Please note if you’ve had a comment deleted you’ve probably also had an email explaining why.

As for the four-languages thing, Fireblade, well done on your linguistic dexterity. However, I read several languages of articles as well. Granted, I use Babelfish to translate those items that are neither in English nor in Spanish (and what I remember from my language studies to piece together the inevitable errors it makes), but then so can anyone else who wants to do it. Babelfish can decode many languages ranging from German to Russian – a very useful tool for anyone who wants to expand their horizons (pity it doesn’t decode computer error messages, but that’s another story…)

So even if you do read four languages fluently, that doesn’t necessarily mean I with my lesser linguistic achievements won’t have understood the same articles you have read. The trick is to assess each individual source and story for validity, biases, misunderstandings etc. and then piece together what is likely after taking those things into account.

In future, could you please link to items you are talking about when asked about them?

Then we may be able to find the lecture Franz gave Ron. I’ve looked on the Auto Motor und Sport site, and the nearest I can find is Franz commenting on the car they’re wanting to debut in Turkey…

The WMSC transcripts, for instance, make it clear that the only "evidence" that the Ferrari/McLaren mess ever involved more than four rogue employees (one from Ferrari, three from McLaren) was Max Mosley’s own repeated opinions. A prosecuting lawyer’s opinion does not constitute evidence – in any language. It’s all in writing in the PDF files provided by the FIA, and Max himself confirmed it in an interview he gave to the Paddock, which the FIA itself decided was worth a link, despite being pro-Mosley…

Those that are claiming McLaren’s guilty verdict is based on hard evidence of widespread wrongdoing, or even wrongdoing outside the circle of Coughlan, Alonso and de la Rosa, are relying on sources that didn’t analyse the primary paperwork properly (or using the summaries the FIA provided that do not accurately reflect what the transcripts themselves reveal).

As for "character assassination", if Max hadn’t made so many mistakes before the scandal, nobody would have taken advantage of it. If Max had issued a swift confirmation of which bits were true and false (five days after the allegations appeared is not quick), apologised for unintended offence and kept a low profile for a while, even the past professional errors would have not been enough to remove him. As it is, he merely gave his critics an opportunity to oust and disregard him. Sad but true.

I fully agree that Ron Dennis claiming no knowledge of Max’s plight rings hollow after his similar statements last year concerning Spygate. Do I believe he has knowledge of who dunit? No. As for Mr. Novak’s statement, it will be interesting to hear his sources that generated that comment.

For example, if someone quoted the German equivalent of The Guardian I’d be more likely to take it seriously than if they cited the Dutch equivalent of the Daily Sport.

But that’s besides the point, Fireblade, if you don’t share these sources with us.

I see a member of the Czech Automobile Association has made an ‘ambivalent and unclear‘ implication of Dennis’s involvement, and according to Dennis he is: "writing to Mr Novak and currently considering the appropriate route via which the remarks that have been attributed to him may be withdrawn or corrected."

Fireblade seems to be under the impression this blog has not concerned itself with the question of how the Mosley allegations came to light, in which case I suggest they read this post and especially the section titles ‘character assassination’: Why Max Mosley should resign where I stated:

A controversial figure such as Mosley is never short of critics and enemies, and only last year clashed publicly with McLaren in the ’spygate’ scandal. Any number of people might bear a grudge against him.

Lastly can I encourage everyone to keep the discussion on the facts of the matter and not resort to insults (as stipulated in the comment policy). I’ve deleted and edited a few comments for this reason.