Thanks for those links.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Brockman
I completely agree wit the guy on t his part:
Quote:
First let me tell you that this is a case of hypocrisy and not democracy.
Printable View
Thanks for those links.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Brockman
I completely agree wit the guy on t his part:
Quote:
First let me tell you that this is a case of hypocrisy and not democracy.
Yep.Quote:
Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1
;) Club racing & Historic car racing... is a much better way to spend your time @ the track.
:D For spectators, ALMS offers a better variety of cars, friendlier venue, and they run on the same tracks that you can also enjoy. Sebring & Road Atlanta for example.
:dozey: Formula One has become too political to really enjoy anymore.
:s mokin: Trumper
Why now? Perhaps because he "is pushing ahead with his strategy to improve his historical reputation by creating the sport as it ought to be - rather than the sport he had fashioned..."Quote:
Originally Posted by ioan
You're a little naïve ioan.Quote:
Originally Posted by ioan
1) An F1 GP is not included on the calendar unless it is approved by the FIA. It is the FIA F1 World Championship after all.
2) Max and Bernie co-existed quite happily until recently, and had done for decades. The regulatory and commercial aspects of the sport were carved up between them.
3) The support of Mohammad Bin Sulayem appears to have been crucial to Max at the EGM.
4) A couple of weeks after the EGM Max & Bernie are at loggerheads and Abu Dhabi has a GP.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1
200k euro :laugh:
Thats about the budget for a Clio isn't it. Bloody joke.
Mind you, Clio drivers in F1 cars......
Now, that's an idea. Where's Tom Onslow-cole when you need him.
The first part of that statement is true, the 2nd one is just a supposition.Quote:
Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1
You are the naive one, but acknowledging that is a bit hard for you.Quote:
Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1
Bernie is the one whi picks the place and the FIA is the one who checks if the venue ot's up to the FIA standards (mainly safety ones).
It was Bernie who wanted a circuit in Abu Dhabi, not Max. :p :
Yep, while max was taking care of the sporting and technical side of the sport, Bernie was stuffing his pockets, It's well known.Quote:
Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1
And the point being?! :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1
There is no point, really. as you have witnessed some people were against Mosley (notably Bernie Ecclestone, the so called "friend") and the others were for him?! What's the catch in your reasoning?
As it it's big news?! The GP was already agreed one year ago. And work on it's structure is well underway. I have already seen it's plans and done some computation of some metallic structures that will be used there. It's not like max decided to thank his middle east supporters and as recognition gave the a F1 GP!Quote:
Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1
You are really making me :laugh: !
What a contribution to the thread!Quote:
Originally Posted by Knock-on
The ones that are skinning Max for not making motorsport affordable are now in arms with him because it might get too affordable! :rotflamo:
Make up your mind people! :p :
Mohammed is pretty happy with himself .
If he bribed the member groups , then there is a problem .
If he merely talked sense to them , then we have proper democratic process .
I've not seen the bribery allegations all over the front pages , so perhaps we should figure there was no bribery .
Opinion, conjecture, hypothisisQuote:
Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1
speculation, and bias!
Don't let the broken exauast pipe hit you on the head on your way out!Quote:
Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1
I disagree with that statement. you have absolutely no proof of that. So quit whining!Quote:
Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1
Quote:
Originally Posted by ioan
http://www.sportspromedia.com/mosley.htmQuote:
In 2004 there was certainly one great change in Mosley’s life when he finally became independently wealthy. It is believed he received a gratis payment from Bernie Ecclestone of US$300 million as a token of his appreciation. The influx of money signalled a move to the tax haven of Monaco. In England he would have paid 40 per cent tax on the windfall; in Monaco nothing. So in March 2004 Mosley made the decision to relocate there from London. But instead of coming clean and saying he was leaving England for tax reasons, he concocted the most amazing (and untrue) story: he claimed to have been advised that a fatal accident in a race event under FIA jurisdiction within the European Union could result in his arrest. It followed the introduction of a new European arrest warrant. Mosley said: “I have been advised that it would be prudent to relocate outside EU jurisdiction.” It was the most amazing nonsense, swallowed by just about everyone. Of course it would have been embarrassing should Ecclestone’s payment to him have become public.
Happy to oblige, but laughing while sticking your head in the sand is not advisable :pQuote:
Originally Posted by ioan
You're comparing a supposed 300 millions with sure billions, made during the same period.
It's like saying that a guy on the minimum wage is filthy rich because he managed to earn a few millions during his whole life.
No, not comparing, just illustrating the point that, contrary to your view, Bernie was not the only one "stuffing his pockets" while supposedly Max was working so hard, unpaid, for the good of the sport.Quote:
Originally Posted by ioan
I wasn't aware that we were supposed to run posts past you to ensure the thread was maintained to your standards.Quote:
Originally Posted by ioan
However, I will answer your post?
You are, in fact, completely wrong as per normal. The embarrassing frequency of having to demonstrate this is becoming quite boring.
Where have I "skinned" Max for making the sport too expensive? I have always believed that the Sport will spend what is availiable to it. I believe trying to restrict budgets will be wholly innefective and lead to the most sucessfull teams being the ones that manage to manipulate and break the fiscal rules.
So, that is completely the opposite of what you have claimed although you will never acknowledge it ( yet again ) :rolleyes:
I also implied that 200k euro is not enough money to run an effective international team in any series.
Can you tell me how many people are involved in the smallest GP2 teams and how much it costs to transport, feed and house them for a season.
Forget about the actual car, race entry, tyres, fuel, pay etc. Just the logistics has blown the budget :laugh:
The 2nd one is currently written in F1 history FFS! An F1 littered with mixed messages and poor rule making/decisions by the FIA president.Quote:
Originally Posted by ioan
C'mon, we don't all have our heads buried in the sand y'know! ;)
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/68669Quote:
Max Mosley was warned by Bernie Ecclestone that people had been hired to discredit him two months before his private life was exposed, it was claimed today.
Dean Attew, an intelligence consultant who formerly worked for Ecclestone and also advised Mosley, revealed that he was contacted early this year by people who wanted Mosley removed from office.
"It was clear that Max disregarded the advice and failed to realise his vulnerability. The issue for me was his total disregard for genuine advice from individuals that he knew had his best interests at heart."
Yeah! I read that, and Bernie reckoned that they would not get anything on Max because Max is simply boring.
Originally Posted by
Max Mosley was warned by Bernie Ecclestone that people had been hired to discredit him two months before his private life was exposed, it was claimed today.
Dean Attew, an intelligence consultant who formerly worked for Ecclestone and also advised Mosley, revealed that he was contacted early this year by people who wanted Mosley removed from office.
"It was clear that Max disregarded the advice and failed to realise his vulnerability. The issue for me was his total disregard for genuine advice from individuals that he knew had his best interests at heart."
Evidently Max has a pretty good handle on his vulnerabilitity!Quote:
Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1
He took this failed coup head on, and NOTHING has changed
in the pecking order at the FIA. He is still calling the shots!
I'm afraid you're correct. Max is untouchable and without accountability. The FIA has become his empire and if he wants to throw his toys out the prsam, as is happening, there is nothing to stop him.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tazio
He has grown from President to Dictator :(
A little off subject, but I see that expression quite often on this forum. What is this words meaning "Pram"Quote:
Originally Posted by Knock-on
Thanks in advance
V
If I could spell it correctly :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Tazio
Pram is short for Perambulator, a childs pushchair. Chucking your toys out means having a tantrum.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baby_transport
Very popular make is Maclaren :D
And I always believe everything that benie and his buds say, just like I believe maX, Ron Dennis, Lewis "nothing can break me" Hamilton......yada yada :beer:Quote:
Originally Posted by Tazio
You can say the same about the FOM and Bernie, on the economical side! Still you lot chose to idolize bernie while you hate Max.Quote:
Originally Posted by Knock-on
So it has been said, countries get the kind of government they deserve...
bottom line is that the Fia has max because it deserves max
F1 has bernei for the same reason
i deserve something better, but deserving got nothing to do with it
There are big differences between the organisation run by Max, and the one run by Bernie.Quote:
Originally Posted by ioan
Who on this forum idolizes Bernie? :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by ioan
I think Max is jealous of BCE - Max used to be an F1 or F2 driver, but failed, he also (like BCE) was a team owner, but failed where Bernie succeeded.
Bernie has been known to dig deep and bail out failing teams, what does Max do? Oh yes, he is forever meddling with the rules that costs the teams fortunes.
Then, he has the audacity to say he wants to cut costs, while introducing KERS, but to his set of criteria, that makes it rather inneficient!?!?!?!?
All we need now, is a shot at an F1 track where we see Max casually strolling across in front of a rapidly approaching car....
...then the FIA president will have truly come full circle! ;)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Knock-on
When you say "you could" I assume you are talking about yourself and not me?Quote:
Originally Posted by ioan
If not, please back up your post with some facts where "us lot" (which implies you are referring to me) idolize Bernie. If not, a simple apology and admit you were talking rubbish again will suffice ;)
Lastly, if you want to keep claiming Bernie is such a bad person, why not start a thread about him and let this one get back on track :p :
So Does Mosley knows identity of his enemies?
Is not the trial on NTOW going to start on July 7th?
I am curious why there has not been depositions already taken in the case that would have uncovered all the rest to be uncovered, but I am unfamiliar with how the pretrial process works in Britiain as to what you can get from the other side before a trial, so what gives? Will there be some big breaks in news that will make others very unhappy or what, will it be more mud dumped on F1 and racing? Seems to me we would all be better off without this but there is where we are headed so it seems
OTOH, maybe not, if this article has any basis:Quote:
Originally Posted by markabilly
The BBC TV Panorama programme had been very critical of the 15-year commercial rights deal Mosley had done with Ecclestone. When it interviewed Mosley for the programme, the FIA president was very surprised by the interviewer, Mark Killick’s knowledge of the secret agreements. In a famous exchange on television, Killick asked Mosley whether he was “trying to defend the indefensible”. Quick as a flash Mosley told him “quite the reverse, you’re attacking the unattackable”.
After the programme aired, Mosley told Terry Lovell: “I wanted to sue, but Bernie said it wasn’t worth it.” For whatever reasons Mosley didn’t sue. In reality he couldn’t take the chance of all these secret agreements being brought out into the open.
All in all the FIA lost US$1.7 billion from 1992 to 2007. One observer says: “Only a halfwit with no financial knowledge would have signed those three deals. They handed Ecclestone and McNally nearly US$2 billion of the FIA’s cash."
Mosley was never open and truthful about any of these deals and had it not been for the BBC journalists from Panorama they would never have become publicly known.
Despite all this largesse towards Ecclestone, Mosley was re-elected with ease in the FIA presidency elections of 1997, 2001 and 2005.
His re-election gave him confidence to push the boundaries of proprietary
http://www.sportspromedia.com/mosley.htm
Suppose that the NOTW starts digging into that stuff during the trial, as after all, max says his privacy is violated, damaging his image and good standing.....then why should this info not be admissible as well at a minnimu on the question of max's character and his image?
Also explains that while max and Benrie are not good friends right now, it is really meaningless when all things are considered, that they will "work things out for the good of their revenue" But the arrgoance of those deals may well explain the arrogance that lead to the "photos and videos" as well as his arrogant unwillingness to walk away.......
Odd that max 's job officially pays nothing.......but does it really?
One mans
"arrogant unwillingness" is another mans
ardent stick-to-it-tiveness!
As any good lawyer would be quick to point out! :p :
(not that it has anything to do with this civil case)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tazio
For me it was something of a question as to exactly how the relationship between Bernie and max worked, and adament or "ardent stick to it" nature of Max, and how he could survive and just how he could roll through this much bad stuff like Bill Clinton rolled through the "I never had sex with that woman, I smoked but never inhaled" episodes with such impunity. The article is not that well written as it lacks structure and readability for my taste, but the premises provide some insight to the extent the underlying facts be true.
And just how much of this might leak out on this upcoming trial that max is so adament in his pursuit--if i were defending this case, my attack would be to aim where it would hurt the most, his true character of selling himself and buying others, and damages can not be had for damaging that which was already corrupted and damaged.
Hence he would have been better off with even people like me saying it was wrong to be invading his privacy, slipping through the noose with that vote, rather than to be filing suit and having his character to be factually shown to be unworthy in general public---all to keep a job that allegedly does not pay.
There may be an attempt to discredit Max. Like you, I don't know British Civil Law.Quote:
Originally Posted by markabilly
However, In the U.S.of A. that information would not be specific enough to this case.
You may be the biggest crook in the world, but that is irrelevant to damages for invasion of privacy.
It may affect the amount of the settlement, but thats not what Max is after!
In fact I believe The question that you and everyone else wants answered is:
Is there enough dirt to stop this corporally whacked Barrister from following through with this trial,
and specifcally what is it? If there is, than I guess we won't get the specifics
Nothing would surprise me at this point however!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tazio
That "You may be the biggest crook in the world, but that is irrelevant to damages for invasion of privacy." would depend on what damages are available under brit law, for example is it mental anquish for being held up to public riducule, public disclosure of embarrassing private information or publicity which puts him/her in a false light to the public. He seems to be saying that he did not do any nazi stuff, he was presented in a false light so he alleges?
That would seem to open up all sorts of doors, would it not?.
But what is the correct "light" for comparing the before and after?
Further such evidence might well be available for impeachment, and in the good old USA, such evidence comes in all the time, often with a limiting instruction that the jury only consider the fact that you are a crook, but that merely being a crook does not mean you were not damaged. Well, the judge can limit it all he wants but damage done cause the evidence is now in that the victim is not so innocent
Plus it might well be admissible on his vague allegations of some sort of set up or entrapment, as to his state of mind. You did it because you been getting away with so much other stuff, you have lost the fear of getting caught
Hard to argue damages, when he never lost his job.....
But as you say, "Is there enough dirt to stop this corporally whacked Barrister from following through with this trial,
and specifcally what is it? If there is, than I guess we won't get the specifics
Nothing would surprise me at this point however!",, Well if Max is going to prove anything as to damages and so forth, he will have to testify, and if the proper predicate be laid, then all sorts of stuff can leak in during cross exam.
OTOH, perhaps we shall also learn the person who may have put the dogs on old Max's trail, resulting in all of this. Was it some PI firm hired by Mac, or was it bern, or was it ?????????? Whoever it is, will get a big black eye, and has helped pull the sport into disrepute over some private shenigans that should have had nothing to do with the public
Fair enough! Let's see how it plays out. Then I'll get back to you!
Alrighty then! :p : The trial is under way, and is going the way these things generally do. Max is pressing on!( no surprise to me) Although the defense hasn't had a chance to present it's side, or cross examine these participants. The evidence looks damning to this impartial observer! I'm stll waitingQuote:
Originally Posted by markabilly
"We were constantly laughing and we enjoy what we do – it's like children playing cowboys and Indians. It's adults playing, having fun," Woman A said.
"Afterwards, it's the best feeling in the world. It's a natural high and the endorphins kick in whether you are giving it or receiving it. It's as if you've just run a marathon."
Woman A, who is to face cross-examination this afternoon, said there was never any suggestion of a Nazi theme.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
She said she was shocked that the article appeared in the News of the World and that Woman E had been the informant.
Woman B's voice cracked and she started crying as she said: "I was horrified, I didn't believe anyone in the scene would do something like that. One thing we always try is to make sure everything remains private."
She added that the role play had a prison setting rather than a military one and the laughter on the video showed no one was taking it too seriously.
"Grotesque? I don't think so," Woman B told the court.
"It may not be everyone's cup of tea but it's something I enjoy in the privacy of my own space.
"Brutal? Certainly not. We never get any permanent markings or anything like that."
Woman D said she was not always paid for attending Mosley's parties, adding that she was not "financially dependent" on Mosley or men like him, since she was completing a PhD and received a tax-free stipend of £14,000.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2008...d=networkfront
btw this is a court transcript, in case someone feels the need to attack the source.
Mark your on the ropes on this one, taking a standing 8 count! :D
Oh my word! :eek: This does not bode well for the NoW!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Myler told the court the News of the World would consider it justifiable to film Mosley having an S&M sex orgy with five prostitutes even if there had not been the alleged Nazi dimension.
He accepted that it was an invasion of privacy to secretly film someone having sex, adding that it had happened to him personally and he had not liked it, but said it was justified in a matter of great public interest."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You've got four of the five women, plus Max testifying that not only was it not a N@zi theme, but considered it to be just a harmless night of getting their rocks off.
I am now prepared to take sig bets on the disposition of this case!
At least Max has "accepted that, as a trustee of the FIA, he had a formal duty to avoid any appearance of improper behaviour."
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle4289840.ece
Nazi conotations or not this whole court case is bad for the FIA and by its association to F1 can't be good.
Max has dragged this out for his family and the FIA, and has shown no consideration to others but himself. Thats is what sickens me the most about this. When is he going to do the right thing and just leave the public eye and his job with the news of the world, then he can carry on doing what the hell he likes......
We don't need this associated to any sport. Its bad enough he got caught, whats worse is his fight to make it seem less than it was.....and it was not good for his reputation or any one associated with him. Wish he would do the decent thing and leave.
I do recall someone saying Max relishes conflict. As a former barrister it seems he is relishing this court case rather than considering the wider implications.Quote:
Originally Posted by MAX_THRUST
I suppose that if someone publicized your sexual life as having Nazi connotations you would rather go and hide instead of trying to clear your name and uphold your reputation?! :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1
Everyone talks from the point of view of someone who isn't touched by the events.
Try and put yourself in his position, let's see what you would do.
I have never argued that Max does not have the right to defend himself in court.Quote:
Originally Posted by ioan
Clearly, the Max Mrs Mosely sees before her now aint the guy she married!
Does ANYONE think it right to hide dirty secrets from your wife/partner? And his Kids! If he feels hard done by because this came out, there is a real simple rule of thumb...
Dont fecking do it in the first place! Numpty!
What about the Aryan race then? Oh, no, didn't hear or remember that guvn'or. How frightfully convenient is that then?
WHo has all the integrity now then.
Plus the £35k for the hooker (they are not hookers! :laugh :) and the all expenses trips to Monaco.
All this appropriate behaviour of the FIA president is it?
Off with his knackers I say! :D