|
|
Пишет Misha Verbitsky (![[info]](http://lj.rossia.org/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small} tiphareth) |
Re: Сдали тех сдадут и этих
>И в свободной Великобритании с её независимой прессой до сих пор
>никто за 25 лет не пожелал рассказать об этом предательстве, не поднял
>тревогу в обществе.
В 1990-х Николай Толстой (родственник писателя, граф, глава рода)
написал про это книгу, лорд, который устроил выдачу казаков, с ним
судился, и разорил его судами. Толстой выжил только потому, что был
независимый заработ (он очень популярный писатель-фантаст). Но англичане
раскаиваться в сотрудничестве со сталинистами не планируют.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikolai_T
In 1989, Lord Aldington, previously a British officer (chief-of-staff to Field Marshal Alexander), former Chairman of the Conservative Party, and then Chairman of Sun Alliance insurance company, commenced a libel action over allegations of war crimes made by Tolstoy in a pamphlet distributed by Nigel Watts, a man in dispute with Sun Alliance on an insurance matter.[10] Although Tolstoy was not the initial target of the libel action, he insisted in joining Watts as defendant because, Tolstoy later wrote, Watts was not a historian and so would have been unable to defend himself.[11] Tolstoy lost and was ordered to pay £2 million to Lord Aldington (£1.5 million in damages and £0.5 million in costs). This sum was over three times any previous award for libel.[12]
According to historian Bob Moore, although the repatriations did occur, Tolstoy's intention was to minimize the culpability of the Cossacks for having sided with the Nazis, and in doing so he had undertaken manipulation of the sources and made "outrageous claims" that were exposed during the trial.[13]
Tolstoy delayed payment by appealing to fifteen courts in Britain and Europe, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that the size of the penalty violated his right to freedom of expression.[14] Documents subsequently obtained from the Ministry of Defence suggested that, under Government instructions, files that could have had a bearing on the defence case might have been withdrawn from the Public Record Office and retained by the Ministry of Defence and Foreign Office throughout the run-up to the trial and the trial itself.[15]
Tolstoy sought to appeal on the basis of new evidence which he claimed proved Aldington had perjured himself over the date of his departure from Austria in May 1945. This was ruled inadmissible at a hearing in the High Courts of Justice, from which the press and public were barred, and his application for an appeal was rejected.[16]
In July 1995, the European Court of Human Rights decided unanimously that the British Government had violated Tolstoy's rights in respect of Article 10 of the Convention on Human Rights. This decision referred only to the amount of the damages awarded against him and did not overturn the verdict of the libel action.
>И в свободной Великобритании с её независимой прессой до сих пор
>никто за 25 лет не пожелал рассказать об этом предательстве, не поднял
>тревогу в обществе.
В 1990-х Николай Толстой (родственник писателя, граф, глава рода)
написал про это книгу, лорд, который устроил выдачу казаков, с ним
судился, и разорил его судами. Толстой выжил только потому, что был
независимый заработ (он очень популярный писатель-фантаст). Но англичане
раскаиваться в сотрудничестве со сталинистами не планируют.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikolai_T
In 1989, Lord Aldington, previously a British officer (chief-of-staff to Field Marshal Alexander), former Chairman of the Conservative Party, and then Chairman of Sun Alliance insurance company, commenced a libel action over allegations of war crimes made by Tolstoy in a pamphlet distributed by Nigel Watts, a man in dispute with Sun Alliance on an insurance matter.[10] Although Tolstoy was not the initial target of the libel action, he insisted in joining Watts as defendant because, Tolstoy later wrote, Watts was not a historian and so would have been unable to defend himself.[11] Tolstoy lost and was ordered to pay £2 million to Lord Aldington (£1.5 million in damages and £0.5 million in costs). This sum was over three times any previous award for libel.[12]
According to historian Bob Moore, although the repatriations did occur, Tolstoy's intention was to minimize the culpability of the Cossacks for having sided with the Nazis, and in doing so he had undertaken manipulation of the sources and made "outrageous claims" that were exposed during the trial.[13]
Tolstoy delayed payment by appealing to fifteen courts in Britain and Europe, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that the size of the penalty violated his right to freedom of expression.[14] Documents subsequently obtained from the Ministry of Defence suggested that, under Government instructions, files that could have had a bearing on the defence case might have been withdrawn from the Public Record Office and retained by the Ministry of Defence and Foreign Office throughout the run-up to the trial and the trial itself.[15]
Tolstoy sought to appeal on the basis of new evidence which he claimed proved Aldington had perjured himself over the date of his departure from Austria in May 1945. This was ruled inadmissible at a hearing in the High Courts of Justice, from which the press and public were barred, and his application for an appeal was rejected.[16]
In July 1995, the European Court of Human Rights decided unanimously that the British Government had violated Tolstoy's rights in respect of Article 10 of the Convention on Human Rights. This decision referred only to the amount of the damages awarded against him and did not overturn the verdict of the libel action.
Добавить комментарий:
