Involved admin blocking opposition

FeloniousMonk was admonished in the  WebEx and Min_Zhu arbcom case 'not to use his administrative tools or give warnings in content disputes in which he is involved.'   This is evidence of recent involvement in a content dispute (reinserting a WP:BLP—WP:OR—WP:ATT violation, edit summary rv guettarda was correct, without participation in talk). (Furthermore, he  continued this behaviour against another editor in an unrelated issue, which is only given here as evidence of continuing disregard for the arbcom).  He is also  blocking outside the scope of the arbcom decision, even if one incorrectly asserts that I am party to it, including blocking (17 February 2007) for contributing (not voting!) to a  deletion discussion that was not an article, and removal of evidence that showed he was acting inappropriately.  He also made a previous block on 20 July 2006, incorrectly citing the arbcom decision of 'associated articles', while first providing no evidence, then false evidence, to justify his accusation and inappropriate block.  (Note that KillerChihuahua removed evidence from that page, claiming that it was posted by a banned user], while no one in that decision was banned from Wikipedia; therefore, the removal was inappropriate.)