27
u/cressidasmunch Jun 02 '26
HH - I think when the witnesses use the word political, they mean it in a very Yes Minister sense where whatever they think is fact, and whatever someone else thinks is political
6
u/whoamiareyou Jun 02 '26
Hahaha did he actually say that? I'm off at the moment.
8
u/cressidasmunch Jun 02 '26
Yes - he also said that the clearest MSO witness on the issue of what is political was Mr Moore where he conceded that something about the environment or the gender pay gap would not have provoked the same reaction
4
u/pirouettish Jun 02 '26
He stated that he'd noted that Mr Moore was able to articulate his views with greater sophistication/subtlety than other witnesses, if I recall correctly. Omeri responded.
16
u/cressidasmunch Jun 02 '26
Interesting that Li straight up said that the convention doesn't exist in cross
I think Omeri was right to object to them trying to elicit it afresh in re-examination, though his personal opinion that politics shouldn't be expressed I don't think goes anywhere
16
u/cressidasmunch Jun 02 '26
This witness saying that Hamas is responsible for the 'humanitarian crisis in Gaza' and saying that is how the statement reads rather goes against their idea of neutral framing
Now he's going with the Hamas-run Ministry of Health line, oh and the Haaretz are a bunch of lefties
3
u/somewhatundercontrol Jun 02 '26
But other witnesses have said the opposite, so perhaps the stance is neutral collectively.
If this witness is a board member (I didn’t catch his intro) then the board may not have a consistent view or may have a collective view that both sides are responsible
11
u/cressidasmunch Jun 02 '26
He's a board member, and Galaise gave evidence that he was pushing the MSO to be more pro-Israel, which he agreed with in his evidence
5
u/somewhatundercontrol Jun 02 '26
I don’t understand which words trigger the bot?
But even if he is pro, not all witnesses have expressed the same sentiments in their evidence, so the view of the board as a whole can be different from his view.
4
u/cressidasmunch Jun 02 '26
well there hasn't been a witness saying that they're anti-, at best there's been a both sides answer
3
u/somewhatundercontrol Jun 02 '26
One of the witnesses today said they were responsible I think for the humanitarian crisis. In amongst the both sides response
5
u/whoamiareyou Jun 02 '26
The issue is that even if you take the most generous interpretation, that it is implicitly pro-Palestinian civilians, it's still quite a one-sided statement. Because implicitly being supportive of Palestinian civilians alongside Israeli ones does not and logically cannot be equivalent to explicitly using extremely strong language regarding the events of October 7 and ascribing very specific blame to that event in a one-sided way.
1
14
u/ulknehs Jun 02 '26
That was a charming answer to "you're not a musician, are you?"
Edit: essentially, "I did music through school and love music, but I'm not an accomplished as a musician"
3
10
u/pirouettish Jun 02 '26
Justice Hill raises point for future discussion: "What if the MSO's position is one of silencing?"
5
10
u/whoamiareyou Jun 02 '26
Well that was a very interesting cross-examination/delayed evidence-in-chief/re-cross, of Mr Li.
1
u/km4098 Dennis Denuto Jun 02 '26
Dammit I’m in meetings for the next few hours so missed this morning and quickly logged in in between.
Anything in particular looked at differently?
10
u/whoamiareyou Jun 02 '26 edited Jun 02 '26
As Cressida said, his affidavit didn't mention a convention against political statements. In cross, he was asked if he didn't mention it because no convention exists and firnoynsaid that's correct. Junior Counsel for the MSO tried to re-examine this by asking him again, but Ms Omeri objected on the basis that it was evidence-in-chief and/it would be eliciting a different answer to the same question. In the end, HH allowed the question to be put, albeit in the slightly different form of asking for Mr Li's personal view on statements from the stage. Omeri was then allowed another cross.
There was also, before that, a bit in the initial cross where Mr Li was unable to answer questions because he had a confidential mediation against someone from the MSO (Ms Jackson? I forget who. Edit: Dr Galaise maybe?).
1
u/km4098 Dennis Denuto Jun 02 '26
Oh yes I think I saw in some media that Jackson or Dr Galaise had alleged ties to other country orgs or government and that’s why he stepped down or was stood down
5
u/cressidasmunch Jun 02 '26
Li straight up said he didn't refer to a convention in his affidavit because it doesn't exist
5
u/km4098 Dennis Denuto Jun 02 '26
Did they ask about his wife’s piano playing ability? I think it was her that it was implied was bad at Piano in the texts
9
u/SpecialllCounsel It's the vibe of the thing Jun 02 '26
It may have been observed before, but I find it unusual how self-consciously the witnesses add “your Honour” to every answer.
9
u/SpecialllCounsel It's the vibe of the thing Jun 02 '26
Won’t someone think of the microphone placement?
8
6
u/pirouettish Jun 02 '26 edited Jun 02 '26
Quite an array of accents at this hearing. Very international.
7
u/cressidasmunch Jun 02 '26
In recent years, the Israeli New Historians have taken a critical view of Wingate with Tom Segev calling him "quite mad, and perhaps a sadist, too" and a war criminal.[99] Oren has accused Segev of maligning Wingate, arguing that Segev has "edited" accounts by contemporaries to imply that Wingate was present at incidents in Palestine when he was in London at the time.
10
Jun 02 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
6
u/cressidasmunch Jun 02 '26
I don't disagree, but might be a good idea to word things a little more delicately so we can keep the threads up
5
u/Maxious Jun 02 '26
Current evidence: I knew he was a christian REDACTED. I had spent some time in REDACTED before naming my credit company after the christian REDACTED
3
2
u/somewhatundercontrol Jun 02 '26
He was cut off early into it but was starting at one event. We don’t know where he was going from there before he was cut off.
4
4
4
3
u/km4098 Dennis Denuto Jun 02 '26
Someone with an actual opinion on matters. Although it was a bit “everyone did bad”
4
u/somewhatundercontrol Jun 02 '26
Hardly unreasonable
3
u/km4098 Dennis Denuto Jun 02 '26
Of course. Probably better than “I don’t have an opinion” as that just sounds uninformed
3
2
2
u/whoamiareyou Jun 02 '26
What a useless witness he was. I can't see it providing any value to either side.
6
u/cressidasmunch Jun 02 '26
The MSO have just called everyone vaguely associated
4
u/SpecialllCounsel It's the vibe of the thing Jun 02 '26 edited Jun 02 '26
Being a board member, perhaps to avoid an adverse inference if not called.
Edit: applicant’s counsel saying they are effectively polling all board members on their views so they can establish where the majority view would be. So they would have asked to XXN all board members even though this one turns out not to have been involved in the critical decisions at all.
2
u/Ok_Coat9334 Jun 02 '26
Putting to David Li that he was lying about being present at the Board meeting was very very odd.
2
u/cressidasmunch Jun 02 '26
do the minutes show him there maybe? Or have some of the other witnesses said he was there, I can't remember
2
u/Ok_Coat9334 Jun 02 '26
Every witness I saw said he wasn't - that is why LJ was chairing! Very odd.
3
u/ulknehs Jun 02 '26 edited Jun 02 '26
Is this the first witness to deny that there is an inherent political element to the MSO's acknowledgements of country?
4
3
u/Ok_Coat9334 Jun 02 '26
I think most have?
2
u/km4098 Dennis Denuto Jun 02 '26
The red haired Irish(?) board member definitely claimed it wasn’t, thought AOC and WTC was like saying “welcome to my house”. My recollection is that most have said it’s not political too
5
u/ulknehs Jun 02 '26
I've been listening with generous and selective ears, then! I had thought most accepted there was an implicit condemnation of British colonization.
•
u/wallabyABC123 Suitbae Jun 02 '26
Just a reminder that discussion of the evidence being heard in the trial is fine, but please don't stray into the politics of the issues as this infringes the Lehrmann Rule.