead of asking Bob Elworthy.
You say there is no evidence for the use of such naughty words. (Please- if you are offended by those terms, you must have been a rather effeminate Superintendent, old mate!)
First, there IS evidence for each. Let me explain, and provide some examples....
    - 'curs': I put it to you that any man who enters a debate armed only with ignorance and stupidity as weapons and seeks to destroy another man just to make himself look bigger or more important is a cur. You sir, and the likes of Bob Buick and Alan Price, are prime examples
    - 'cunts': (Not a word I use often, but I'm sure most men have at one time or another. I'm sure you'd certainly be used to hearing it, probably from as early as age two, and most likely all your police service days, by fellow coppers?) In my humble opinion, a cunt is a man who deliberately sets out to sabotage another man's integrity or character or livelihood professing some noble enterprise when only malice exists- and you sir, are a cunt, along with Bob Buick and a number of others
    - 'cowards';...golleeee! Where do I start? Well, I guess there are those anonymous individuals behind the ANZMI/AVM web sites to start with; then there's those fellow members of the 2nd D&E Platoon who began the fight to validate the platoon but who bolted at the first sound of a shot being fired; then there's my section-commander in 7Pl 'C' Company 9RAR who didn't follow me and Walker and Salmon over that rise and run into that VC bunker system with us- and left it to another section-commander Cpl Mick Shave and Lt Mummer's 9Pl to get us wounded blokes out (of the men I actually served with, that individual is the only man I have called a 'coward' in relation to war service; then there are those men who know the truth about a whole range of things and who don't have the balls to present it; then, there's a man who thinks his former position within the police force allows him some privileged status to attack at random any target he selects. You sir, in that context, are also one of those cowards
    - 'drunks': Well, a fellow 4RAR veteran, Ted Colmer is a self-admitted drunk, my friend. Admitted it in writing. And there are plenty of men claiming the TPI because their war service made them drink to excess. Check with the VVCS, or DVA. Is that evidence enough?
    - 'psychos': Moz, let me let you in on a secret. The veteran world is full of psychos. Barry Billing and Ted Colmer are self-admitted, and court-verified ones, for starters. Billing was a fraudster; Colmer threatened to kill everyone. Lots of vets are claiming war pensions based on psychiatric illness- so I guess they can be called psychos too. There are a lot of PTSD- related 'psychos' out there, they tell me. Why, heavens to betsy, I've seen a shrink too, at times, so I'm also a psycho, I guess. Perhaps you need to investigate more, eh?
    - 'paedophiles': Now Moseley, you can't be serious. As a former copper, you KNOW they are out there. Every veteran in Australia knows that Keith Tennent is one, just for starters- validated by a court. They can sometimes be found in the unlikeliest of places- like pretending to be do-gooders building things in third word countries where kiddies are more accessible. I'm sure you'd know their haunts, their strategies, how they hide, etc etc. A few have been returned to Australia in cuffs by the AFP. Have a good look around......oh, and when you include a known paedophile among your email contacts, it says much about you too, old friend.
Now......does that answer your question?
But, before I conclude, I note that you went jelly-legged when Bob Elworthy took you to task about your outburst concerning the launch of Anzacs Betrayed. Your vicious attack against an institution that raises the profile of Vietnam veterans in the most positive and honourable was a despicable act. Who are you trying to kid? I trust they will initiate action against you- you sought to denigrate the efforts of many good people working to build that Museum, you arrogant ant.
And you sabotaged Anzacs Betrayed- a matter I am discussing with my own lawyer at the moment.
I was personally angered and amused at your response- because Elworthy and Gary Parker have got you by the balls, you fool. By ranting like a schoolgirl about Anzacs Betrayed before it was even printed- let alone read by you or anyone else (it was published by a publisher in Queensland and printed in Sydney) and I only picked it up a day or so before the book launch makes you look like a prized idiot.
Intelligent people comment about the contents of a book AFTER they read a book- not before they read it.
What Anzacs Betrayed specifically does is provide all the validating documentation concerning one of the most unedifying, disgraceful slices of Australian military history.
Let the documentation and photographs and letters speak for themselves- and let men make their own minds up. Veterans don't need the opinion of a pumped-up former lance-jack who thinks he's now a general.
Of course, you don't want others to read it. Nor does the 'establishment'.
But guess what?
Right about now, every significant politician, and Senator, and journalist is about to receive their copy of Anzacs Betrayed (personally signed of course)- along with many examples of deliberate deceit and duplicity by officers of the ADF and the AWM.....So is the DART.
When you spit out a comment about me writing about innocent civilians being killed in a way that suggests it never happened, be careful my friend. First, other soldiers have already confirmed it in relation to the 2nd D&E Platoon matter (and not just infantrymen), while there are many other references by other soldiers and authors in other books. ......check out those by O'Brien (7 RAR) and Burstall (6RAR), being just two of them, and then there was Beersheeba. Rintoul has collected testimonies from many veterans about the deaths of civilians in Ashes of Vietnam, etc etc ......I have also collected anecdotal comment from other men across the country during my travels.
In fact, I'm toying with the idea of writing them all up in a new tome.
You might be doing your best to stop veterans from reading Anzacs Betrayed, and no doubt some small-minded veterans won't, but those with intelligence would find it very interesting.
Incidentally, veterans are still able to purchase a copy from the NVVM for themselves to see what the fuss is all about. Or perhaps suggest their local library buy one.
Only $45- and the NVVM profits.
Now piss off, you big-noting, know-nothing, idiot.
Oh.....sorry, there was one more thing.
One of your copper mates, Gary Winchester sought to take me to task recently as well. I recognise it's part of a campaign. I answered him personally with a detailed response.
But he did raise one small matter I thought I'd share with you.....
He referred to the last bunker assault 10 Platoon was engaged in (a 'bunker assault', by the way, is when we actually take the fight to the enemy. You mightn't be aware of the term, given your propensity to escape the war...)
Anyway, Winchester had a different perspective about the conclusion of that matter. In The War Within, I say that three of us (me, Winchester and Holborow, the gunner) had been caught directly in front of a VC bunker and had been unable to do anything but lay there as the platoon fought that fight over our heads. At its conclusion, the section-commander stood on my fingers as we withdrew. No shots fired. Simple.
But Winchester reckons that as we withdrew, Holborow was blazing away at those bunkers.
Two different perspectives- and as I've said many times before perspective is at the heart of the matter when it comes to writing an account of anything. (One might have thought that a Police Commissioner would have been aware of that?)
Now, here's the rub......I say outright that Winchester's perspective is bullshit. What he's trying to do is build up Holborow's effort. (Holborow is a mate of his- a fellow copper. Or ex-copper, now.) No doubt the story has been told before at Anzac Days etc and has now become 'fact'.
But guess what?
I was Holborow's Number 2, and if Holborow had been laying down covering fire in thick jungle in the pitch black of night, I would have been there beside him feeding that M60, and recorded it in The War Within.
But it's not the way I recall it. I say nothing happened like that. We withdrew quietly.
So what do I do?
I COULD accept Winchester's version, and rush back to the manuscript and alter it to include his opinion for the next edition.
But I won't.
And why not?
Because that would destroy the integrity of my memoir. You see, a memoir is, by definition, an individual's recall. Right or wrong, it is not meant to be a consensus of opinion.  The writer writes it as he recalls it, not the combined recall of third parties- and if others disagree with his perspective or account, stiff cheddar.
If another person has a different perspective, they can write up their own account, submit it to a publisher, and if successful, sit back and wait till the critics come out to attack his perspective- as they will.
I am aware of errors in my account (eg. killing off the wrong 'Bluey' and the like) and could have also corrected those errors. But I won't- for the same reason as above.
Like it or lump it.
Don Tate
Author of Anzacs Betrayed
(only available from the National Vietnam Veterans Museum, Port Phillip)
FACEBOOK: ANZACS BERTAYED
http://www.dontate.com.au/



On Tuesday, 19 November 2013 3:50 PM, Allen Petersen <petersaj@bigpond.net.au> wrote:

From: Gary Moseley
Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2013 7:20 AM
To: Arthur Ventham
Cc: Allen Petersen
Subject: Re: HONOURABLE AND DISHONOURABLE MENTIONS IN ANZACS BETRAYED
 
Arthur,
 
Thanks for taking the time and trouble to write to me, it is appreciated.
 
I regret that I have been dragged into this but I have one objection and one objection alone to Tate's book being stocked at NVVM.
 
He can have all the conspiracy theories he likes, he can spin all the war stories he likes. As he has published them anyone has the right to challenge them
 
My objection is that Tate demeans other veterans service, attacks their reputation including the staff at AWM. Calls honorable men cunts, curs, cowards and paedophiles etc. only because they challenge his version of history.
 
Tate has publicly stated 4 RAR, first tour, "saw and did nothing" tell that to the relatives of the 19 KIA and the scores wounded.
 
For these reasons and these reasons alone his book has no place at the NVVM.
 
I am would be more than happy to stop when the book is removed from their shelves.
 
Gary Moseley.

Sent from my iPad

On 19 Nov 2013, at 1:40 am, "Arthur Ventham" <arthur.ventham@gmail.com> wrote:


Allen and Gary,
 
I have received a lot of emails over the past 2 or 3 years regarding Don Tate, AVM Website and numerous other unknown (to me anyway) Vietnam Veterans all of which are downright hostile in one way or the other.  As a Vietnam Veteran, albeit a Cpl in RAE and later a Major RA Inf, and much later a Chief Inspector (ACS) and retiring as a GM / CEO in both public and private sectors I have better things to do than get into a slanging match over who did what, when and how, especially since I have no knowledge of any of the incidents mentioned in the book (yes I have a copy and I have read it). 
 
Having been in Vietnam with the Australian Army, East Timor with a Federal Agency and Iraq with the UN all I can say is that war does funny things to people and each and everyone has a different perspective on what happened, where and how.  But when it comes down to the nitty gritty who really gives a crap, I don’t!  Life is too short to drink cheap wine and it is way too short to get bogged down in silly arguments with other Vets over what someone wrote, after all it is their version or their belief as to how things occurred.
 
Like you Gary I am involved in a number of Vet related activities as an Advocate and unqualified Counsellor and to be honest I am more concerned about the younger Vets coming back from Afghanistan, Iraq, East Timor and the Solomon Islands than worrying about what someone reckoned happened over 40 years ago and those that are continually discussing the Don Tate issue and his book, whether fact or fiction, is only doing a disservice to those that paid the ultimate sacrifice, not just in Vietnam but every other war that Australian troops have been engaged in and I would suggest that if everyone stopped talking about it the thing would fade away and be forgotten and everyone would be a lot happier and stress free.
 
Regards
 
Arthur Ventham RFD MBA
Cpl RAE
Major RA Inf (Ret)
Chief Inspector Border Control
GM State Government Department of Premier and Cabinet (Ret)
CEO ArMar International
 
Tel: 08-9408 6387 / Mob: 0402 008 063 / Fax: 08- 94676237 / Skype: Ozpatriot
 
Freedom isn’t free!  It carries a heavy price tag that only a few are prepared to pay.
 
From: Allen Petersen [mailto:petersaj@bigpond.net.au]
Sent: Monday, 18 November 2013 10:40 PM
To: Undisclosed-Recipient:;
Subject: HONOURABLE AND DISHONOURABLE MENTIONS IN ANZACS BETRAYED
 
From: Gary Moseley
Sent: Friday, November 15, 2013 2:02 PM
To: petersaj@bigpond.net.au
Subject:  HONOURABLE AND DISHONOURABLE MENTIONS IN ANZACS BETRAYED
 
Allen, can you distribute this to your network.
 
Gary Moseley

From: Gary Moseley < >
Date: 15 November 2013 3:56:15 pm AEST
To: BOB ELWORTHY <sthelena@outlook.com.au>
Subject: Re: YOUR EMAIL: HONOURABLE AND DISHONOURABLE MENTIONS IN ANZACS BETRAYED

Hi Bob,
 
Thanks for contacting me but I am bewildered by your response. My mention of Lawyers was not a threat but friendly advice. No publisher in Australia, and despite his denials Tate approached a few, would touch this book due to the slanderous allegations and statements he makes about a number of honourable veterans including myself. Tate can have all the conspiracy theories he likes in regard to the Army hierarchy and Politicians. He can rewrite History all he likes in a vain attempt to exaggerate his service. However that is not enough for Tate he must also denigrate and maliciously attack all those that disagree with his version of events.
 
What I want to know is how you and your Organisation can support a man who accuses his fellow soldiers of shooting and killing innocent civilians without the slightest shred of evidence. To accuse those he served alongside in 9 RAR  and 4 RAR of "being cowards then and cowards now", to denigrate the whole of 4 RAR OF "seeing and doing nothing". He also now calls fellow members of the D & E Platoon cowards, who initially supported him for recognition of the Platoon but withdrew due to the fact of his allegations of shooting of civilians and they formed the view that Tate was doing this not for the recognition of the Platoon but for his own "glory" and to sell books.
 
Tate is a narcissist who now attempts to demean others having failed his attempts to make himself out as something special.
 
Please tell me how you can support a man who calls veterans, on no evidence, curs, cunts, cowards, drunks, psychos and paedophiles. Please do not give me the usual Tate line that we called him names first. Whilst some may have most have not like me, Bigwood, Holby, Douglas, Winchester members of his company in 9 RAR etc. etc. I with a number of other Veterans manage a charity that builds schools, we are starting on our 7th, for the poor around Nui Dat, see http://www.vtvfcf.com/ .Tate's response when he found out what we were doing was that we did this because we were Paedophiles. This is the measure of the man you are supporting.
 
How the hell did you get the view that I identified myself with AVM. I did not even know they existed until recently. For the record I have lived in Vietnam for the last 5 years only returning a couple of months ago.Tate uses that tactic accusing me of being a puppet of AVM, Bob Buick or the Military Establishment, whoever that is. I have had nothing to do with them, In fact had nothing to do with all things Vietnam Veterans, apart from close friends from 4 RAR and our charity.
 
Tate is telling people I called for a boycott of the museum, I did not but again Tate lies to get  people like yourself to stick up for him.
 
I first became aware of Tate earlier this year when I stumbled upon his rantings on the Internet and was stunned by his vicious and malicious attacks on members of 4 RAR and others. I then corresponded with him and I thought the correspondence was between us. But no Tate, behind my back distributed my e mails attacking me, deriding my service and accusing me of avoiding combat. He made things public not me. Everything I have written about him he has received a copy but Tate does the opposite, recently he sent a letter to the new Government to the Minister of Defence again with slanderous allegations and character assassination about me and other Veterans. I suggest you ask Tate for a copy of that letter.
 
I am capable of independent thought and more than capable of conducting my own research. I spent 24 years as a Police Officer, 15 of which was as a Detective in Major Crime Investigation. Just as an aside Tate's so called evidence to support his more outlandish allegations do not hold up to any scrutiny. He frequently states that people support his allegations. I have checked them all and they do not. Classical example Tate originally stated that in his first contact he took on the VC by himself and this was supported by Lieutenant Avery in his book. Tate does not even get a mention in this book. He is now on his 3 rd version of this contact, I have his e mails. He has also stated that he was not on the 4 RAR nominal role in their book. His name is there and he knows it, he has a copy.

I cannot believe that you would support Tate knowing what I know and I would be happy to send you what I have discovered. I have kept all e mails with Tate. All of it is in Tate's own words in Tate's own publications on the Internet. Where I have checked facts with others, I have always advised Tate and when they do NOT corroborate him, which is always the case, he then turns on them denigrating them despite the fact that it was he who told me they would support him.
 
Tate is  a wounded Vietnam Veteran who has received ALL of his entitlements and is entitled to respect for that. He is also a Fraud and a Liar who distorted the facts, states he has evidence when he does not and resorts to personal attacks when challenged. His exaggerations are breathtaking, like his "terrible overnight flight" to hospital, it was a 15 minute Helicopter flight. His being flown home on a "filthy dirty Hercules with 50 other wounded soldiers" or when he went AWOL from a Brisbane hospital " the Police set up road blocks on every road out of Brisbane" these are but a few examples of his attempts to inflate his own importance and why people take issue with him as I have said that's fine with me but what cannot be tolerated by me and I suggest you is his unwarranted, malicious and slanderous attacks on Veterans. To use the Anzac Spirit in his book title, given the contents, is both deplorable and despicable and you promote it. Please tell me why and do not give the rubbish that scholars may be interested in it.
 
I some months ago sent Tate a document that stated that he was a Fraud and a Liar and detailed the evidence I had to support my claim. Tate"s response was not to answer the allegations, in fact he made no reply to me but went feral on the Internet attacking my character and Military Record. I am happy for you or anyone else to check on my integrity, character and honesty.
 
I am afraid you have done yourself and your Organisation a grave disservice by supporting Tate. I suggest you go to a D Company 4 RAR and a B Company 9RAR reunion and you will see the depth of disgust at Tate in the Veterans Community. It should tell you something when Tate would not dare to attend nor would he be welcome.
 
Do not fall for the trap of defending him just because AVM attacks him.
 
You suggest that I should distance my self from other peoples comments. None of my comments about Tate are either libellous or unsubstantiated, so I see no need to change my view.
 
You Sir have been conned by Tate's, poor bugger me act. I suggest you should do some research before lecturing me. Tate uses a clerical error that also affected 41 others from 4 RAR to build a case to accuse all and sundry of attempting to subvert his service records. His and his only. I suggest you speak with the other 40. Do not be offended Tate is good at distortion and many have been hoodwinked by him, given time all eventually see the real Tate.
 
With the exception of a very few Tate is despised by all he served with and many other Veterans.
 
I suggest that you stop defending the indefensible merely because a website you do not like attacks him.
 
No doubt Tate will contact you and no doubt it will contain nothing more than a personal attack on me or repeating this bit of evidence or that person agrees with me, ALL of which has been already discredited.
 
Gary Moseley.
Regimental Number 2787510.
L/Cpl 4 RAR
2nd Lieutenant, Army Aviation..
Commercial Helicopter Pilot.
Superintendent of Police (retired)
 
Sent from my iPad
 

On 13 Nov 2013, at 10:47 am, "BOB ELWORTHY" <sthelena@outlook.com.au> wrote:
Dear Gary,
 
I refer to your email in relation to your objections to the NVVM conducting a Don Tate book launch. I hold a different opinion to yours on whether the museum should conduct such a book launch, however I am responding to your email because I give you credit for having the courage to put your name to your email.
 
By identifying yourself you show that you are a person of substance, unlike the other anonymous cowards who prefer to hide behind the Australian Veterans Matters website, using pseudonyms to hide their identity, or others who resort to unsigned abusive and obscene letters or anonymous telephone calls.
 
Gary,unfortunately you resorted to a veiled threat in your email and I quote I suggest you brief a very good senior counsel because we certainly areÂ. Given that you have identified yourself, and your comments have aligned you with the AVM,  might I suggest that you consider distancing yourself from the libellous and unsubstantiated claims about the NVVM made by ZION?
 
Because I can assure you that those comments have attracted significant attention.   
 
Regards,
 
Bob Elworthy
State President VVAA Victoria
 
Sent from Windows Mail

 
 
 





Logged
Pages: [1] Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2006-2008, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!