Difference between revisions of "Talk:Bankole Timothy"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(→Blanking text: How exactly do you come to the conclusion that Bengtsson's report is "baseless"?) |
JamieRDornan (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
:::I rely upon renowned Swedish journalist [[Jan-Olof Bengtsson]] for this well-referenced report on [[Bankole Timothy]]. Could you please tell us who you interviewed in Sierra Leone, in South Africa and in London; what did they say about [[Bankole Timothy]] and the meeting with [[Bernt Carlsson]] on 21 December 1988; and, how exactly do you come to the conclusion that Bengtsson's report is "baseless"?--[[User:Patrick Haseldine|Patrick Haseldine]] ([[User talk:Patrick Haseldine|talk]]) 21:51, 21 March 2016 (GMT) | :::I rely upon renowned Swedish journalist [[Jan-Olof Bengtsson]] for this well-referenced report on [[Bankole Timothy]]. Could you please tell us who you interviewed in Sierra Leone, in South Africa and in London; what did they say about [[Bankole Timothy]] and the meeting with [[Bernt Carlsson]] on 21 December 1988; and, how exactly do you come to the conclusion that Bengtsson's report is "baseless"?--[[User:Patrick Haseldine|Patrick Haseldine]] ([[User talk:Patrick Haseldine|talk]]) 21:51, 21 March 2016 (GMT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | ::::You do not address the simple question: do you in your honest opinion, today, find that this article correctly suggests De Beers were behind the bombing at Lockerbie and that Mr Timothy was aware and complicit? As the person responsible for posting this, it is surely your duty to ensure it is satisfactorily researched, that you have done your due dil and that it in no way constitutes libel. Looking at your contributions, it seems you have something of a passionate interest or obsession with Lockerbie and focusing on certain individuals. I do not mean to demean you, but this is all without merit. I am tiring of the back and forth, I thought this was a wiki but you insist on 'your story'. I simply advise you revisit it as it is honestly incorrect. Best--[[User:JamieRDornan|JamieRDornan]] ([[User talk:Patrick Haseldine|talk]]) 07:38, 22 March 2016 (GMT) | ||
Revision as of 07:38, 22 March 2016
Blanking text
Your first edit on WS, Jamie, involves blanking text on Bankole Timothy's biography. What is your interest in this subject?--Patrick Haseldine (talk) 19:28, 21 March 2016 (GMT)
- You say Jamie you've "just returned from Sierra Leone, SA, and London and conducted a series of interviews there and found this [text on Bankole Timothy's biography] is baseless". As someone who spent 5 years in Sierra Leone, was on the South Africa desk in the FCO and authored this biography of Bankole Timothy, I believe you have a De Beers connexion. Am I right?--Patrick Haseldine (talk) 20:05, 21 March 2016 (GMT)
- Hi Patrick. You are mistaken here. I have no association with DeBeers or anything like that. Simply, is it your honest opinion today that this was the case? JamieRDornan (talk) 20:51, 21 March 2016 (GMT)
- I rely upon renowned Swedish journalist Jan-Olof Bengtsson for this well-referenced report on Bankole Timothy. Could you please tell us who you interviewed in Sierra Leone, in South Africa and in London; what did they say about Bankole Timothy and the meeting with Bernt Carlsson on 21 December 1988; and, how exactly do you come to the conclusion that Bengtsson's report is "baseless"?--Patrick Haseldine (talk) 21:51, 21 March 2016 (GMT)
- You do not address the simple question: do you in your honest opinion, today, find that this article correctly suggests De Beers were behind the bombing at Lockerbie and that Mr Timothy was aware and complicit? As the person responsible for posting this, it is surely your duty to ensure it is satisfactorily researched, that you have done your due dil and that it in no way constitutes libel. Looking at your contributions, it seems you have something of a passionate interest or obsession with Lockerbie and focusing on certain individuals. I do not mean to demean you, but this is all without merit. I am tiring of the back and forth, I thought this was a wiki but you insist on 'your story'. I simply advise you revisit it as it is honestly incorrect. Best--JamieRDornan (talk) 07:38, 22 March 2016 (GMT)
