Discussion:
Cuban dissidents are talking about unity,
(too old to reply)
PL
2011-04-18 16:07:00 UTC
Permalink
Posted on Sunday, 04.17.11

Cuban dissidents are talking about unity

But internal bickering and rivalries need to be resolved before they can
form a broad opposition front.
By Juan O. Tamayo
***@elnuevoherald.com

Believing that the time is ripe for a new push against the Raúl Castro
government, Cuban dissidents are working to organize 12 recently freed
political prisoners into the nucleus of a broad opposition front, united
around a set of demands for basic freedoms.

The united front could give the dissident movement a more powerful
voice, earn it increased respect from the international community and
perhaps draw more support from everyday Cubans, said the organizers of
the effort.

But they acknowledge that the campaign will be onerously difficult, with
the opposition movement deeply divided and Castro making it clear that
he will not embrace any of the political and social changes likely to be
proposed by his critics.

"Never before was there such a solid consensus on the need for change.
Practically all of us are on the same line,'' said leading dissident
Hector Palacios. "But now almost no one has any hope that the government
will agree.''

The idea of forging a united opposition front has been a longtime dream
of Cuban dissidents but has been increasingly discussed in Havana over
for the past two or three months, five dissidents told El Nuevo Herald
by phone from Havana.

"We do have tendency toward convergence," said Elizardo Sanchez Santa
Cruz, president of the Cuban Commission for Human Rights and National
Reconciliation. Added dissident Rene Gomez Manzano, "Yes, the idea exists."

The timing is right, all the dissidents argued, because the 3-year-old
Castro government itself has acknowledged the need for change, facing a
stagnant economy, rising official corruption, an increasingly frustrated
youth and a loss of revolutionary zeal.

"We are passing through a unique opportunity in the history of Castro
Cuba,'' independent journalist Guillermo Farinas told El Nuevo Herald by
telephone from his home in the central city of Santa Clara.

Last year's death of political prisoner Orlando Zapata Tamayo after a
long hunger strike brought Cuba a shower of international condemnations.
And Farinas' own follow-on strike helped force Castro into unprecedented
talks with the Catholic Church.

Several dissidents already have launched or re-launched initiatives for
change.

Oswaldo Payá said he handed former U.S. President Jimmy Carter during
his visit last month an initiative titled "All Cubans" that calls for
freedom of expression and access to the news media as the first step
leading to free and open elections.

The driving force behind the Varela Project, which gathered 25,000
signatures for its proposal for political reforms, Payá also has been
collecting signatures since October for Project Heredia, which demands
that the government end all restrictions and sanctions on Cubans' travel
abroad.

Two of Cuba's best-known dissidents, Vladimiro Roca and Martha Beatriz
Roque, joined 10 others in December in signing "Future for Cuba," a
document that included 20 recommendations to Castro for easing Cuba's
economic mess. More than 2,000 people signed it later, Roque said.

Hector Palacios, head of the Liberal Union, said his group is again
updating its "Project for Change,'' presented in 1999, 2006 and again in
2008. "The government is talking about change, so it's time to propose
more changes," he said.

The most ambitious proposal came from Farinas, who argues that the 12
recently released political prisoners who remain in Cuba — the rest went
into exile in Spain — should form the nucleus of an opposition front
that also would include 35 other well-known dissidents.

The 12 include top dissidents Oscar Elias Biscet, Angel Moya and Hector
Maseda, freed in recent weeks after spending eight years in prison. And
the number 12 would be a nod to the 12 Apostles of Christ that might be
helpful in a Christian country like Cuba, Farinas said.

"It's time to gather around a nucleus of 12 people and a set of mutually
agreed-on principles,'' Farinas told El Nuevo Herald.

Other dissidents warned that the opposition movement is deeply divided.
Creating an opposition front "is an idea that I respect, but right now
the dissident movement is more divided than ever,'' Roque said.

Dispatches sent by U.S. diplomats in Havana in 2009 and made public by
Wikileaks sites describe Cuba's traditional dissidents as old, with
little popular support and penetrated by government spies who easily
exacerbate their already sharp internal rivalries.

Farinas argues, however, that the years the 12 dissidents spent in
prison makes them even better candidates to lead a national movement
"because they have not had the opportunity to have personal problems
with other members of the opposition.''

Biscet, a black physician regarded as the most influential of the 12
dissidents, said he has told Farinas the time is not right to push for a
united movement. But the time will come, he added, because Cubans are
increasingly realizing that the island must change.

"We have to work slowly," he said. "It's like wooing a girl from the
countryside. One must start little by little."

http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/04/17/v-fullstory/2172771/cuban-dissidents-are-talking-about.html
CubaFAQ
2011-04-18 17:24:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by PL
Posted on Sunday, 04.17.11
Cuban dissidents are talking about unity
Easier said than done. From a top secret report to his superiors, the
current chief of the US Interest Section in Havana, Johnathon Farrar
lamented:

Whether or not the opposition organizations have agendas that can be
made to appeal to a broad range of interests on the island, they must
first begin to achieve some level of unity of purpose as an
opposition, or at least stop spending so much energy trying to
undercut one another. Despite claims that they represent "thousands of
Cubans," we see little evidence of such support, at least from the
admittedly limited vantage point we have in Havana. When we question
opposition leaders about their programs, we do not see platforms
designed to appeal to a broad cross section of Cuban society. Rather,
the greatest effort is directed at obtaining enough resources to keep
the principal organizers and their key supporters living from day to
day. One political party organization told the COM quite openly and
frankly that it needed resources to pay salaries and presented him
with a budget in the hope that USINT would be able to cover it. With
seeking resources as a primary concern, the next most important
pursuit seems to be to limit or marginalize the activities of
erstwhile allies, thus preserving power and access to scarce
resources....

The current feud among the leadership of the Agenda para la Transicion
is a case in point. When the organization was founded one year ago,
it was ground breaking in that it brought together an unusually broad
array of dissidents. The only significant groups missing were those
of Oswaldo Paya, who was invited to join but refused, and the Arco
Progresista led by Manuel Cuesta Morua, a group that is considered by
other dissidents to be a "tame" opposition organization that is
controlled by the GOC. However, after only a year in which its signal
accomplishment was presenting a prize to a young graphic artist for
designing a logo for the organization, the Agenda para la Transicion
seems close to flying apart. The crux of the dispute appears to be a
power struggle between Hector Palacios and several followers on one
side and Martha Beatriz Roque and Vladimiro Roca and some of their
followers on the other. But the main problem lies in the fact that,
while the concept of unifying the opposition under one umbrella
organization has a great deal of merit, the members have not been
able to overcome the challenge of keeping several very strong and
uncompromising personalities working together. The splits that would
be natural among the members of such a group are aggravated by active
measures being taken by Cuban state security, which works to coopt
certain members and infiltrate the organization with its own agents
whose job it is to stoke any discord that exists.

"The US and the Role of the Opposition in Cuba (Full text from
WikiLeaks)" at https://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.cuba/msg/366f644b838b0179?hl=en

Dan
Visit my CUBA: Issues & Answers website at its new home:
http://www3.sympatico.ca/danchristienses/CubaFAQ.html
PL
2011-04-18 18:17:21 UTC
Permalink
On 18/04/2011 19:24, CubaFAQ wrote:

Who wrote? danchristienses sounds a lot like Dan Christensen and
CubaFAQ.html gives the name of Dan's site: "Cuba: issues and ..."
Post by CubaFAQ
Post by PL
Posted on Sunday, 04.17.11
Cuban dissidents are talking about unity
Easier said than done.
a necessity that will happen

On why the cause of the Cuban dissidents isn't widely known in Cuba:

Castro never allowed them access to explain their views. Never even
stated what they said.
Foul attacks. No more.
Recently they have had to start address the bloggers AND the points they
raised.

There is no freedom of speech, no freedom of organization in Cuba.
The CDR, police, SDE ... all ensure the repression is kept up.

See:
http://cubasde.impela.net/
http://cubarepresion.impela.net/
http://cubacdr.impela.net/

Note: the regime is a lot closer to nazi practices than any of these
non-violent dissidents.

On the spread of the dissdent movement:

The diplomatic chatter in the wikileaks indeed indicated the rise of a
new generation that is taking the movement to the next level.

This new generation is feedong on the discontent of the Cuban people and
hopes that the will "stay and struggle" instead of emograte.

On the polls that for years have shown that Cubans want an end to the
regime:

2009

Posted on Monday, 11.16.09
Poll finds Cubans unhappy with island's direction
By LESLEY CLARK
***@MiamiHerald.com"
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CubaVerdad/message/48179

2007

"Poll: 79% of Cubans think Castro gov't can't fix problems
Updated 11/19/2007 7:51 AM |
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2007-11-18-cubapoll_N.htm?csp=34

2006

Posted on Fri, Dec. 15, 2006

CUBA
Gallup poll: 47% of Cubans approve of Castro regime
An independent poll of Cubans shows they want more freedom and
opportunities, but many still support Fidel and Ra l Castro.
BY PABLO BACHELET
***@MiamiHerald.com
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CubaVerdad/message/27426

Castro's regime acknowledging dissent for the first time:

http://prensacubana.e-datalink.net/?s=Yoani+Sanchez&search=Search

Worldwide support with awards from lots of human rights organizations

See:
http://cubadissident.impela.net/
http://damasdeblanco.impela.net/
http://los75.impela.net/

Like:
The Sakharov Prize:
http://damasdeblanco.impela.net/?s=Premio+Sakharov&search=Search

Nobel Prize nominations:
http://los75.impela.net/2011/03/un-merecido-nobel-para-oscar-elias-biscet/
http://cubadissident.impela.net/2010/03/cuban-dissident-nominated-for-nobel-peace-prize/

Journalism awards.
Just one example: Yoani Sanchez
http://cubadissident.impela.net/?s=Sanchez+premio&search=Search

Deal with it Dan, every day the dissident movement grows, gets better
known in Cuba and gets more support

On repression by the Castro regime

The Castro repression is very well documented.
Here alone you can find thousands of articles that expose your lies:
http://cubarepresion.impela.net

Amnesty International on repression in Cuba:
https://encrypted.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&biw=1024&bih=635&q=amnesty+international+repression+Cuba&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=

But according to Dan Christensen none of the above is "real".
Just shows what a liar he is.

On political prisoners in Cuba:

The prisoners of conscience still under sentence in Cuba:
Some are on "parole" (licensia extrapenal) and can be put back in jail.
For a list see:
http://los75.impela.net/los-75-donde-estan/

and there are still lots of political prisoners in Cuba not (yet)
adopted by Amnesty International as "prisoners of conscience"

In march alone 260 people were arrested and (mostly) released after a
short while.
http://www.cubaverdad.net/weblog/2011/04/mas-de-260-opositores-fueron-detenidos-en-el-mes-de-marzo/

Lots of political prisoners remain.

Also see:
http://www.cubaverdad.net/weblog/category/espanol/prisionero-politico/
http://www.cubaverdad.net/weblog/category/espanol/preso-politico-2/
http://www.cubaverdad.net/weblog/category/english/political-prisoner-2/


Mass deportations:

"Spain: Around 30 former Cuban political prisoners and 200 relatives to
be brought to Madrid
April 7, 2011 |Jorge Sainz, The Associated Press
http://www.weyburnreview.com/article/GB/20110407/CP01/304079931/-1/weyburn0102/spain-around-30-former-cuban-political-prisoners-and-200-relatives&template=cpArt
http://cubafaq.impela.net/2011/04/spain-around-30-former-cuban-political-prisoners-and-200-relatives-to-be-brought-to-madrid/


"El Gobierno trae a España en secreto a 50 presos cubanos y a sus familias
Exteriores fleta un vuelo para 260 personas y prepara alojamientos en
Madrid y Soria; algunos opositores fueron excarcelados hace unos días
CRUZ MORCILLO / MADRID
Día 07/04/2011
http://www.abc.es/20110407/espana/abcp-gobierno-trae-espana-secreto-20110407.html"
CubaFAQ
2011-04-18 20:43:02 UTC
Permalink
Who wrote? danchristienses  sounds a lot like Dan Christensen and
CubaFAQ.html gives the name of Dan's site: "Cuba: issues and ..."
After 10 years, my CubaFAQ website still has Paul Lamot (aka PL)
shitting his pants! To see why, visit it at http://www3.sympatico.ca/danchristienses/CubaFAQ.html

(You use my name; I use yours. That's fair.)
Post by CubaFAQ
Post by PL
Posted on Sunday, 04.17.11
Cuban dissidents are talking about unity
Easier said than done.
a necessity that will happen
The historic record isn't good. Too much ego and greed, and not enough
vision and leadership. Face it, Fidel and Raul are a tough act to
follow.
Castro never allowed them access to explain their views. Never even
stated what they said.
[snip]

What would they say? Again, since your snipped it, your man in Havana
reported to his superiors that:

"When we question opposition leaders about their programs, we do not
see platforms designed to appeal to a broad cross section of Cuban
society. Rather, the greatest effort is directed at obtaining enough
resources to keep the principal organizers and their key supporters
living from day to day... With seeking resources as a primary
concern, the next most important pursuit seems to be to limit or
marginalize the activities of erstwhile allies, thus preserving power
and access to scarce resources."
"The US and the Role of the Opposition in Cuba (Full text from
WikiLeaks)" at https://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.cuba/msg/366f644b838b0179?hl=en

They are too busy fighting among themselves over money to come up with
any coherent alternative to Cuban socialism. Maybe they know it's
hopeless.
The diplomatic chatter in the wikileaks indeed indicated the rise of a
new generation that is taking the movement to the next level.
Not really. Again, since your snipped it, Farrar also reported:

"Without some true epiphany among the opposition leadership and a
lessening in official repression of its activities, the traditional
dissident movement is not likely to supplant the Cuban government.
The dissidents have, and will continue to perform, a key role in
acting as the conscience of Cuba and deserve our support in that
role. But we will need to look elsewhere, including within the
government itself, to spot the most likely successors to the Castro
regime...

"Younger individuals, including bloggers, musicians, and performing
and plastic artists do not belong to identifiable organizations,
though they are much better at taking 'rebellious' stands with greater
popular appeal. However, these individuals are still tightly
controlled by the GOC, eschew the label of "dissident," and do not
seem to aspire to any leadership role. [Your pals have give
"dissidents" a bad name!]

"We believe it is the younger generation of 'non-traditional
dissidents, XXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXX that is likely to have a greater
long term impact on post-Castro Cuba. However, the most likely
immediate successors to the Castro regime will probably come from
within the middle ranks of the government itself."

So much for leadership potential from your "new generation."
Posted on Monday, 11.16.09
Poll finds Cubans unhappy with island's direction
By LESLEY CLARK
Already debunked here. This is from the International Republican
Institution which is controlled by that disgraced US political party
that invaded Iraq based on lies, killing hundreds of thousands of
civilians. In cahoots with their "bankster" cronies, they perpetrated
the largest financial fraud in human history. The world economy may
take generations to recover it. Their leader, George Bush, is even
wanted for war crimes!
2007
"Poll: 79% of Cubans think Castro gov't can't fix problems
Updated 11/19/2007 7:51 AM |http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2007-11-18-cubapoll_N.htm?csp=34
From the IRI again. Get real!
2006
Posted on Fri, Dec. 15, 2006
CUBA
Gallup poll: 47% of Cubans approve of Castro regime
An independent poll of Cubans shows they want more freedom and
opportunities, but many still support Fidel and Ra l Castro.
BY PABLO BACHELET
A poll by another Washington DC-based organization, and therefore
suspect. Even so, they reported:

"Cubans held their health and educational systems in high regard. For
instance, 96 percent said healthcare was available to all regardless
of income, compared with 42 percent who felt the same way in Latin
America."

As such, Cubans are not likely to embraced Latin American-style
capitalism any time soon.
Bullshit. These traitorous mercenaries have always been denounced by
all levels of Cuban society. Your colleague posted an example just the
other day of a spontaneous demonstration of the disgust for a just
released "dissident" in a small town.
Worldwide support with awards from lots of human rights organizations
[snip more of the same]

They have so little popular support that, as you yourself were once
forced to concede, these "dissident" groups of yours would not even
exist with foreign, mostly US bankrolling:

"To be able to function they [Cuban dissidents] need aid...They can
only function with international help... The US aid gives them the
means to survive."
https://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.cuba/msg/3b60f00005050898?h&hl=en

And as your man in Havana began his top secret report:

"As the Raul Castro government of Cuba (GOC) appears to have settled
into a position of undisputed authority internally, it is worth asking
what the Cuban political opposition is doing and the role it may play
in the future. Two recent op-ed pieces in the international press
that have infuriated dissident leaders argue that the answers are: not
much and none.... Though dissidents have reacted very negatively to
the articles in the international press, the fact is that they contain
more than a grain of truth and it would have been better if the
criticism had been taken as a wake-up call."
Some are on "parole" (licensia extrapenal) and can be put back in jail.
For a list see:http://los75.impela.net/los-75-donde-estan/
They weren't pardoned for their crimes as illegal US agents; they were
paroled. Those who did not go into exile are still subject to Cuban
laws and the terms of their parole.
and there are still lots of political prisoners in Cuba not (yet)
adopted by Amnesty International as "prisoners of conscience"
In march alone 260 people were arrested and (mostly) released after a
short while.http://www.cubaverdad.net/weblog/2011/04/mas-de-260-opositores-fueron...
Lots of political prisoners remain.
[more of the same]

Already debunked here. Even according to Amnesty International, there
are no more so-called "prisoners of conscience" in Cuba. See: "No
'prisoners of conscience' in Cuba" at
https://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.cuba/msg/1745da0b272f08ad?hl=en

Dan
Visit my CUBA: Issues & Answers website at its new home:
http://www3.sympatico.ca/danchristienses/CubaFAQ.html
PL
2011-04-18 21:04:01 UTC
Permalink
EXPOSING DAN CHRISTENSEN'S PERSONAL SLANDEROUS ATTACK ON ME AND CUBAFAQ

Each of us (unknowingly) influences the ads wee see online.
We decide which sites we visit. They provide the contextual element of
the ad selection.
Past browsing behavior as laid down in cookies and other tracking
systems is also a determining factor is the selection of ads: the
historical element.

The site owner as a rule selects the standard "image and text" ad, the
color and the size.
The image or text ad shown is a combination of "contextual" elements
(what is on the site - in the case of Cubafaq's site: news about Cuba)
and "historical" elements that are based on your browsing behavior as
reflected in your cookies.

For example: a man that visits lots of sites on fishing will be targeted
with information on fishing trips / opportunities in Canada when he goes
to a Canadian travel site.

A person with a "historical" record (or open sites of a certain
nature)is more likely to get certain ads than others.
It is of course not a perfect system, but Google has a solid reputation
for its ads strategies and techniques. Some people are clearly more
likely to be targeted with a certain type of ads than others who have no
supporting historical base.

So blaming others for content provided to you by Google Adsense based on
your choices of current and past visits of sites is hypocrite Dan
Christensen.

Do you now understand why you ridiculed yourself here again, Dan.
Don't blame others for your debacle: you slanderous campaign of personal
attacks brought you this. Your continued attacks will bring you more
ridicule.

See:

"A while back, Google AdSense migrated from purely contextual
advertising to historical advertising. I didn't notice until I visited
the Economist web site, once. Since then, it feels like 50% of the web
is trying to get me to subscribe!

The difference is clearly illustrated on the screen capture. On the
left, page visited using Google Chrome, my regular browser on my home
computer. On the right, IE 9 beta, which I rarely use.

There are a couple of problems with the historical, cookie based
advertising. The main one is that I already subscribe to both The
Economist and Netflix! The second is if I click on The Economist one, it
bring me to an offer for Americans only!"

http://altavistagoogle.blogspot.com/2011/01/impact-of-cookies-on-google-adsense.html

Some advice to all:
- clean your cookies and browsing history. Note that that will remove
the "visited site list" in your browser and may force you to log in
again on certain sites.
- use safe connections while browsing like https://encrypted.google.com/
Lots of add-ons are available to protect your privacy

The two above will suffice for most people. Beyond that there are a
series of other others, but I don't want to show my hand too much.

Having been the target of numerous - both "cyber" and "verbal" - attacks
I kind of learned to protect myself.
Let's see what Dan Christensen's next attack brings.
If none this post closes that matter for me.

PS: You are such a pompous asshole Dan Christensen.
CubaFAQ
2011-04-18 21:07:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by PL
EXPOSING DAN CHRISTENSEN'S PERSONAL SLANDEROUS ATTACK ON ME AND CUBAFAQ
Each of us (unknowingly) influences the ads wee see online.
Already debunked here. See my posting just now, "Paul Lamot still in
denial."

Dan
PL
2011-04-18 21:08:24 UTC
Permalink
EXPOSING DAN CHRISTENSEN'S PERSONAL SLANDEROUS ATTACK ON ME AND CUBAFAQ

Each of us (unknowingly) influences the ads wee see online.
We decide which sites we visit. They provide the contextual element of
the ad selection.
Past browsing behavior as laid down in cookies and other tracking
systems is also a determining factor is the selection of ads: the
historical element.

The site owner as a rule selects the standard "image and text" ad, the
color and the size.
The image or text ad shown is a combination of "contextual" elements
(what is on the site - in the case of Cubafaq's site: news about Cuba)
and "historical" elements that are based on your browsing behavior as
reflected in your cookies.

For example: a man that visits lots of sites on fishing will be targeted
with information on fishing trips / opportunities in Canada when he goes
to a Canadian travel site.

A person with a "historical" record (or open sites of a certain
nature)is more likely to get certain ads than others.
It is of course not a perfect system, but Google has a solid reputation
for its ads strategies and techniques. Some people are clearly more
likely to be targeted with a certain type of ads than others who have no
supporting historical base.

So blaming others for content provided to you by Google Adsense based on
your choices of current and past visits of sites is hypocrite Dan
Christensen.

Do you now understand why you ridiculed yourself here again, Dan.
Don't blame others for your debacle: you slanderous campaign of personal
attacks brought you this. Your continued attacks will bring you more
ridicule.

See:

"A while back, Google AdSense migrated from purely contextual
advertising to historical advertising. I didn't notice until I visited
the Economist web site, once. Since then, it feels like 50% of the web
is trying to get me to subscribe!

The difference is clearly illustrated on the screen capture. On the
left, page visited using Google Chrome, my regular browser on my home
computer. On the right, IE 9 beta, which I rarely use.

There are a couple of problems with the historical, cookie based
advertising. The main one is that I already subscribe to both The
Economist and Netflix! The second is if I click on The Economist one, it
bring me to an offer for Americans only!"

http://altavistagoogle.blogspot.com/2011/01/impact-of-cookies-on-google-adsense.html

Some advice to all:
- clean your cookies and browsing history. Note that that will remove
the "visited site list" in your browser and may force you to log in
again on certain sites.
- use safe connections while browsing like https://encrypted.google.com/
Lots of add-ons are available to protect your privacy

The two above will suffice for most people. Beyond that there are a
series of other others, but I don't want to show my hand too much.

Having been the target of numerous - both "cyber" and "verbal" - attacks
I kind of learned to protect myself.
Let's see what Dan Christensen's next attack brings.
If none this post closes that matter for me.

PS: You are such a pompous asshole Dan Christensen.
CubaFAQ
2011-04-18 21:17:31 UTC
Permalink
This looks familiar, Paul Lamot. (HA,HA, HA!) What a loser!

(You use my name; I use yours. That's fair.)

Dan
Visit my CUBA: Issues & Answers website at its new home:
http://www3.sympatico.ca/danchristienses/CubaFAQ.html
Post by PL
EXPOSING DAN CHRISTENSEN'S PERSONAL SLANDEROUS ATTACK ON ME AND CUBAFAQ
Each of us (unknowingly) influences the ads wee see online.
We decide which sites we visit. They provide the contextual element of
the ad selection.
Past browsing behavior as laid down in cookies and other tracking
systems is also a determining factor is the selection of ads: the
historical element.
The site owner as a rule selects the standard "image and text" ad, the
color and the size.
The image or text ad shown is a combination of "contextual" elements
(what is on the site - in the case of Cubafaq's site: news about Cuba)
and "historical" elements that are based on your browsing behavior as
reflected in your cookies.
For example: a man that visits lots of sites on fishing will be targeted
with information on fishing trips / opportunities in Canada when he goes
PL
2011-04-18 21:21:00 UTC
Permalink
On 18/04/2011 23:17, CubaFAQ wrote:

Very familiar: more abuse.
In fact Dan Christensen who is trying to blackmail me in to silence with
a new series of abuses wrote.

I never give in to blackmail, Dan.
What you are doing other have done for years and never succeeded.


EXPOSING DAN CHRISTENSEN'S PERSONAL SLANDEROUS ATTACK ON ME AND CUBAFAQ

Each of us (unknowingly) influences the ads wee see online.
We decide which sites we visit. They provide the contextual element of
the ad selection.
Past browsing behavior as laid down in cookies and other tracking
systems is also a determining factor is the selection of ads: the
historical element.

The site owner as a rule selects the standard "image and text" ad, the
color and the size.
The image or text ad shown is a combination of "contextual" elements
(what is on the site - in the case of Cubafaq's site: news about Cuba)
and "historical" elements that are based on your browsing behavior as
reflected in your cookies.

For example: a man that visits lots of sites on fishing will be targeted
with information on fishing trips / opportunities in Canada when he goes
to a Canadian travel site.

A person with a "historical" record (or open sites of a certain
nature)is more likely to get certain ads than others.
It is of course not a perfect system, but Google has a solid reputation
for its ads strategies and techniques. Some people are clearly more
likely to be targeted with a certain type of ads than others who have no
supporting historical base.

So blaming others for content provided to you by Google Adsense based on
your choices of current and past visits of sites is hypocrite Dan
Christensen.

Do you now understand why you ridiculed yourself here again, Dan.
Don't blame others for your debacle: you slanderous campaign of personal
attacks brought you this. Your continued attacks will bring you more
ridicule.

See:

"A while back, Google AdSense migrated from purely contextual
advertising to historical advertising. I didn't notice until I visited
the Economist web site, once. Since then, it feels like 50% of the web
is trying to get me to subscribe!

The difference is clearly illustrated on the screen capture. On the
left, page visited using Google Chrome, my regular browser on my home
computer. On the right, IE 9 beta, which I rarely use.

There are a couple of problems with the historical, cookie based
advertising. The main one is that I already subscribe to both The
Economist and Netflix! The second is if I click on The Economist one, it
bring me to an offer for Americans only!"

http://altavistagoogle.blogspot.com/2011/01/impact-of-cookies-on-google-adsense.html

Some advice to all:
- clean your cookies and browsing history. Note that that will remove
the "visited site list" in your browser and may force you to log in
again on certain sites.
- use safe connections while browsing like https://encrypted.google.com/
Lots of add-ons are available to protect your privacy

The two above will suffice for most people. Beyond that there are a
series of other others, but I don't want to show my hand too much.

Having been the target of numerous - both "cyber" and "verbal" - attacks
I kind of learned to protect myself.
Let's see what Dan Christensen's next attack brings.
If none this post closes that matter for me.

PS: You are such a pompous asshole Dan Christensen.
PL
2011-04-18 21:05:57 UTC
Permalink
On 18/04/2011 22:43, CubaFAQ wrote:
as always when Dan Christensen is reduced to abuses, lies and slander I
only address the issues


On why the cause of the Cuban dissidents isn't widely known in Cuba:

Castro never allowed them access to explain their views. Never even
stated what they said.
Foul attacks. No more.
Recently they have had to start address the bloggers AND the points they
raised.

There is no freedom of speech, no freedom of organization in Cuba.
The CDR, police, SDE ... all ensure the repression is kept up.

See:
http://cubasde.impela.net/
http://cubarepresion.impela.net/
http://cubacdr.impela.net/

Note: the regime is a lot closer to nazi practices than any of these
non-violent dissidents.

On the spread of the dissdent movement:

The diplomatic chatter in the wikileaks indeed indicated the rise of a
new generation that is taking the movement to the next level.

This new generation is feedong on the discontent of the Cuban people and
hopes that the will "stay and struggle" instead of emograte.

On the polls that for years have shown that Cubans want an end to the
regime:

2009

Posted on Monday, 11.16.09
Poll finds Cubans unhappy with island's direction
By LESLEY CLARK
***@MiamiHerald.com"
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CubaVerdad/message/48179

2007

"Poll: 79% of Cubans think Castro gov't can't fix problems
Updated 11/19/2007 7:51 AM |
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2007-11-18-cubapoll_N.htm?csp=34

2006

Posted on Fri, Dec. 15, 2006

CUBA
Gallup poll: 47% of Cubans approve of Castro regime
An independent poll of Cubans shows they want more freedom and
opportunities, but many still support Fidel and Ra l Castro.
BY PABLO BACHELET
***@MiamiHerald.com
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CubaVerdad/message/27426

Castro's regime acknowledging dissent for the first time:

http://prensacubana.e-datalink.net/?s=Yoani+Sanchez&search=Search

Worldwide support with awards from lots of human rights organizations

See:
http://cubadissident.impela.net/
http://damasdeblanco.impela.net/
http://los75.impela.net/

Like:
The Sakharov Prize:
http://damasdeblanco.impela.net/?s=Premio+Sakharov&search=Search

Nobel Prize nominations:
http://los75.impela.net/2011/03/un-merecido-nobel-para-oscar-elias-biscet/
http://cubadissident.impela.net/2010/03/cuban-dissident-nominated-for-nobel-peace-prize/

Journalism awards.
Just one example: Yoani Sanchez
http://cubadissident.impela.net/?s=Sanchez+premio&search=Search

Deal with it Dan, every day the dissident movement grows, gets better
known in Cuba and gets more support

On repression by the Castro regime

The Castro repression is very well documented.
Here alone you can find thousands of articles that expose your lies:
http://cubarepresion.impela.net

Amnesty International on repression in Cuba:
https://encrypted.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&biw=1024&bih=635&q=amnesty+international+repression+Cuba&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=

But according to Dan Christensen none of the above is "real".
Just shows what a liar he is.

On political prisoners in Cuba:

The prisoners of conscience still under sentence in Cuba:
Some are on "parole" (licensia extrapenal) and can be put back in jail.
For a list see:
http://los75.impela.net/los-75-donde-estan/

and there are still lots of political prisoners in Cuba not (yet)
adopted by Amnesty International as "prisoners of conscience"

In march alone 260 people were arrested and (mostly) released after a
short while.
http://www.cubaverdad.net/weblog/2011/04/mas-de-260-opositores-fueron-detenidos-en-el-mes-de-marzo/

Lots of political prisoners remain.

Also see:
http://www.cubaverdad.net/weblog/category/espanol/prisionero-politico/
http://www.cubaverdad.net/weblog/category/espanol/preso-politico-2/
http://www.cubaverdad.net/weblog/category/english/political-prisoner-2/


Mass deportations:

"Spain: Around 30 former Cuban political prisoners and 200 relatives to
be brought to Madrid
April 7, 2011 |Jorge Sainz, The Associated Press
http://www.weyburnreview.com/article/GB/20110407/CP01/304079931/-1/weyburn0102/spain-around-30-former-cuban-political-prisoners-and-200-relatives&template=cpArt
http://cubafaq.impela.net/2011/04/spain-around-30-former-cuban-political-prisoners-and-200-relatives-to-be-brought-to-madrid/


"El Gobierno trae a España en secreto a 50 presos cubanos y a sus familias
Exteriores fleta un vuelo para 260 personas y prepara alojamientos en
Madrid y Soria; algunos opositores fueron excarcelados hace unos días
CRUZ MORCILLO / MADRID
Día 07/04/2011
http://www.abc.es/20110407/espana/abcp-gobierno-trae-espana-secreto-20110407.html"
CubaFAQ
2011-04-18 21:10:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by PL
as always when Dan Christensen is reduced to abuses, lies and slander I
only address the issues
You are simply repeating yourself, Paul Lamot. As usual, you are
reduced to snipping and running. For my reply see, my previous
postings in this thread.

Dan
Visit my CUBA: Issues & Answers website at its new home:
http://www3.sympatico.ca/danchristienses/CubaFAQ.html
PL
2011-04-18 21:14:29 UTC
Permalink
On 18/04/2011 23:10, CubaFAQ wrote:

In fact Dan Christensen who is trying to blackmail me in to silence with
a new series of abuses wrote.

I never give in to blackmail, Dan.
What you are doing other have done for years and never succeeded.


EXPOSING DAN CHRISTENSEN'S PERSONAL SLANDEROUS ATTACK ON ME AND CUBAFAQ

Each of us (unknowingly) influences the ads wee see online.
We decide which sites we visit. They provide the contextual element of
the ad selection.
Past browsing behavior as laid down in cookies and other tracking
systems is also a determining factor is the selection of ads: the
historical element.

The site owner as a rule selects the standard "image and text" ad, the
color and the size.
The image or text ad shown is a combination of "contextual" elements
(what is on the site - in the case of Cubafaq's site: news about Cuba)
and "historical" elements that are based on your browsing behavior as
reflected in your cookies.

For example: a man that visits lots of sites on fishing will be targeted
with information on fishing trips / opportunities in Canada when he goes
to a Canadian travel site.

A person with a "historical" record (or open sites of a certain
nature)is more likely to get certain ads than others.
It is of course not a perfect system, but Google has a solid reputation
for its ads strategies and techniques. Some people are clearly more
likely to be targeted with a certain type of ads than others who have no
supporting historical base.

So blaming others for content provided to you by Google Adsense based on
your choices of current and past visits of sites is hypocrite Dan
Christensen.

Do you now understand why you ridiculed yourself here again, Dan.
Don't blame others for your debacle: you slanderous campaign of personal
attacks brought you this. Your continued attacks will bring you more
ridicule.

See:

"A while back, Google AdSense migrated from purely contextual
advertising to historical advertising. I didn't notice until I visited
the Economist web site, once. Since then, it feels like 50% of the web
is trying to get me to subscribe!

The difference is clearly illustrated on the screen capture. On the
left, page visited using Google Chrome, my regular browser on my home
computer. On the right, IE 9 beta, which I rarely use.

There are a couple of problems with the historical, cookie based
advertising. The main one is that I already subscribe to both The
Economist and Netflix! The second is if I click on The Economist one, it
bring me to an offer for Americans only!"

http://altavistagoogle.blogspot.com/2011/01/impact-of-cookies-on-google-adsense.html

Some advice to all:
- clean your cookies and browsing history. Note that that will remove
the "visited site list" in your browser and may force you to log in
again on certain sites.
- use safe connections while browsing like https://encrypted.google.com/
Lots of add-ons are available to protect your privacy

The two above will suffice for most people. Beyond that there are a
series of other others, but I don't want to show my hand too much.

Having been the target of numerous - both "cyber" and "verbal" - attacks
I kind of learned to protect myself.
Let's see what Dan Christensen's next attack brings.
If none this post closes that matter for me.

PS: You are such a pompous asshole Dan Christensen.
CubaFAQ
2011-04-18 21:13:40 UTC
Permalink
This looks familiar, Paul Lamot. (HA, HA ,HA!) What a loser!

Dan
Visit my CUBA: Issues & Answers website at its new home:
http://www3.sympatico.ca/danchristienses/CubaFAQ.html
Post by PL
as always when Dan Christensen is reduced to abuses, lies and slander I
only address the issues
Castro never allowed them access to explain their views. Never even
stated what they said.
Foul attacks. No more.
Recently they have had to start address the bloggers AND the points they
raised.
There is no freedom of speech, no freedom of organization in Cuba.
The CDR, police, SDE ... all ensure the repression is kept up.
See:http://cubasde.impela.net/http://cubarepresion.impela.net/http://cubacdr.impela.net/
Note: the regime is a lot closer to nazi practices than any of these
non-violent dissidents.
PL
2011-04-18 21:15:48 UTC
Permalink
On 18/04/2011 23:10, CubaFAQ wrote:

Very familiar: more abuse.
In fact Dan Christensen who is trying to blackmail me in to silence with
a new series of abuses wrote.

I never give in to blackmail, Dan.
What you are doing other have done for years and never succeeded.


EXPOSING DAN CHRISTENSEN'S PERSONAL SLANDEROUS ATTACK ON ME AND CUBAFAQ

Each of us (unknowingly) influences the ads wee see online.
We decide which sites we visit. They provide the contextual element of
the ad selection.
Past browsing behavior as laid down in cookies and other tracking
systems is also a determining factor is the selection of ads: the
historical element.

The site owner as a rule selects the standard "image and text" ad, the
color and the size.
The image or text ad shown is a combination of "contextual" elements
(what is on the site - in the case of Cubafaq's site: news about Cuba)
and "historical" elements that are based on your browsing behavior as
reflected in your cookies.

For example: a man that visits lots of sites on fishing will be targeted
with information on fishing trips / opportunities in Canada when he goes
to a Canadian travel site.

A person with a "historical" record (or open sites of a certain
nature)is more likely to get certain ads than others.
It is of course not a perfect system, but Google has a solid reputation
for its ads strategies and techniques. Some people are clearly more
likely to be targeted with a certain type of ads than others who have no
supporting historical base.

So blaming others for content provided to you by Google Adsense based on
your choices of current and past visits of sites is hypocrite Dan
Christensen.

Do you now understand why you ridiculed yourself here again, Dan.
Don't blame others for your debacle: you slanderous campaign of personal
attacks brought you this. Your continued attacks will bring you more
ridicule.

See:

"A while back, Google AdSense migrated from purely contextual
advertising to historical advertising. I didn't notice until I visited
the Economist web site, once. Since then, it feels like 50% of the web
is trying to get me to subscribe!

The difference is clearly illustrated on the screen capture. On the
left, page visited using Google Chrome, my regular browser on my home
computer. On the right, IE 9 beta, which I rarely use.

There are a couple of problems with the historical, cookie based
advertising. The main one is that I already subscribe to both The
Economist and Netflix! The second is if I click on The Economist one, it
bring me to an offer for Americans only!"

http://altavistagoogle.blogspot.com/2011/01/impact-of-cookies-on-google-adsense.html

Some advice to all:
- clean your cookies and browsing history. Note that that will remove
the "visited site list" in your browser and may force you to log in
again on certain sites.
- use safe connections while browsing like https://encrypted.google.com/
Lots of add-ons are available to protect your privacy

The two above will suffice for most people. Beyond that there are a
series of other others, but I don't want to show my hand too much.

Having been the target of numerous - both "cyber" and "verbal" - attacks
I kind of learned to protect myself.
Let's see what Dan Christensen's next attack brings.
If none this post closes that matter for me.

PS: You are such a pompous asshole Dan Christensen.
CubaFAQ
2011-04-19 02:24:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by PL
Very familiar: more abuse.
In fact Dan Christensen who is trying to blackmail me in to silence with
a new series of abuses wrote.
No one is trying to "blackmail" you into silence, Paul Lamot.

(You use my name; I use yours. Isn't that fair? Or is privacy only for
you, Paul Lamot?)
Post by PL
EXPOSING DAN CHRISTENSEN'S PERSONAL SLANDEROUS ATTACK ON ME AND CUBAFAQ
Each of us (unknowingly) influences the ads wee see online.
Enough of your lame excuses, Paul Lamot. You saw that distasteful ad
on your own computer as well as I did. To your credit, you never
denied its existence, and you took it down immediately after I brought
it to your attention. But don't think you can blame me for your
mistakes, or somehow turn this to your advantage. The smart thing to
do would have been to thank me for bringing it your attention, and
apologizing. You would have looked good. Or at least, not stupid.
Instead, you have turned it into this melodramatic, epic struggle that
you can't win.

Dan
PL
2011-04-19 07:40:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by CubaFAQ
Post by PL
Very familiar: more abuse.
In fact Dan Christensen who is trying to blackmail me in to silence with
a new series of abuses wrote.
No one is trying to "blackmail" you into silence,
Yes you are Dan Christensen
Post by CubaFAQ
What "slanderous attacks,"
Your false claims Dan Christensen of being responsible for putting "teen
photos on websites.
Do you deny you claimed that?

Threats don't work on me Dan Christensen.
Post by CubaFAQ
You yourself saw the same ad on your own computer
(snip)

Nope.
I did not.
I never saw any "teen photos". Never said so.

You are the sleazy one here and your continued campaign of slander and
intimidation confirms that.
You don't deny any of this I see.

EXPOSING DAN CHRISTENSEN'S PERSONAL SLANDEROUS ATTACK ON ME AND CUBAFAQ

Each of us (unknowingly) influences the ads wee see online.
We decide which sites we visit. They provide the contextual element of
the ad selection.
Past browsing behavior as laid down in cookies and other tracking
systems is also a determining factor is the selection of ads: the
historical element.

The site owner as a rule selects the standard "image and text" ad, the
color and the size.
The image or text ad shown is a combination of "contextual" elements
(what is on the site - in the case of Cubafaq's site: news about Cuba)
and "historical" elements that are based on your browsing behavior as
reflected in your cookies.

For example: a man that visits lots of sites on fishing will be targeted
with information on fishing trips / opportunities in Canada when he goes
to a Canadian travel site.

A person with a "historical" record (or open sites of a certain
nature)is more likely to get certain ads than others.
It is of course not a perfect system, but Google has a solid reputation
for its ads strategies and techniques. Some people are clearly more
likely to be targeted with a certain type of ads than others who have no
supporting historical base.

So blaming others for content provided to you by Google Adsense based on
your choices of current and past visits of sites is hypocrite Dan
Christensen.

Do you now understand why you ridiculed yourself here again, Dan.
Don't blame others for your debacle: you slanderous campaign of personal
attacks brought you this. Your continued attacks will bring you more
ridicule.

See:

"A while back, Google AdSense migrated from purely contextual
advertising to historical advertising. I didn't notice until I visited
the Economist web site, once. Since then, it feels like 50% of the web
is trying to get me to subscribe!

The difference is clearly illustrated on the screen capture. On the
left, page visited using Google Chrome, my regular browser on my home
computer. On the right, IE 9 beta, which I rarely use.

There are a couple of problems with the historical, cookie based
advertising. The main one is that I already subscribe to both The
Economist and Netflix! The second is if I click on The Economist one, it
bring me to an offer for Americans only!"

http://altavistagoogle.blogspot.com/2011/01/impact-of-cookies-on-google-adsense.html

Some advice to all:
- clean your cookies and browsing history. Note that that will remove
the "visited site list" in your browser and may force you to log in
again on certain sites.
- use safe connections while browsing like https://encrypted.google.com/
Lots of add-ons are available to protect your privacy

The two above will suffice for most people. Beyond that there are a
series of other others, but I don't want to show my hand too much.

Having been the target of numerous - both "cyber" and "verbal" - attacks
I kind of learned to protect myself.
Let's see what Dan Christensen's next attack brings.
If none this post closes that matter for me.

PS: You are such a pompous asshole Dan Christensen. .
CubaFAQ
2011-04-19 17:34:40 UTC
Permalink
On Apr 19, 3:40 am, PL <***@pandora.be> wrote:

In fact, Paul Lamot wrote.

(You use my name; I use yours. Isn't that fair? Or is privacy only for
Paul Lamot?)
Post by PL
Post by CubaFAQ
Post by PL
Very familiar: more abuse.
In fact Dan Christensen who is trying to blackmail me in to silence with
a new series of abuses wrote.
No one is trying to "blackmail" you into silence,
Yes you are Dan Christensen
Wrong again, Paul Lamot.
Post by PL
Post by CubaFAQ
What "slanderous attacks,"
Your false claims Dan Christensen of being responsible for putting "teen
photos on websites.
Do you deny you claimed that?
Again, you had an ad for a "Dating and Singles" service at your
website that featured photos of scantily clad young girls -- many, if
not all of them teenagers, in my opinion. You did not deny the
existence of such an ad. In fact, you described if here as being for a
"marriage service." But you removed it anyway -- to your credit, as I
keep saying. That was the right to do. There was no need to say
anymore, but you keep coming back to it, somehow hoping to blame me
for your mistake. You are being totally irrational.

If you are too proud to apologize, the smart thing to do would have
been to just drop it. You responded correctly by immediately removing
the offending ad when it was brought to your attention. You can quote
me on that. By your irrational persistence on this matter, however,
you are only making people wonder about you.

Dan
PL
2011-04-19 18:05:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by CubaFAQ
Post by PL
Post by CubaFAQ
Post by PL
Very familiar: more abuse.
In fact Dan Christensen who is trying to blackmail me in to silence with
a new series of abuses wrote.
No one is trying to "blackmail" you into silence,
Yes you are Dan Christensen
Wrong again,
Nope.
You said it yourself Dan Christensen
As long as I refer to your name of 12 years that you dropped to hide
behind a respected name used previously by others wyou will continue to
violate my privacy.
That is what you said.
I exposed your "lobbyist" ane "CIa" and "Nzai" lies for 10 years and as
we speak other are trying to intimidate me in the manner you try to. I
have nothing to lose.
You have. You are the "irrational" one, Dan.
Post by CubaFAQ
Post by PL
Post by CubaFAQ
What "slanderous attacks,"
Your false claims Dan Christensen of being responsible for putting "teen
photos on websites.
Do you deny you claimed that?
Again, you had an ad
(snip

again.
Not my site.
Cubafaq's.

Not his selection of ad: a combination of your browsing behavior and the
content of the site.

I see you dropped the lying claim I ever said I saw any "teen photos".
Never said so. That you now have conformed.

You are the sleazy one here and your continued campaign of slander and
intimidation confirms that.
You don't deny any of this I see.

EXPOSING DAN CHRISTENSEN'S PERSONAL SLANDEROUS ATTACK ON ME AND CUBAFAQ

Each of us (unknowingly) influences the ads wee see online.
We decide which sites we visit. They provide the contextual element of
the ad selection.
Past browsing behavior as laid down in cookies and other tracking
systems is also a determining factor is the selection of ads: the
historical element.

The site owner as a rule selects the standard "image and text" ad, the
color and the size.
The image or text ad shown is a combination of "contextual" elements
(what is on the site - in the case of Cubafaq's site: news about Cuba)
and "historical" elements that are based on your browsing behavior as
reflected in your cookies.

For example: a man that visits lots of sites on fishing will be targeted
with information on fishing trips / opportunities in Canada when he goes
to a Canadian travel site.

A person with a "historical" record (or open sites of a certain
nature)is more likely to get certain ads than others.
It is of course not a perfect system, but Google has a solid reputation
for its ads strategies and techniques. Some people are clearly more
likely to be targeted with a certain type of ads than others who have no
supporting historical base.

So blaming others for content provided to you by Google Adsense based on
your choices of current and past visits of sites is hypocrite Dan
Christensen.

Do you now understand why you ridiculed yourself here again, Dan.
Don't blame others for your debacle: you slanderous campaign of personal
attacks brought you this. Your continued attacks will bring you more
ridicule.

See:

"A while back, Google AdSense migrated from purely contextual
advertising to historical advertising. I didn't notice until I visited
the Economist web site, once. Since then, it feels like 50% of the web
is trying to get me to subscribe!

The difference is clearly illustrated on the screen capture. On the
left, page visited using Google Chrome, my regular browser on my home
computer. On the right, IE 9 beta, which I rarely use.

There are a couple of problems with the historical, cookie based
advertising. The main one is that I already subscribe to both The
Economist and Netflix! The second is if I click on The Economist one, it
bring me to an offer for Americans only!"

http://altavistagoogle.blogspot.com/2011/01/impact-of-cookies-on-google-adsense.html

Some advice to all:
- clean your cookies and browsing history. Note that that will remove
the "visited site list" in your browser and may force you to log in
again on certain sites.
- use safe connections while browsing like https://encrypted.google.com/
Lots of add-ons are available to protect your privacy

The two above will suffice for most people. Beyond that there are a
series of other others, but I don't want to show my hand too much.

Having been the target of numerous - both "cyber" and "verbal" - attacks
I kind of learned to protect myself.
Let's see what Dan Christensen's next attack brings.
If none this post closes that matter for me.

PS: You are such a pompous asshole Dan Christensen. .
CubaFAQ
2011-04-19 18:32:23 UTC
Permalink
On Apr 19, 2:05 pm, PL <***@pandora.be> wrote:

In fact, Paul Lamot wrote.

You use my name; I use yours. Get used to it, Paul Lamot.
Post by PL
Post by CubaFAQ
Post by PL
Post by CubaFAQ
Post by PL
Very familiar: more abuse.
In fact Dan Christensen who is trying to blackmail me in to silence with
a new series of abuses wrote.
No one is trying to "blackmail" you into silence,
Yes you are Dan Christensen
Wrong again,
Nope.
You said it yourself Dan Christensen
As long as I refer to your name of 12 years that you dropped to hide
behind a respected name used previously by others wyou will continue to
violate my privacy.
That is another issue altogether. It's only fair that if you use my
name, then I should be able to use yours. Or is privacy only for Paul
Lamot?

Get a life!
Post by PL
That is what you said.
I exposed your "lobbyist" ane "CIa" and "Nzai" lies for 10 years and as
we speak other are trying to intimidate me in the manner you try to. I
have nothing to lose.
You are the one on record as supporting and actively promoting the
genocidal US embargo that groups like Amnesty International and the UN
General Assembly have repeatedly condemned over the years. It can't be
a very popular position in your country or in Europe generally. Even
the fanatically anti-Cuban East European countries are opposed to it.

As for your lobbying exploits, we have your own words here at SCC. For
links and a summary, see: "PL's same tired old lies and evasions
EXPOSED" at http://groups.google.ca/group/soc.culture.cuba/msg/36c96cf26743ccca?hl=en
Post by PL
Post by CubaFAQ
Post by PL
Post by CubaFAQ
What "slanderous attacks,"
Your false claims Dan Christensen of being responsible for putting "teen
photos on websites.
Do you deny you claimed that?
Again, you had an ad
(snip
What the cowardly Paul Lamot snipped:

Again, you had an ad for a "Dating and Singles" service at your
website that featured photos of scantily clad young girls -- many, if
not all of them teenagers, in my opinion. You did not deny the
existence of such an ad. In fact, you described if here as being for a
"marriage service." But you removed it anyway -- to your credit, as I
keep saying. That was the right to do. There was no need to say
anymore, but you keep coming back to it, somehow hoping to blame me
for your mistake. You are being totally irrational.

If you are too proud to apologize, the smart thing to do would have
been to just drop it. You responded correctly by immediately removing
the offending ad when it was brought to your attention. You can quote
me on that. By your irrational persistence on this matter, however,
you are only making people wonder about you.
Post by PL
again.
Not my site.
Cubafaq's.
Already debunked here. See "PL's cheap, imitation cubafaq site axed
for violation of terms of service" at
https://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.cuba/msg/364a042eb268dfaa?hl=en

At any rate, the offending ad was removed when I brought to YOUR
attention here. You yourself were also made it clear that you were
aware of the ad -- you said it was for a "marriage service."
Post by PL
Not his selection of ad: a combination of your browsing behavior and the
content of the site.
I see you dropped the lying claim I ever said I saw any "teen photos".
[snipping repetitious portion of Paul Lamot's posting]

You saw the same ad I did, Paul Lamot. Quit pretending now that you
didn't.

Dan
PL
2011-04-19 20:02:33 UTC
Permalink
On 19/04/2011 20:32, CubaFAQ wrote:
(snip)
Post by CubaFAQ
Post by PL
Post by CubaFAQ
Post by PL
Post by CubaFAQ
Post by PL
Very familiar: more abuse.
In fact Dan Christensen who is trying to blackmail me in to silence with
a new series of abuses wrote.
No one is trying to "blackmail" you into silence,
Yes you are Dan Christensen
Wrong again,
Nope.
You said it yourself Dan Christensen
As long as I refer to your name of 12 years that you dropped to hide
behind a respected name used previously by others you will continue to
violate my privacy.
That is another issue altogether.
(snip)

Nope.
that is the only issue.
Thanks for confirming you are in vain trying to blackmail me.

You said it yourself Dan Christensen
As long as I refer to your name of 12 years that you dropped to hide
behind a respected name used previously by others you will continue to
violate my privacy.
That is what you said.
I exposed your "lobbyist", CIA" and "Nazi" lies for 10 years and as we
speak other are trying to intimidate me in the manner you try to. I have
nothing to lose.
You have. You are the "irrational" one, Dan.

Again the facts:

Not my site.
Cubafaq's.

Not his selection of ad: a combination of your browsing behavior and the
content of the site.

I see you dropped the lying claim I ever said I saw any "teen photos".
Never said so. That you now have conformed.

You are the sleazy one here and your continued campaign of slander and
intimidation confirms that.
You don't deny any of this I see.

EXPOSING DAN CHRISTENSEN'S PERSONAL SLANDEROUS ATTACK ON ME AND CUBAFAQ

Each of us (unknowingly) influences the ads wee see online.
We decide which sites we visit. They provide the contextual element of
the ad selection.
Past browsing behavior as laid down in cookies and other tracking
systems is also a determining factor is the selection of ads: the
historical element.

The site owner as a rule selects the standard "image and text" ad, the
color and the size.
The image or text ad shown is a combination of "contextual" elements
(what is on the site - in the case of Cubafaq's site: news about Cuba)
and "historical" elements that are based on your browsing behavior as
reflected in your cookies.

For example: a man that visits lots of sites on fishing will be targeted
with information on fishing trips / opportunities in Canada when he goes
to a Canadian travel site.

A person with a "historical" record (or open sites of a certain
nature)is more likely to get certain ads than others.
It is of course not a perfect system, but Google has a solid reputation
for its ads strategies and techniques. Some people are clearly more
likely to be targeted with a certain type of ads than others who have no
supporting historical base.

So blaming others for content provided to you by Google Adsense based on
your choices of current and past visits of sites is hypocrite Dan
Christensen.

Do you now understand why you ridiculed yourself here again, Dan.
Don't blame others for your debacle: you slanderous campaign of personal
attacks brought you this. Your continued attacks will bring you more
ridicule.

See:

"A while back, Google AdSense migrated from purely contextual
advertising to historical advertising. I didn't notice until I visited
the Economist web site, once. Since then, it feels like 50% of the web
is trying to get me to subscribe!

The difference is clearly illustrated on the screen capture. On the
left, page visited using Google Chrome, my regular browser on my home
computer. On the right, IE 9 beta, which I rarely use.

There are a couple of problems with the historical, cookie based
advertising. The main one is that I already subscribe to both The
Economist and Netflix! The second is if I click on The Economist one, it
bring me to an offer for Americans only!"

http://altavistagoogle.blogspot.com/2011/01/impact-of-cookies-on-google-adsense.html

Some advice to all:
- clean your cookies and browsing history. Note that that will remove
the "visited site list" in your browser and may force you to log in
again on certain sites.
- use safe connections while browsing like https://encrypted.google.com/
Lots of add-ons are available to protect your privacy

The two above will suffice for most people. Beyond that there are a
series of other others, but I don't want to show my hand too much.

Having been the target of numerous - both "cyber" and "verbal" - attacks
I kind of learned to protect myself.
Let's see what Dan Christensen's next attack brings.
If none this post closes that matter for me.

PS: You are such a pompous asshole Dan Christensen. .
CubaFAQ
2011-04-19 19:03:56 UTC
Permalink
On Apr 19, 2:05 pm, PL <***@pandora.be> wrote:

In fact, Paul Lamot wrote.

You use my name; I use yours. Get used to it, Paul Lamot.
Post by PL
Post by CubaFAQ
Post by PL
Post by CubaFAQ
Post by PL
Very familiar: more abuse.
In fact Dan Christensen who is trying to blackmail me in to silence with
a new series of abuses wrote.
No one is trying to "blackmail" you into silence,
Yes you are Dan Christensen
Wrong again,
Nope.
You said it yourself Dan Christensen
As long as I refer to your name of 12 years that you dropped to hide
behind a respected name used previously by others wyou will continue to
violate my privacy.
[snip]

That is another issue altogether. It's only fair that if you use my
name, then I should be able to use yours. Or is privacy only for Paul
Lamot?

Get a life!
Post by PL
Post by CubaFAQ
Post by PL
Post by CubaFAQ
What "slanderous attacks,"
Your false claims Dan Christensen of being responsible for putting "teen
photos on websites.
Do you deny you claimed that?
Again, you had an ad
(snip
What the cowardly Paul Lamot snipped:

Again, you had an ad for a "Dating and Singles" service at your
website that featured photos of scantily clad young girls -- many, if
not all of them teenagers, in my opinion. You did not deny the
existence of such an ad. In fact, you described if here as being for a
"marriage service." But you removed it anyway -- to your credit, as I
keep saying. That was the right to do. There was no need to say
anymore, but you keep coming back to it, somehow hoping to blame me
for your mistake. You are being totally irrational.

If you are too proud to apologize, the smart thing to do would have
been to just drop it. You responded correctly by immediately removing
the offending ad when it was brought to your attention. You can quote
me on that. By your irrational persistence on this matter, however,
you are only making people wonder about you.
Post by PL
again.
Not my site.
Cubafaq's.
Already debunked here. See "PL's cheap, imitation cubafaq site axed
for violation of terms of service" at
https://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.cuba/msg/364a042eb268dfaa...

At any rate, the offending ad was removed when I brought it to your
attention here. You yourself also made it clear that you were aware of
the ad -- you said it was for a "marriage service."
Post by PL
Not his selection of ad: a combination of your browsing behavior and the
content of the site.
I see you dropped the lying claim I ever said I saw any "teen photos".
[snipping repetitious portion of Paul Lamot's posting]

You saw the same ad I did, Paul Lamot. Quit pretending now that you
didn't.

Dan
PL
2011-04-19 20:02:43 UTC
Permalink
On 19/04/2011 21:03, CubaFAQ wrote:

In fact Dan Christensen in his relentless slander campaign wroite the
same he wrote half an hour earlier.
thanks for confirming to all this is no more than another slander
campaign, Dan Christensen.
I don't yield to blackmail.

On 19/04/2011 20:32, CubaFAQ wrote:
(snip)
Post by CubaFAQ
Post by PL
Post by CubaFAQ
Post by PL
Post by CubaFAQ
Post by PL
Very familiar: more abuse.
In fact Dan Christensen who is trying to blackmail me in to silence with
a new series of abuses wrote.
No one is trying to "blackmail" you into silence,
Yes you are Dan Christensen
Wrong again,
Nope.
You said it yourself Dan Christensen
As long as I refer to your name of 12 years that you dropped to hide
behind a respected name used previously by others you will continue to
violate my privacy.
That is another issue altogether.
(snip)

Nope.
that is the only issue.
Thanks for confirming you are in vain trying to blackmail me.

You said it yourself Dan Christensen
As long as I refer to your name of 12 years that you dropped to hide
behind a respected name used previously by others you will continue to
violate my privacy.
That is what you said.
I exposed your "lobbyist", CIA" and "Nazi" lies for 10 years and as we
speak other are trying to intimidate me in the manner you try to. I have
nothing to lose.
You have. You are the "irrational" one, Dan.

Again the facts:

Not my site.
Cubafaq's.

Not his selection of ad: a combination of your browsing behavior and the
content of the site.

I see you dropped the lying claim I ever said I saw any "teen photos".
Never said so. That you now have conformed.

You are the sleazy one here and your continued campaign of slander and
intimidation confirms that.
You don't deny any of this I see.

EXPOSING DAN CHRISTENSEN'S PERSONAL SLANDEROUS ATTACK ON ME AND CUBAFAQ

Each of us (unknowingly) influences the ads wee see online.
We decide which sites we visit. They provide the contextual element of
the ad selection.
Past browsing behavior as laid down in cookies and other tracking
systems is also a determining factor is the selection of ads: the
historical element.

The site owner as a rule selects the standard "image and text" ad, the
color and the size.
The image or text ad shown is a combination of "contextual" elements
(what is on the site - in the case of Cubafaq's site: news about Cuba)
and "historical" elements that are based on your browsing behavior as
reflected in your cookies.

For example: a man that visits lots of sites on fishing will be targeted
with information on fishing trips / opportunities in Canada when he goes
to a Canadian travel site.

A person with a "historical" record (or open sites of a certain
nature)is more likely to get certain ads than others.
It is of course not a perfect system, but Google has a solid reputation
for its ads strategies and techniques. Some people are clearly more
likely to be targeted with a certain type of ads than others who have no
supporting historical base.

So blaming others for content provided to you by Google Adsense based on
your choices of current and past visits of sites is hypocrite Dan
Christensen.

Do you now understand why you ridiculed yourself here again, Dan.
Don't blame others for your debacle: you slanderous campaign of personal
attacks brought you this. Your continued attacks will bring you more
ridicule.

See:

"A while back, Google AdSense migrated from purely contextual
advertising to historical advertising. I didn't notice until I visited
the Economist web site, once. Since then, it feels like 50% of the web
is trying to get me to subscribe!

The difference is clearly illustrated on the screen capture. On the
left, page visited using Google Chrome, my regular browser on my home
computer. On the right, IE 9 beta, which I rarely use.

There are a couple of problems with the historical, cookie based
advertising. The main one is that I already subscribe to both The
Economist and Netflix! The second is if I click on The Economist one, it
bring me to an offer for Americans only!"

http://altavistagoogle.blogspot.com/2011/01/impact-of-cookies-on-google-adsense.html

Some advice to all:
- clean your cookies and browsing history. Note that that will remove
the "visited site list" in your browser and may force you to log in
again on certain sites.
- use safe connections while browsing like https://encrypted.google.com/
Lots of add-ons are available to protect your privacy

The two above will suffice for most people. Beyond that there are a
series of other others, but I don't want to show my hand too much.

Having been the target of numerous - both "cyber" and "verbal" - attacks
I kind of learned to protect myself.
Let's see what Dan Christensen's next attack brings.
If none this post closes that matter for me.

PS: You are such a pompous asshole Dan Christensen. .
CubaFAQ
2011-04-19 20:29:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by PL
In fact Dan Christensen in his relentless slander campaign wroite the
same he wrote half an hour earlier.
thanks for confirming to all this is no more than another slander
campaign, Dan Christensen.
Thanks for confirming you have gone off the deep end, Paul Lamot.

(Remember, you use my name, I use yours. It's only fair. Or is privacy
only for Paul Lamot?.)
Post by PL
(snip)
 >>
 >>>>>> Very familiar: more abuse.
 >>>>>> In fact Dan Christensen who is trying to blackmail me in to
silence with
 >>>>>> a new series of abuses wrote.
 >>
 >>>>> No one is trying to "blackmail" you into silence,
 >>
 >>>> Yes you are Dan Christensen
 >>
 >>> Wrong again,
 >>
 >> Nope.
 >> You said it yourself Dan Christensen
 >> As long as I refer to your name of 12 years that you dropped to hide
 >> behind a respected name used previously by others you will continue to
 >> violate my privacy.
 >
 > That is another issue altogether.
(snip)
Nope.
that is the only issue.
If so, then the resolution is simple: You stop using my name, and I
stop using yours. But you have no interest in being civil, do you,
Paul Lamot? Oh, well....
Post by PL
You said it yourself Dan Christensen
As long as I refer to your name of 12 years that you dropped to hide
behind a respected name used previously by others you will continue to
violate my privacy.
[snip]

As you have recently confirmed, I have been using the CubaFAQ name (in
my website URL) for over 10 years (since 2000). And as long as you
continue to use my full name, I will continue to use yours. Get used
to it. (Have you Googled your name lately, Paul Lamot?)

The rest of Paul Lamot's pathetic posting has already been debunked
been exposed and debunked here. (See my previous posting.)

If you are simply going to keep repeating yourself like this, Paul
Lamot, and you still have nothing new and relevant to add, do not
expect a reply from me on this matter.

Dan
Visit my CUBA: Issues & Answers website at its new home:
http://www3.sympatico.ca/danchristienses/CubaFAQ.html
PL
2011-04-19 20:37:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by PL
In fact Dan Christensen in his relentless slander campaign wroite the
same he wrote half an hour earlier.
thanks for confirming to all this is no more than another slander
campaign, Dan Christensen.
(snip)
Post by CubaFAQ
Post by PL
Post by CubaFAQ
Post by PL
Post by CubaFAQ
Post by PL
Very familiar: more abuse.
In fact Dan Christensen who is trying to blackmail me in to
silence with
Post by CubaFAQ
Post by PL
Post by CubaFAQ
Post by PL
Post by CubaFAQ
Post by PL
a new series of abuses wrote.
No one is trying to "blackmail" you into silence,
Yes you are Dan Christensen
Wrong again,
Nope.
You said it yourself Dan Christensen
As long as I refer to your name of 12 years that you dropped to hide
behind a respected name used previously by others you will continue to
violate my privacy.
That is another issue altogether.
(snip)
Nope.
that is the only issue.
If so, then the resolution is simple(snip)
You stop all your lies, spam and insults and there is no more Dan
Christensen
Post by PL
You said it yourself Dan Christensen
As long as I refer to your name of 12 years that you dropped to hide
behind a respected name used previously by others you will continue to
violate my privacy.
[snip]
As you have recently confirmed,
(snip)

I have never confirmed you used the Cubafaq name. On the contrary. Just
another desperate lie of Dan Christensen.

In fact you never did for your posts.
You posted a "Dan Christensen".
Not for your site entitled "Issues ..."

You just are trying to blackmail people in to giving you a "get out of
jail for free" card.
Won't work.

Thanks for confirming you are in vain trying to blackmail me.

You said it yourself Dan Christensen
As long as I refer to your name of 12 years that you dropped to hide
behind a respected name used previously by others you will continue to
violate my privacy.
That is what you said.
I exposed your "lobbyist", CIA" and "Nazi" lies for 10 years and as we
speak other are trying to intimidate me in the manner you try to. I have
nothing to lose.
You have. You are the "irrational" one, Dan.

Again the facts:

Not my site.
Cubafaq's.

Not his selection of ad: a combination of your browsing behavior and the
content of the site.

I see you dropped the lying claim I ever said I saw any "teen photos".
Never said so. That you now have conformed.

You are the sleazy one here and your continued campaign of slander and
intimidation confirms that.
You don't deny any of this I see.

EXPOSING DAN CHRISTENSEN'S PERSONAL SLANDEROUS ATTACK ON ME AND CUBAFAQ

Each of us (unknowingly) influences the ads wee see online.
We decide which sites we visit. They provide the contextual element of
the ad selection.
Past browsing behavior as laid down in cookies and other tracking
systems is also a determining factor is the selection of ads: the
historical element.

The site owner as a rule selects the standard "image and text" ad, the
color and the size.
The image or text ad shown is a combination of "contextual" elements
(what is on the site - in the case of Cubafaq's site: news about Cuba)
and "historical" elements that are based on your browsing behavior as
reflected in your cookies.

For example: a man that visits lots of sites on fishing will be targeted
with information on fishing trips / opportunities in Canada when he goes
to a Canadian travel site.

A person with a "historical" record (or open sites of a certain
nature)is more likely to get certain ads than others.
It is of course not a perfect system, but Google has a solid reputation
for its ads strategies and techniques. Some people are clearly more
likely to be targeted with a certain type of ads than others who have no
supporting historical base.

So blaming others for content provided to you by Google Adsense based on
your choices of current and past visits of sites is hypocrite Dan
Christensen.

Do you now understand why you ridiculed yourself here again, Dan.
Don't blame others for your debacle: you slanderous campaign of personal
attacks brought you this. Your continued attacks will bring you more
ridicule.

See:

"A while back, Google AdSense migrated from purely contextual
advertising to historical advertising. I didn't notice until I visited
the Economist web site, once. Since then, it feels like 50% of the web
is trying to get me to subscribe!

The difference is clearly illustrated on the screen capture. On the
left, page visited using Google Chrome, my regular browser on my home
computer. On the right, IE 9 beta, which I rarely use.

There are a couple of problems with the historical, cookie based
advertising. The main one is that I already subscribe to both The
Economist and Netflix! The second is if I click on The Economist one, it
bring me to an offer for Americans only!"

http://altavistagoogle.blogspot.com/2011/01/impact-of-cookies-on-google-adsense.html

Some advice to all:
- clean your cookies and browsing history. Note that that will remove
the "visited site list" in your browser and may force you to log in
again on certain sites.
- use safe connections while browsing like https://encrypted.google.com/
Lots of add-ons are available to protect your privacy

The two above will suffice for most people. Beyond that there are a
series of other others, but I don't want to show my hand too much.

Having been the target of numerous - both "cyber" and "verbal" - attacks
I kind of learned to protect myself.
Let's see what Dan Christensen's next attack brings.
If none this post closes that matter for me.

PS: You are such a pompous asshole Dan Christensen. .
CubaFAQ
2011-04-19 20:54:09 UTC
Permalink
On Apr 19, 4:37 pm, PL <***@pandora.be> wrote:

In fact the cowardly Paul Lamot wrote.

(Your use my name, then I use yours. Get used to it.)
Post by PL
Post by PL
In fact Dan Christensen in his relentless slander campaign wroite the
same he wrote half an hour earlier.
thanks for confirming to all this is no more than another slander
campaign, Dan Christensen.
(snip)
  >>>>>>  Very familiar: more abuse.
  >>>>>>  In fact Dan Christensen who is trying to blackmail me in to
silence with
  >>>>>>  a new series of abuses wrote.
  >>>>>  No one is trying to "blackmail" you into silence,
  >>>>  Yes you are Dan Christensen
  >>>  Wrong again,
  >>  Nope.
  >>  You said it yourself Dan Christensen
  >>  As long as I refer to your name of 12 years that you dropped to hide
  >>  behind a respected name used previously by others you will continue to
  >>  violate my privacy.
  >  That is another issue altogether.
(snip)
Nope.
that is the only issue.
If so, then the resolution is simple(snip)
You stop all your lies, spam and insults and there is no more Dan
Christensen
You stop using my name and no more "Paul Lamot."
Post by PL
Post by PL
You said it yourself Dan Christensen
As long as I refer to your name of 12 years that you dropped to hide
behind a respected name used previously by others you will continue to
violate my privacy.
[snip]
As you have recently confirmed,
(snip)
I have never confirmed you used the Cubafaq name.
A blatant lie. See:
https://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.cuba/msg/94f651d80886e68c?hl=en

Another of your lies exposed, Paul Lamot. When will you learn?

Also, see announcement of launch in March 2000:
https://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.cuba/msg/fc3886122a129645?hl=en

The rest of Paul Lamot's pathetic posting has already been exposed and
debunked here.

If you are simply going to keep repeating yourself like this, Paul
Lamot, and you still have nothing new and relevant to add, do not
expect a reply from me on this matter.

Dan
Visit my CUBA: Issues & Answers website at its new home:
http://www3.sympatico.ca/danchristienses/CubaFAQ.html
PL
2011-04-19 21:09:27 UTC
Permalink
On 19/04/2011 22:54, CubaFAQ wrote:

In fact Dan Christensen wrote in his slanderous blackmail campaign
Post by CubaFAQ
Post by PL
In fact Dan Christensen in his relentless slander campaign wrote the
same he wrote half an hour earlier.
thanks for confirming to all this is no more than another slander
campaign, Dan Christensen.
(snip)
Post by CubaFAQ
Post by PL
Post by CubaFAQ
Post by PL
Post by CubaFAQ
Post by PL
Very familiar: more abuse.
In fact Dan Christensen who is trying to blackmail me in to
silence with
Post by CubaFAQ
Post by PL
Post by CubaFAQ
Post by PL
Post by CubaFAQ
Post by PL
a new series of abuses wrote.
No one is trying to "blackmail" you into silence,
Yes you are Dan Christensen
Wrong again,
Nope.
You said it yourself Dan Christensen
As long as I refer to your name of 12 years that you dropped to hide
behind a respected name used previously by others you will continue to
violate my privacy.
That is another issue altogether.
(snip)
Nope.
that is the only issue.
If so, then the resolution is simple(snip)
You stop all your lies, spam and insults and there is no more Dan
Christensen
You stop using my name and no more "Paul Lamot."
Post by PL
You said it yourself Dan Christensen
As long as I refer to your name of 12 years that you dropped to hide
behind a respected name used previously by others you will continue to
violate my privacy.
[snip]
As you have recently confirmed,
(snip)
I have never confirmed you used the Cubafaq name.
(snip)
DAN CHRISTENSEN AGAIN EXPOSED AS THE LIAR HE IS.
PLEASE FOLLOW THE LINKS HE POSTED
https://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.cuba/msg/94f651d80886e68c?hl=en&pli=1

Link to your lies. Not a message of mine.
https://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.cuba/msg/fc3886122a129645?hl=en

Message by Dan Christensen announcing his site entitled:
CUBA: Issues & Answer

Thanks for confirming I was right.

All I ever said was that you had a page with an abbreviation in the HTML
NOT the name of a site.
NOT the name of a user in Usenet.

You once had a page called "PL...." on your site (before a third party
and I forced you to remove the slanderous pack of lies)
https://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.cuba/browse_thread/thread/14579a254037551e/7f7a588a2513f299?hl=en&lnk=gst&q=100%25+improvement#7f7a588a2513f299
Do you now claim PL as your name?

Thanks for being such a fool Dan Christensen.


I have never confirmed you used the Cubafaq name. On the contrary. Just
another desperate lie of Dan Christensen.

In fact you never did for your posts.
You posted a "Dan Christensen".
Not for your site entitled "Issues ..."

You just are trying to blackmail people in to giving you a "get out of
jail for free" card.
Won't work.

Thanks for confirming you are in vain trying to blackmail me.

You said it yourself Dan Christensen
As long as I refer to your name of 12 years that you dropped to hide
behind a respected name used previously by others you will continue to
violate my privacy.
That is what you said.
I exposed your "lobbyist", CIA" and "Nazi" lies for 10 years and as we
speak other are trying to intimidate me in the manner you try to. I have
nothing to lose.
You have. You are the "irrational" one, Dan.

Again the facts:

Not my site.
Cubafaq's.

Not his selection of ad: a combination of your browsing behavior and the
content of the site.

I see you dropped the lying claim I ever said I saw any "teen photos".
Never said so. That you now have conformed.

You are the sleazy one here and your continued campaign of slander and
intimidation confirms that.
You don't deny any of this I see.

EXPOSING DAN CHRISTENSEN'S PERSONAL SLANDEROUS ATTACK ON ME AND CUBAFAQ

Each of us (unknowingly) influences the ads wee see online.
We decide which sites we visit. They provide the contextual element of
the ad selection.
Past browsing behavior as laid down in cookies and other tracking
systems is also a determining factor is the selection of ads: the
historical element.

The site owner as a rule selects the standard "image and text" ad, the
color and the size.
The image or text ad shown is a combination of "contextual" elements
(what is on the site - in the case of Cubafaq's site: news about Cuba)
and "historical" elements that are based on your browsing behavior as
reflected in your cookies.

For example: a man that visits lots of sites on fishing will be targeted
with information on fishing trips / opportunities in Canada when he goes
to a Canadian travel site.

A person with a "historical" record (or open sites of a certain
nature)is more likely to get certain ads than others.
It is of course not a perfect system, but Google has a solid reputation
for its ads strategies and techniques. Some people are clearly more
likely to be targeted with a certain type of ads than others who have no
supporting historical base.

So blaming others for content provided to you by Google Adsense based on
your choices of current and past visits of sites is hypocrite Dan
Christensen.

Do you now understand why you ridiculed yourself here again, Dan.
Don't blame others for your debacle: you slanderous campaign of personal
attacks brought you this. Your continued attacks will bring you more
ridicule.

See:

"A while back, Google AdSense migrated from purely contextual
advertising to historical advertising. I didn't notice until I visited
the Economist web site, once. Since then, it feels like 50% of the web
is trying to get me to subscribe!

The difference is clearly illustrated on the screen capture. On the
left, page visited using Google Chrome, my regular browser on my home
computer. On the right, IE 9 beta, which I rarely use.

There are a couple of problems with the historical, cookie based
advertising. The main one is that I already subscribe to both The
Economist and Netflix! The second is if I click on The Economist one, it
bring me to an offer for Americans only!"

http://altavistagoogle.blogspot.com/2011/01/impact-of-cookies-on-google-adsense.html

Some advice to all:
- clean your cookies and browsing history. Note that that will remove
the "visited site list" in your browser and may force you to log in
again on certain sites.
- use safe connections while browsing like https://encrypted.google.com/
Lots of add-ons are available to protect your privacy

The two above will suffice for most people. Beyond that there are a
series of other others, but I don't want to show my hand too much.

Having been the target of numerous - both "cyber" and "verbal" - attacks
I kind of learned to protect myself.
Let's see what Dan Christensen's next attack brings.
If none this post closes that matter for me.

PS: You are such a pompous asshole Dan Christensen. .
CubaFAQ
2011-04-19 21:54:18 UTC
Permalink
On Apr 19, 5:09 pm, PL <***@pandora.be> wrote:

In fact, Paul Lamot wrote.

(If you use my name, I will use yours. That's fair, isn't it?)
Post by PL
In fact Dan Christensen wrote in his slanderous blackmail campaign
Post by CubaFAQ
Post by PL
In fact Dan Christensen in his relentless slander campaign wrote the
same he wrote half an hour earlier.
thanks for confirming to all this is no more than another slander
campaign, Dan Christensen.
(snip)
   >>>>>>    Very familiar: more abuse.
   >>>>>>    In fact Dan Christensen who is trying to blackmail me in to
silence with
   >>>>>>    a new series of abuses wrote.
   >>>>>    No one is trying to "blackmail" you into silence,
   >>>>    Yes you are Dan Christensen
   >>>    Wrong again,
   >>    Nope.
   >>    You said it yourself Dan Christensen
   >>    As long as I refer to your name of 12 years that you dropped to hide
   >>    behind a respected name used previously by others you will continue to
   >>    violate my privacy.
   >    That is another issue altogether.
(snip)
Nope.
that is the only issue.
If so, then the resolution is simple(snip)
You stop all your lies, spam and insults and there is no more Dan
Christensen
You stop using my name and no more "Paul Lamot."
Post by PL
You said it yourself Dan Christensen
As long as I refer to your name of 12 years that you dropped to hide
behind a respected name used previously by others you will continue to
violate my privacy.
[snip]
As you have recently confirmed,
(snip)
What the cowardly Paul Lamot snipped for all too obvious reasons:

As you have recently confirmed, I have been using the CubaFAQ name
(in
my website URL) for over 10 years (since 2000). And as long as you
continue to use my full name, I will continue to use yours. Get used
to it. (Have you Googled your name lately, Paul Lamot?)
Post by PL
Post by CubaFAQ
Post by PL
I have never confirmed you used the Cubafaq name.
(snip)
DAN CHRISTENSEN AGAIN EXPOSED AS THE LIAR HE IS.
PLEASE FOLLOW THE LINKS HE POSTED
 > https://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.cuba/msg/94f651d80886e68c?hl=en
Link to your lies. Not a message of mine.
Your non-reply: https://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.cuba/msg/522bf45244d9fbbe?hl=en^f651d80886e68c

Again, thanks for confirming my longstanding use of "CubaFAQ."
Post by PL
 >https://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.cuba/msg/fc3886122a129645...
CUBA: Issues & Answer
The original link given as: www.netcom.ca/~dchris/CubaFAQ.html
Post by PL
Thanks for confirming I was right.
Thanks for confirming you lied, Paul Lamot. When will you learn?
Post by PL
All I ever said was that you had a page with an abbreviation in the HTML
Thanks again for confirming my longstanding use of "CubaFAQ."
Post by PL
NOT the name of a site.
"CubaFAQ" was in the URL from day 1. And unlike your cheap imitation
site (axed by WordPress http://cubafaq.wordpress.com/ and recently
relocated) it had answers to Frequently asked questions about Cuba.
Your cheap imitation was (and still is) nothing more than a shell for
copyrighted cut-and-paste news articles that are widely available on
the internet from sources like Google News. Not one FAQ. Not one
original article.
Post by PL
NOT the name of a user in Usenet.
There is no CubaFAQ here but me.
Post by PL
You once had a page called "PL...." on your site (before a third party
and I forced you to remove the slanderous pack of lies)https://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.cuba/browse_thread/thread...
[snipping portion of Paul Lamot's posting already debunked here. See
previous postings]

You are a masochist, aren't your, Paul Lamot?

Some background: Some years ago, Paul Lamot repeatedly claimed over a
period of years here that a certain US medical expert, who should know
(and shall remain nameless), said Cuban health stats were falsified.
As usual, Paul Lamot was twisting the words of another to advance his
bloodthirsty political agenda.

One day, the good doctor e-mailed both of us exposing Paul Lamot for
the truly desperate liar that he is. I posted his e-mail at my
website. On the off-chance that some idiot just might believe Paul
Lamot's lies, the good doctor asked that I take it down. I did so out
of respect for him. It was almost worth it to see Paul Lamot squirm,
but as readers here can see, there is no shortage of his lies to be
exposed here!

As for the rest of Paul Lamot's pathetic posting, he is simply
repeating his lies, each of which have already been exposed here. What
a loser!

Dan
Visit my CUBA: Issues & Answers website at its new home:
http://www3.sympatico.ca/danchristienses/CubaFAQ.html
PL
2011-04-19 22:26:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by PL
In fact Dan Christensen wrote in his slanderous blackmail campaign
Post by CubaFAQ
Post by PL
In fact Dan Christensen in his relentless slander campaign wrote the
same he wrote half an hour earlier.
thanks for confirming to all this is no more than another slander
campaign, Dan Christensen.
(snip)
Post by CubaFAQ
Post by PL
Post by CubaFAQ
Post by PL
Post by CubaFAQ
Post by PL
Very familiar: more abuse.
In fact Dan Christensen who is trying to blackmail me in to
silence with
Post by CubaFAQ
Post by PL
Post by CubaFAQ
Post by PL
Post by CubaFAQ
Post by PL
a new series of abuses wrote.
No one is trying to "blackmail" you into silence,
Yes you are Dan Christensen
Wrong again,
Nope.
You said it yourself Dan Christensen
As long as I refer to your name of 12 years that you dropped to hide
behind a respected name used previously by others you will continue to
violate my privacy.
That is another issue altogether.
(snip)
Nope.
that is the only issue.
If so, then the resolution is simple(snip)
You stop all your lies, spam and insults and there is no more Dan
Christensen
You stop using my name
(snip)

When you stop all your lies, spam and insults and there is no more Dan
Christensen

DAN CHRISTENSEN AGAIN EXPOSED AS THE LIAR HE IS.
PLEASE FOLLOW THE LINKS HE POSTED
https://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.cuba/msg/94f651d80886e68c?hl=en&pli=1

Link to your lies. Not a message of mine.
https://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.cuba/msg/fc3886122a129645?hl=en

Message by Dan Christensen announcing his site entitled:
CUBA: Issues & Answer

Thanks for confirming I was right.

All I ever said was that you had a page with an abbreviation in the HTML
NOT the name of a site.
NOT the name of a user in Usenet.

You once had a page called "PL...." on your site (before a third party
and I forced you to remove the slanderous pack of lies)
https://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.cuba/browse_thread/thread/14579a254037551e/7f7a588a2513f299?hl=en&lnk=gst&q=100%25+improvement#7f7a588a2513f299
Do you now claim PL as your name?

Thanks for being such a fool Dan Christensen.


I have never confirmed you used the Cubafaq name. On the contrary. Just
another desperate lie of Dan Christensen.

In fact you never did for your posts.
You posted a "Dan Christensen".
Not for your site entitled "Issues ..."

You just are trying to blackmail people in to giving you a "get out of
jail for free" card.
Won't work.

Thanks for confirming you are in vain trying to blackmail me.

You said it yourself Dan Christensen
As long as I refer to your name of 12 years that you dropped to hide
behind a respected name used previously by others you will continue to
violate my privacy.
That is what you said.
I exposed your "lobbyist", CIA" and "Nazi" lies for 10 years and as we
speak other are trying to intimidate me in the manner you try to. I have
nothing to lose.
You have. You are the "irrational" one, Dan.

Again the facts:

Not my site.
Cubafaq's.

Not his selection of ad: a combination of your browsing behavior and the
content of the site.

I see you dropped the lying claim I ever said I saw any "teen photos".
Never said so. That you now have conformed.

You are the sleazy one here and your continued campaign of slander and
intimidation confirms that.
You don't deny any of this I see.

EXPOSING DAN CHRISTENSEN'S PERSONAL SLANDEROUS ATTACK ON ME AND CUBAFAQ

Each of us (unknowingly) influences the ads wee see online.
We decide which sites we visit. They provide the contextual element of
the ad selection.
Past browsing behavior as laid down in cookies and other tracking
systems is also a determining factor is the selection of ads: the
historical element.

The site owner as a rule selects the standard "image and text" ad, the
color and the size.
The image or text ad shown is a combination of "contextual" elements
(what is on the site - in the case of Cubafaq's site: news about Cuba)
and "historical" elements that are based on your browsing behavior as
reflected in your cookies.

For example: a man that visits lots of sites on fishing will be targeted
with information on fishing trips / opportunities in Canada when he goes
to a Canadian travel site.

A person with a "historical" record (or open sites of a certain
nature)is more likely to get certain ads than others.
It is of course not a perfect system, but Google has a solid reputation
for its ads strategies and techniques. Some people are clearly more
likely to be targeted with a certain type of ads than others who have no
supporting historical base.

So blaming others for content provided to you by Google Adsense based on
your choices of current and past visits of sites is hypocrite Dan
Christensen.

Do you now understand why you ridiculed yourself here again, Dan.
Don't blame others for your debacle: you slanderous campaign of personal
attacks brought you this. Your continued attacks will bring you more
ridicule.

See:

"A while back, Google AdSense migrated from purely contextual
advertising to historical advertising. I didn't notice until I visited
the Economist web site, once. Since then, it feels like 50% of the web
is trying to get me to subscribe!

The difference is clearly illustrated on the screen capture. On the
left, page visited using Google Chrome, my regular browser on my home
computer. On the right, IE 9 beta, which I rarely use.

There are a couple of problems with the historical, cookie based
advertising. The main one is that I already subscribe to both The
Economist and Netflix! The second is if I click on The Economist one, it
bring me to an offer for Americans only!"

http://altavistagoogle.blogspot.com/2011/01/impact-of-cookies-on-google-adsense.html

Some advice to all:
- clean your cookies and browsing history. Note that that will remove
the "visited site list" in your browser and may force you to log in
again on certain sites.
- use safe connections while browsing like https://encrypted.google.com/
Lots of add-ons are available to protect your privacy

The two above will suffice for most people. Beyond that there are a
series of other others, but I don't want to show my hand too much.

Having been the target of numerous - both "cyber" and "verbal" - attacks
I kind of learned to protect myself.
Let's see what Dan Christensen's next attack brings.
If none this post closes that matter for me.

PS: You are such a pompous asshole Dan Christensen. .

Does Dan Christensen have any claim tgo the "Cubafaq" name: no.

The facts: the slanderous page Dan was forced to remove from his website
(at his previous ISP). Now all gone.

See:
100% improvement in Dan's site
Feb 26 2001, 8:54 pm
http://www.netcom.ca/~dchris/PL.html"

https://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.cuba/msg/1b54112dc6e22f26?hl=en

So: "PL" in the name of the page

In this message:
https://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.cuba/msg/012d5390e11a93c1?hl=en
he claims he is entitled to the sole use of the Cubafaq name because
another page on this then website has "cubafaq" in its html name (just
like "pl" on the other case")

The link refers to:

"Visit my new website, "CUBA: Issues & Answer"
Dan Christensen
Mar 5 2000, 10:00 am
Thanks everyone for your patience. I have "dumbed" down the technology a
bit -- removed frames and JavaScript -- so it SHOULD work on any browser
now.

www.netcom.ca/~dchris/CubaFAQ.html

Dan"

https://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.cuba/msg/fc3886122a129645?hl=en


"cubafaq" in the HTML of his now defunct site.

In that message Dan Christensen uses his name to post and refers to his
site not as "cubafaq", but ""CUBA: Issues & Answer"

This shows that Dan Christensen:
- until recently NEVER used the name Cubafaq in Usnet
- NEVER called his site "Cubafaq".

Dan Christensen has no claim to the "cubafaq" name as he has no claim to
the "PL" name.

ANOTHER LIE OF DAN CHRISTENSEN EXPOSED
PL
2011-04-19 21:21:24 UTC
Permalink
The facts: the slanderous page Dan was forced to remove from his website
(at his previous ISP). Now all gone.

See:
100% improvement in Dan's site
Feb 26 2001, 8:54 pm
http://www.netcom.ca/~dchris/PL.html"

https://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.cuba/msg/1b54112dc6e22f26?hl=en

So: "PL" in the name of the page

In this message:
https://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.cuba/msg/012d5390e11a93c1?hl=en
he claims he is entitled to the sole use of the Cubafaq name because
another page on this then website has "cubafaq" in its html name (just
like "pl" on the other case")

The link refers to:

"Visit my new website, "CUBA: Issues & Answer"
Dan Christensen
Mar 5 2000, 10:00 am
Thanks everyone for your patience. I have "dumbed" down the technology a
bit -- removed frames and JavaScript -- so it SHOULD work on any browser
now.

www.netcom.ca/~dchris/CubaFAQ.html

Dan"

https://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.cuba/msg/fc3886122a129645?hl=en


"cubafaq" in the HTML of his now defunct site.

In that message Dan Christensen uses his name to post and refers to his
site not as "cubafaq", but ""CUBA: Issues & Answer"

This shows that Dan Christensen:
- until recently NEVER used the name Cubafaq in Usnet
- NEVER called his site "Cubafaq".

Dan Christensen has no claim to the "cubafaq" name as he has no claim to
the "PL" name.

ANOTHER LIE OF DAN CHRISTENSEN EXPOSED
CubaFAQ
2011-04-19 23:16:26 UTC
Permalink
On Apr 19, 5:21 pm, PL <***@pandora.be> wrote:

[snipping portion of Paul Lamot's pathetic posting already debunked
here -- see previous posting]

When you use my name, I will use your name, Paul Lamot. That's fair,
isn't it?
Post by PL
So: "PL" in the name of the page
In this message:https://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.cuba/msg/012d5390e11a93c1...
he claims he is entitled to the sole use of the Cubafaq name because
another page on this then website has "cubafaq" in its html name (just
like "pl" on the other case")
Desperately grasping at straws, eh, Paul Lamot? What a loser!
Post by PL
"Visit my new website, "CUBA: Issues & Answer"              
Dan Christensen        
Mar 5 2000, 10:00 am
Thanks everyone for your patience. I have "dumbed" down the technology a
bit -- removed frames and JavaScript -- so it SHOULD work on any browser
now.
www.netcom.ca/~dchris/CubaFAQ.html
Dan"
https://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.cuba/msg/fc3886122a129645...
"cubafaq" in the HTML of his now defunct site.
It was relocated when I changed ISP's. My website was moved to:
http://www3.sympatico.ca/danchristienses/CubaFAQ.html

Still "CubaFAQ".

And even after 11 years, it still has Paul Lamot shitting his pants.
So much so, that he had to used "cubafaq" for his own cheap imitation
of it (axed by WordPress http://cubafaq.wordpress.com/ and recently
relocated). Why use "cubafaq" when there is not a single FAQ or
original article anywhere on the site -- just cut-and-paste news
articles? No doubt in the desperate hope of confusing readers about my
own website. What a loser.

The rest of Paul Lamot's pathetic posting has already been debunked
here. See my previous posting here.

Dan
Visit my CUBA: Issues & Answers website at its new home:
http://www3.sympatico.ca/danchristienses/CubaFAQ.html
(The original CubaFAQ website. Don't be fooled by Paul Lamot's cheap
imitations.)
PL
2011-04-20 11:19:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by CubaFAQ
[snipping
as usual Dan Christensen snips the facts that expose his lies
Post by CubaFAQ
Post by PL
So: "PL" in the name of the page
In this message:https://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.cuba/msg/012d5390e11a93c1...
he claims he is entitled to the sole use of the Cubafaq name because
another page on this then website has "cubafaq" in its html name (just
like "pl" on the other case")
Desperately grasping at straws,('snip)
Nope.
Exposing your twisted logic.
But thanks for confirming that some letters in the name of a html file
do not entitle anyone to a name.
You have exposed your own lies.

A summary: since over 12 years Dan Christensen has been lying and
defaming me because I exposed him for what he was and for exposing his
propaganda.
He hasn't stopped lying and insulting for the last 12 years and now is
desperately trying to hide behind a new alias because he knows he is
utterly discredited. Dan Christensen lies when he claims that he has
used the handle either as a person or as name of his website.

In his desperate attempt to monopolize the name Dan Christensen has
slandered me and another person that has used the name "Cubafaq" as
handle and name of one of his sites for years.
As usual Dan Christensen takes one thing (a 404 page of a site abandoned
by its owner) and claims all kinds of "bad behaviour". About the new
location of the site he claims it has been loaded with inappropriate
sexual content by its owner while the ads Dan Christensen sees on hos
screen are generated by a mix of context (the site - on Cuba) and his
historical behavior (sites visited).

Again this is exposed as another slanderous campaign (apparently part of
another orchestrated campaign) to slander me personally in the hope that
I will no longer post. I have received messages to that extent.


EXPOSING DAN CHRISTENSEN'S PERSONAL SLANDEROUS ATTACK ON ME AND CUBAFAQ

Each of us (unknowingly) influences the ads wee see online.
We decide which sites we visit. They provide the contextual element of
the ad selection.
Past browsing behavior as laid down in cookies and other tracking
systems is also a determining factor is the selection of ads: the
historical element.

The site owner as a rule selects the standard "image and text" ad, the
color and the size.
The image or text ad shown is a combination of "contextual" elements
(what is on the site - in the case of Cubafaq's site: news about Cuba)
and "historical" elements that are based on your browsing behavior as
reflected in your cookies.

For example: a man that visits lots of sites on fishing will be targeted
with information on fishing trips / opportunities in Canada when he goes
to a Canadian travel site.

A person with a "historical" record (or open sites of a certain
nature)is more likely to get certain ads than others.
It is of course not a perfect system, but Google has a solid reputation
for its ads strategies and techniques. Some people are clearly more
likely to be targeted with a certain type of ads than others who have no
supporting historical base.

So blaming others for content provided to you by Google Adsense based on
your choices of current and past visits of sites is hypocrite Dan
Christensen.

Do you now understand why you ridiculed yourself here again, Dan.
Don't blame others for your debacle: you slanderous campaign of personal
attacks brought you this. Your continued attacks will bring you more
ridicule.

See:

"A while back, Google AdSense migrated from purely contextual
advertising to historical advertising. I didn't notice until I visited
the Economist web site, once. Since then, it feels like 50% of the web
is trying to get me to subscribe!

The difference is clearly illustrated on the screen capture. On the
left, page visited using Google Chrome, my regular browser on my home
computer. On the right, IE 9 beta, which I rarely use.

There are a couple of problems with the historical, cookie based
advertising. The main one is that I already subscribe to both The
Economist and Netflix! The second is if I click on The Economist one, it
bring me to an offer for Americans only!"

http://altavistagoogle.blogspot.com/2011/01/impact-of-cookies-on-google-adsense.html

Some advice to all:
- clean your cookies and browsing history. Note that that will remove
the "visited site list" in your browser and may force you to log in
again on certain sites.
- use safe connections while browsing like https://encrypted.google.com/
Lots of add-ons are available to protect your privacy

The two above will suffice for most people. Beyond that there are a
series of other others, but I don't want to show my hand too much.

Having been the target of numerous - both "cyber" and "verbal" - attacks
I kind of learned to protect myself.
Let's see what Dan Christensen's next attack brings.
If none this post closes that matter for me.

PS: You are such a pompous asshole Dan Christensen. .


DAN CHRISTENSEN HAS NOT USED THE NAME CUBAFAQ IN THE PAST.

The facts: the slanderous page Dan was forced to remove from his website
(at his previous ISP). Now all gone.

See:
100% improvement in Dan's site
Feb 26 2001, 8:54 pm
http://www.netcom.ca/~dchris/PL.html"

https://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.cuba/msg/1b54112dc6e22f26?hl=en

So: "PL" in the name of the page

In this message:
https://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.cuba/msg/012d5390e11a93c1?hl=en
he claims he is entitled to the sole use of the Cubafaq name because
another page on this then website has "cubafaq" in its html name (just
like "pl" on the other case")

The link refers to:

"Visit my new website, "CUBA: Issues & Answer"
Dan Christensen
Mar 5 2000, 10:00 am
Thanks everyone for your patience. I have "dumbed" down the technology a
bit -- removed frames and JavaScript -- so it SHOULD work on any browser
now.

www.netcom.ca/~dchris/CubaFAQ.html

Dan"

https://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.cuba/msg/fc3886122a129645?hl=en


"cubafaq" in the HTML of his now defunct site.

In that message Dan Christensen uses his name to post and refers to his
site not as "cubafaq", but ""CUBA: Issues & Answer"

This shows that Dan Christensen:
- until recently NEVER used the name Cubafaq in Usnet
- NEVER called his site "Cubafaq".

Dan Christensen has no claim to the "cubafaq" name as he has no claim to
the "PL" name.

ANOTHER LIE OF DAN CHRISTENSEN EXPOSED
CubaFAQ
2011-04-20 13:36:21 UTC
Permalink
As usual, the cowardly Paul Lamot is unable to address the issues
here. He has simply snipped my entire reply and repeated nearly word-
for-word his already failed lies and evasions. What a loser!

Remember, when you use my name, I use yours. Your clumsy blackmail
attempts won't work. (Paul Lamot: "You stop all your lies, spam and
insults and there is no more 'Dan Christensen'.")

Really, if this is the best you can do, Paul Lamot, and you STILL have
nothing new and relevant to add, do not expect a reply from me on this
matter.

Dan
Visit my CUBA: Issues & Answers website at its new home:
http://www3.sympatico.ca/danchristienses/CubaFAQ.html
(The original CubaFAQ website. Don't be fooled by Paul Lamot's cheap
imitations.)

PS: On Paul Lamot's countless other lies and evasions on everything
from his lobbying exploits to the international condemnation of his
beloved embargo, see: "PL's same tired old lies and evasions EXPOSED"
at http://groups.google.ca/group/soc.culture.cuba/msg/36c96cf26743ccca?hl=en
Post by PL
Post by CubaFAQ
[snipping
as usual Dan Christensen snips the facts that expose his lies
Post by CubaFAQ
Post by PL
So: "PL" in the name of the page
In this message:https://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.cuba/msg/012d5390e11a93c1...
he claims he is entitled to the sole use of the Cubafaq name because
another page on this then website has "cubafaq" in its html name (just
like "pl" on the other case")
Desperately grasping at straws,('snip)
Nope.
Exposing your twisted logic.
But thanks for confirming that some letters in the name of a html file
do not entitle anyone to a name.
You have exposed your own lies.
PL
2011-04-20 14:22:14 UTC
Permalink
On 20/04/2011 15:36, CubaFAQ wrote:

another lie: I never blackmailed you, Dan, I just asked you to stop your
abuses.
Post by CubaFAQ
As usual, the cowardly
(snip)

as usual Dan Christensen is reduced to snipping and running

Exposing your twisted logic.
But thanks for confirming that some letters in the name of a html file
do not entitle anyone to a name.
You have exposed your own lies.

A summary: since over 12 years Dan Christensen has been lying and
defaming me because I exposed him for what he was and for exposing his
propaganda.
He hasn't stopped lying and insulting for the last 12 years and now is
desperately trying to hide behind a new alias because he knows he is
utterly discredited. Dan Christensen lies when he claims that he has
used the handle either as a person or as name of his website.

In his desperate attempt to monopolize the name Dan Christensen has
slandered me and another person that has used the name "Cubafaq" as
handle and name of one of his sites for years.
As usual Dan Christensen takes one thing (a 404 page of a site abandoned
by its owner) and claims all kinds of "bad behaviour". About the new
location of the site he claims it has been loaded with inappropriate
sexual content by its owner while the ads Dan Christensen sees on hos
screen are generated by a mix of context (the site - on Cuba) and his
historical behavior (sites visited).

Again this is exposed as another slanderous campaign (apparently part of
another orchestrated campaign) to slander me personally in the hope that
I will no longer post. I have received messages to that extent.


EXPOSING DAN CHRISTENSEN'S PERSONAL SLANDEROUS ATTACK ON ME AND CUBAFAQ

Each of us (unknowingly) influences the ads wee see online.
We decide which sites we visit. They provide the contextual element of
the ad selection.
Past browsing behavior as laid down in cookies and other tracking
systems is also a determining factor is the selection of ads: the
historical element.

The site owner as a rule selects the standard "image and text" ad, the
color and the size.
The image or text ad shown is a combination of "contextual" elements
(what is on the site - in the case of Cubafaq's site: news about Cuba)
and "historical" elements that are based on your browsing behavior as
reflected in your cookies.

For example: a man that visits lots of sites on fishing will be targeted
with information on fishing trips / opportunities in Canada when he goes
to a Canadian travel site.

A person with a "historical" record (or open sites of a certain
nature)is more likely to get certain ads than others.
It is of course not a perfect system, but Google has a solid reputation
for its ads strategies and techniques. Some people are clearly more
likely to be targeted with a certain type of ads than others who have no
supporting historical base.

So blaming others for content provided to you by Google Adsense based on
your choices of current and past visits of sites is hypocrite Dan
Christensen.

Do you now understand why you ridiculed yourself here again, Dan.
Don't blame others for your debacle: you slanderous campaign of personal
attacks brought you this. Your continued attacks will bring you more
ridicule.

See:

"A while back, Google AdSense migrated from purely contextual
advertising to historical advertising. I didn't notice until I visited
the Economist web site, once. Since then, it feels like 50% of the web
is trying to get me to subscribe!

The difference is clearly illustrated on the screen capture. On the
left, page visited using Google Chrome, my regular browser on my home
computer. On the right, IE 9 beta, which I rarely use.

There are a couple of problems with the historical, cookie based
advertising. The main one is that I already subscribe to both The
Economist and Netflix! The second is if I click on The Economist one, it
bring me to an offer for Americans only!"

http://altavistagoogle.blogspot.com/2011/01/impact-of-cookies-on-google-adsense.html

Some advice to all:
- clean your cookies and browsing history. Note that that will remove
the "visited site list" in your browser and may force you to log in
again on certain sites.
- use safe connections while browsing like https://encrypted.google.com/
Lots of add-ons are available to protect your privacy

The two above will suffice for most people. Beyond that there are a
series of other others, but I don't want to show my hand too much.

Having been the target of numerous - both "cyber" and "verbal" - attacks
I kind of learned to protect myself.
Let's see what Dan Christensen's next attack brings.
If none this post closes that matter for me.

PS: You are such a pompous asshole Dan Christensen. .


DAN CHRISTENSEN HAS NOT USED THE NAME CUBAFAQ IN THE PAST.

The facts: the slanderous page Dan was forced to remove from his website
(at his previous ISP). Now all gone.

See:
100% improvement in Dan's site
Feb 26 2001, 8:54 pm
http://www.netcom.ca/~dchris/PL.html"

https://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.cuba/msg/1b54112dc6e22f26?hl=en

So: "PL" in the name of the page

In this message:
https://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.cuba/msg/012d5390e11a93c1?hl=en
he claims he is entitled to the sole use of the Cubafaq name because
another page on this then website has "cubafaq" in its html name (just
like "pl" on the other case")

The link refers to:

"Visit my new website, "CUBA: Issues & Answer"
Dan Christensen
Mar 5 2000, 10:00 am
Thanks everyone for your patience. I have "dumbed" down the technology a
bit -- removed frames and JavaScript -- so it SHOULD work on any browser
now.

www.netcom.ca/~dchris/CubaFAQ.html

Dan"

https://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.cuba/msg/fc3886122a129645?hl=en


"cubafaq" in the HTML of his now defunct site.

In that message Dan Christensen uses his name to post and refers to his
site not as "cubafaq", but ""CUBA: Issues & Answer"

This shows that Dan Christensen:
- until recently NEVER used the name Cubafaq in Usnet
- NEVER called his site "Cubafaq".

Dan Christensen has no claim to the "cubafaq" name as he has no claim to
the "PL" name.

ANOTHER LIE OF DAN CHRISTENSEN EXPOSED

Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...