“O judgment, thou art fled to brutish beasts,
And men have lost their reason!” -- William Shakespeare
GEORGE’S ULTIMATUM: You can do that? Ban me? Stifle dissent? The Wolf? You would do that? I thought you loved me George.
MY CHALLENGE: I have $1,000.00 that says I am not S. Watts. Put your money where your mouth is, George.
Don't forget, it was you (and others, for whom I have enough respect not to post their names on this bulletin board) who practically pleaded with me not to quit.
You, George, implored me with something about "voice of dissent," as if you were the "establishment" and I the little revolutionary radical noise-maker, the gadfly, as Mike put it.
You wanted/needed me then, George. You welcomed me “back” after a short vacation, too.
Now you got infected/infested with a prankster or several pranksters - so-called "trolls" and "gravediggers" or internet “stalkers” and who-knows-what.
All of a sudden everything that happens to you or your website is done by your "enemies." And who is that public enemy number one?
Me, Wolf, or anyone who points out your mistakes and errors and transgression of common decency – your Mr. Grimes and Mr. Meaners, to echo Mr. Watts.
You decided I was your enemy -- when you printed that salacious, bitter article which questioned CPTDA's legitimacy, by using Wiedersberg's, embittered reactionary, retaliatory comments which were and are neither news-worthy, nor noteworthy nor print-worthy.
At best, that matter should have been kept for your opinions and comments section, but you used it not like a tool, but like a weapon. That is called an attack.
You decided I was your enemy -- when I cornered you about the "Snakes" bs-torial, which was and is neither newsworthy, nor noteworthy nor print-worthy.
You used some non-newsworthy, non-noteworthy and non-print-worthy issues of basic differences, some misunderstandings and some inter-organizational squabbling not as a tool, but as a weapon. That is called an attack.
It’s not just bad judgment or poor taste in selecting material for publication.
You decided I was your enemy -- when you decided I was posting under various names and pseudonyms. Again, you use this issue not as a tool, but as a weapon. Again, that is called an attack.
It is bad and wrong to use a public forum, even if it is your public forum, in this way.
Didn’t they teach that in that MBA program? I think they call it ethics or something.
You have facilitated your cause celebre by blackening the name of people and organizations who don’t meet with your approval.
You besmirched a great and loving internationally renowned organization that has been instrumental in savings life, limb and liberty around the world, you besmirched me, but worst of all, you besmirched yourself.
That, sir, was bad and wrong. Foulks seems to be just one of your apostles, or one of your dupes. It’s not just my opinion as incredible that may be he does it to himself.
That is obvious to anyone who has a reading proficiency above the sixth grade. He actively continues to spread the dirt you started spreading around a year ago.
Now, in his latest flight of fancy, Foulks challenges Don, Yi and I, ignoring the fact that it was Don and Yi and I that have been challenging Foulks and you all along.
Your strategy and tactics include, but are not limited to the following:
Ignore valid comments and critiques,
Question critics’ and commentators’ credibility,
Question your adversaries’ veracity,
Brand anything not to your liking as immature,
Create division by branding people as outsiders,
Claim most of the adverse comments are coming from me,
Assume I am trolling and grave digging on your board.
The things that get posted herein may be all in good fun for a while, until someone reminds us of the dark and dreary truth about the way you and your associates have behaved.
You and nor any of your apostles of deceit are not “man” enough to admit you have screwed up, gone way too far, hurt the activities you profess to support and defend.
Do you think this will ever go away because you demand that it go away? Because you think by banning me, you get rid of the problem?
It will only go away when you admit your mistakes, confess your transgressions, own up to your wrong-doing and misbehaving -- like a real man.
You know, that "tell a lie often enough" stuff.
I am willing to forgive and forget. I have already forgotten most of the pigeon droppings you have left on my head and shoulders, but some of the things you and your cohorts have pulled off can not be forgiven until you own up to them.
You know, “To err is human, to forgive divine” stuff you may have heard about.
Remorse precedes forgiveness.
Did you see that post about integrity and credibility? Read it my friend. Take it to heart.
If you’re worried about a lawsuit or something, forget it. The issues herein are not worth litigating, in my non-legal opinion.
“I'm not upset that you lied to me, I'm upset that from now on I can't believe you.” -- Friedrich Nietzsche
“... I would sooner have you hate me for telling you the truth than adore me for telling you lies.” -- Pietro Aretino
“Sometimes I lie awake at night, and ask, 'Where have I gone wrong?' Then a voice says to me, 'This is going to take more than one night.'” -- Charles M. Schulz
“The worst lies are the lies we tell ourselves. We live in denial of what we do, even what we think. We do this because we're afraid. We fear we will not find love, and when we find it we fear we'll lose it. We fear that if we do not have love we will be unhappy.” -- Richard Bach
“Thou call'st me dog before thou hadst a cause, But since I am a dog, beware my fangs” -- William Shakespeare
Love, Peace and Happiness,
Wolfgang J. Weiss
(and not the Troll, Cyberman, Analyst, Insider, Outsider, Informant, jb, bj, Watts or anyone else you may think I may be). Who are the mystery posters? No one really cares, or should.
Even though my previous post contains several names and allusions to famous and infamous persons, their inclusion is not to be construed as disrespect (except fpe the really bad, evil guys I paraphrased, of course.)
Nope, behave yourself, Joseph Bellow/John Barry, don't fly off the handle over this.
"George Lutfullah ordered you to get off this site, so go back in the hole where you came from. Do you understand? I don't think so because you are stupid."
"Mr. Faarax"
Or
"I couldn't get one decent response before someone had to make a mockery over this."
"This is why cabdrivers will never get anywhere."
"I'm not putting up with this anymore. Any response in this thread that doesn't offer some sort of insight to my question will be deleted. Don't like it? Too bad. Go post somewhere else. You won't be missed."
Thanks Mr. George Lutfallah! Ban me too!
Hey, I was first in line to be banned.
Where are your manners, sir?
Can't you just wait until I get the big boot in the tukas from Mr. George, pa-leeese?
Mr. Farrax should only be banned because he is not spending enough time with his family.
Yi should be banned just because he knows Wolf.
Don should be banned because he has a law doctoralphd degree. Way to professional!
IS there a banning fee? How much to get banned.
duh
although i may think most of your posts are playful and immature, and sometimes spiteful and juvenile, that is your business, and i would not care about them one way or the other, though they seem mean-spirited at times, and that does bother me. i don't even take too much issue with you posting under all those pseudonyms. i do take issue with you lying about it though. a grown man shouldn't stoop to lying about his behavior when he's been caught out.
(and we know they are you, i don't feel the need to prove this, but i am a man of integrity, and don't lie as a habit)
the main issue at hand here is you posting as me. i did and do register a strong complaint about this practice. and mr. lutfallah has seemingly agreed with my position. i don't know if you post as anyone else. but i have put out the question to other posters on this site whether we as an online community can afford to put up with someone who would engage in such behavior.
mr. weiss, if you are a man, apologize, promise not to do it again, and we'll move on from here. but you have to live up to your promise too. we know where you post from and can track you back. remember that.
joseph bellow, and jb (not john barry or anyone else)
joseph bellow, and jb (not john barry or anyone else):
Option 1:
Please track Mr. Wess down and destroy his base, so he will never come back here again;
Option 2:
Please send any proof about Mr. Weiss' bad behavior to President Mike Foulks of the CCO for justice.
I hope that it helps this time!
This seems to keep coming back:
“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it."
Dear, dear, Wolfgang J. Weiss, of CPTDA infamy,
What are the 'lies', Wolf?
Who's telling them?
Was the 'flyer' (or brochure, as you called it) TRUTHFUL?
Was YOUR name on it?
Who were the six signers?
Are you 'MAN' enough to admit your MISTAKES?
Or are you just a CRYIN' WOLF?
-Mike Foulks, President, Chicago Cabdriver Organization (CCO)
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
This seems to keep coming back:
“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it."
Oh, what a tangled web we weave
When first we practice to deceive!
A lie is a type of DECEPTION in the form of an untruthful statement with the intention to deceive, often with the further intention to maintain a secret or reputation, or to avoid punishment.
To lie is to state something one believes is false with the intention that it be taken for the truth by someone else. A liar is a person who is lying, who has lied, or who lies repeatedly.
Lying is typically used to refer to deceptions in oral or written communication.
Other forms of deception, such as disguises or forgeries, are generally not considered lies, though the underlying intent may be the same; however, even a true statement can be considered a lie if the person making that statement is doing so to deceive. In this situation, it is the intent of being untruthful rather than the truthfulness of the statement itself that is considered.
TYPES OF LIES
The various types of lies include the following:
BALD-FACED LIE
A bald-faced (or barefaced) lie is a lie told when it is obvious to all concerned that it is a lie. For example, the child with chocolate all over her face who denies having eaten the cake is a bald-faced liar. The adjective "bald-faced" indicates that no attempt has been made to hide the fact that it is a lie.
LYING BY OMISSION
Lying by omission is when an important fact is omitted, deliberately leaving another person with a misconception. This includes failures to correct pre-existing misconceptions.
LIE-TO-CHILDREN
A lie-to-children is an expression, or more specifically a euphemism, that describes a lie told to make an adult subject, such as sex, acceptable to children. The most common example is "The stork brought you." or hiding honesty and truth e.g. I will tell you when you are a little bit older.
WHITE LIE
A white lie would cause no discord if it were uncovered and offers some benefit to the liar or the hearer, or both. As a concept, it is largely defined by local custom and cannot be clearly separated from regular lies with any authority. As such the term may have differing meanings in different cultures. Lies which are harmless but told for no reason are generally not called white lies.
EMERGENCY LIE
Emergency lie is a different kind of white lie, which is employed when the truth may not be told because, for example, harm to a third party would come of it. An example of such an emergency lie would be a neighbor lying to an enraged husband about the whereabouts of his unfaithful wife, because said husband might reasonably be expected to inflict physical violence should he encounter his wife in person.
PERJURY
Perjury is the act of lying or making verifiably false statements on a material matter under oath or affirmation in a court of law or in any of various sworn statements in writing. Perjury is a crime because the witness has sworn to tell the truth and, for the credibility of the court, witness testimony must be relied on as being truthful.
BLUFFING
Bluffing is an act of deception that is not usually seen as immoral because it takes place in the context of a game where this kind of deception is consented to in advance by the players. For instance, a gambler who deceives other players into thinking he has different cards than he really does, or an athlete who indicates he will move left and then actually dodges right, are not considered to be lying. In these situations, deception is accepted as a tactic and even expected.
MISLEADING
Misleading is when a person tells a statement that isn't an outright lie, but still has the purpose of making someone believe in an untruth.
DISSEMBLING
"Dissemble" is a polite term for lying, it can be considered as just misleading but is also used as a euphemism for lying.
CAREFUL SPEAKING
Careful speaking is distinct from the above in that the speaker wishes to avoid imparting certain information, or admitting certain facts, and additionally, does not want to 'lie' when doing so. Careful speaking involves using carefully-phrased statements to give a 'half-answer': one that does not actually 'answer' the question, but still provides an appropriate (and accurate) answer based on that question. As with 'misleading', above, 'careful speaking' is not outright lying.
EXAGGERATION
Exaggeration is when the most fundamental aspect(s) of a statement is true, but the degree to which it is true is not correct.
JOCOSE LIES
Jocose lies are lies which are meant in jest and are usually understood as such by all present parties. Sarcasm can be one example of this. A more elaborate example can be seen in storytelling traditions which are present in some places, where the humor comes from the storyteller's insistence that he or she is telling the absolute truth despite all evidence to the contrary (i.e. tall tale). There is debate about whether these are "real lies", with different philosophers holding different views (see below).
Augustine of Hippo divided lies into eight kinds, listed in order of severity:
1. Lies in religious teaching.
2. Lies that harm others and help no one.
3. Lies that harm others and help someone.
4. Lies told for the pleasure of lying.
5. Lies told to "please others in smooth discourse."
6. Lies that harm no one and that help someone.
7. Lies that harm no one and that save someone's life.
8. Lies that harm no one and that save someone's "purity."
Augustine believed that "jocose lies" are not, in fact, lies.
PSYCHOLOGY OF LYING
The capacity to lie is noted early and nearly universally in human development. Social psychology and developmental psychology are concerned with the theory of mind, which people employ to simulate another's reaction to their story and determine if a lie will be believable. The most commonly cited milestone, what is known as Machiavellian intelligence, is at the age of about four and a half years, when children begin to be able to lie convincingly. Before this, they seem simply unable to comprehend that anyone doesn't see the same view of events that they do -- and seem to assume that there is only one point of view: their own -- that must be integrated into any given story.
Young children learn from experience that stating an untruth can avoid punishment for misdeeds, before they develop the theory of mind necessary to understand why it works. In this stage of development, children will sometimes tell fantastic and unbelievable lies because they lack the conceptual framework to judge whether a statement is believable or even to understand the concept of believability.
When children first learn how lying works, they lack the moral understanding of when to refrain from doing it. It takes years of watching people lie and the results of lies to develop a proper understanding. Propensity to lie varies greatly between children, some doing so habitually and others being habitually honest. Habits in this regard are likely to change into early adulthood.
Pseudo logia fantastica is a term applied by psychiatrists to the behavior of habitual or compulsive lying.
MORALITY OF LYING
The philosophers Saint Augustine, as well as Thomas Aquinas and Immanuel Kant, condemned all lying. However, Thomas Aquinas also had an argument for lying. According to all three, there are no circumstances in which one may lie. One must be murdered, suffer torture, or endure any other hardship, rather than lie, even if the only way to protect oneself is to lie. Each of these philosophers gave several arguments against lying, all compatible with each other. Among the more important arguments are:
1. Lying is a PERVERSION of the natural faculty of speech, the natural end of which is to communicate the thoughts of the speaker.
2. When one lies, one undermines trust in society.
CONSEQUENCES OF LYING
Once a lie has been told there can be two alternative consequences: it may be discovered or remain undiscovered.
* Discovery of a lie tends to discredit other statements by the same speaker and can lead to social or legal sanctions against the speaker, such as ostracizing or conviction for perjury.
* An undiscovered lie is a latent danger to the liar who is probably aware that it may be discovered, especially if that would lead to the sanctions above, as when the liar has obtained some unjust advantage by telling the lie.
PARADOXES ABOUT LYING
Within any scenario where dualistic (e.g., yes/no, black/white) answers are always given, a person who we know is consistently lying would paradoxically be a source of truth. There are many such paradoxes, the most famous one being known as the liar paradox, commonly expressed as "This sentence is a lie," or "This sentence is false." The so-called Epimenides paradox — "All Cretans are liars," as stated by Epimenides the Cretan — is a forerunner of this, though its status as a paradox is disputed. A class of related logic puzzles is known as knights and knaves, in which the goal is to determine who of a group of people, is lying and who is telling the truth.
REPRESENTATIONS OF LYING
* Carlo Collodi's Pinocchio is a wooden puppet often led into trouble by his propensity to lie. His nose grows with every lie. A long nose has thus become a caricature of liars.
* In the manga and anime "One Piece," one of the main characters -- Usopp -- lies and tells tales regularly. He has an exceptionally long nose.
* In the film Liar Liar, the lawyer Fletcher Reed (Jim Carrey) cannot lie for 24 hours due to a wish of his son which magically came true.
COVERING UP LIES
Sir Walter Scott's famous couplet "Oh, what a tangled web we weave / When first we practice to deceive!" describes the often difficult procedure of covering up a lie so that it is not detected at some future time.
CRYIN'WOLF...
Tell us about the 'FLYER', Wolf...Who are the six signers?
Let us all know the 'Truth'!
-Mike Foulks
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Oh, what a tangled web we weave
When first we practice to deceive!
A lie is a type of DECEPTION in the form of an untruthful statement with the intention to deceive, often with the further intention to maintain a secret or reputation, or to avoid punishment.
To lie is to state something one believes is false with the intention that it be taken for the truth by someone else. A liar is a person who is lying, who has lied, or who lies repeatedly.
Lying is typically used to refer to deceptions in oral or written communication.
Other forms of deception, such as disguises or forgeries, are generally not considered lies, though the underlying intent may be the same; however, even a true statement can be considered a lie if the person making that statement is doing so to deceive. In this situation, it is the intent of being untruthful rather than the truthfulness of the statement itself that is considered.
TYPES OF LIES
The various types of lies include the following:
BALD-FACED LIE
A bald-faced (or barefaced) lie is a lie told when it is obvious to all concerned that it is a lie. For example, the child with chocolate all over her face who denies having eaten the cake is a bald-faced liar. The adjective "bald-faced" indicates that no attempt has been made to hide the fact that it is a lie.
LYING BY OMISSION
Lying by omission is when an important fact is omitted, deliberately leaving another person with a misconception. This includes failures to correct pre-existing misconceptions.
LIE-TO-CHILDREN
A lie-to-children is an expression, or more specifically a euphemism, that describes a lie told to make an adult subject, such as sex, acceptable to children. The most common example is "The stork brought you." or hiding honesty and truth e.g. I will tell you when you are a little bit older.
WHITE LIE
A white lie would cause no discord if it were uncovered and offers some benefit to the liar or the hearer, or both. As a concept, it is largely defined by local custom and cannot be clearly separated from regular lies with any authority. As such the term may have differing meanings in different cultures. Lies which are harmless but told for no reason are generally not called white lies.
EMERGENCY LIE
Emergency lie is a different kind of white lie, which is employed when the truth may not be told because, for example, harm to a third party would come of it. An example of such an emergency lie would be a neighbor lying to an enraged husband about the whereabouts of his unfaithful wife, because said husband might reasonably be expected to inflict physical violence should he encounter his wife in person.
PERJURY
Perjury is the act of lying or making verifiably false statements on a material matter under oath or affirmation in a court of law or in any of various sworn statements in writing. Perjury is a crime because the witness has sworn to tell the truth and, for the credibility of the court, witness testimony must be relied on as being truthful.
BLUFFING
Bluffing is an act of deception that is not usually seen as immoral because it takes place in the context of a game where this kind of deception is consented to in advance by the players. For instance, a gambler who deceives other players into thinking he has different cards than he really does, or an athlete who indicates he will move left and then actually dodges right, are not considered to be lying. In these situations, deception is accepted as a tactic and even expected.
MISLEADING
Misleading is when a person tells a statement that isn't an outright lie, but still has the purpose of making someone believe in an untruth.
DISSEMBLING
"Dissemble" is a polite term for lying, it can be considered as just misleading but is also used as a euphemism for lying.
CAREFUL SPEAKING
Careful speaking is distinct from the above in that the speaker wishes to avoid imparting certain information, or admitting certain facts, and additionally, does not want to 'lie' when doing so. Careful speaking involves using carefully-phrased statements to give a 'half-answer': one that does not actually 'answer' the question, but still provides an appropriate (and accurate) answer based on that question. As with 'misleading', above, 'careful speaking' is not outright lying.
EXAGGERATION
Exaggeration is when the most fundamental aspect(s) of a statement is true, but the degree to which it is true is not correct.
JOCOSE LIES
Jocose lies are lies which are meant in jest and are usually understood as such by all present parties. Sarcasm can be one example of this. A more elaborate example can be seen in storytelling traditions which are present in some places, where the humor comes from the storyteller's insistence that he or she is telling the absolute truth despite all evidence to the contrary (i.e. tall tale). There is debate about whether these are "real lies", with different philosophers holding different views (see below).
Augustine of Hippo divided lies into eight kinds, listed in order of severity:
1. Lies in religious teaching.
2. Lies that harm others and help no one.
3. Lies that harm others and help someone.
4. Lies told for the pleasure of lying.
5. Lies told to "please others in smooth discourse."
6. Lies that harm no one and that help someone.
7. Lies that harm no one and that save someone's life.
8. Lies that harm no one and that save someone's "purity."
Augustine believed that "jocose lies" are not, in fact, lies.
PSYCHOLOGY OF LYING
The capacity to lie is noted early and nearly universally in human development. Social psychology and developmental psychology are concerned with the theory of mind, which people employ to simulate another's reaction to their story and determine if a lie will be believable. The most commonly cited milestone, what is known as Machiavellian intelligence, is at the age of about four and a half years, when children begin to be able to lie convincingly. Before this, they seem simply unable to comprehend that anyone doesn't see the same view of events that they do -- and seem to assume that there is only one point of view: their own -- that must be integrated into any given story.
Young children learn from experience that stating an untruth can avoid punishment for misdeeds, before they develop the theory of mind necessary to understand why it works. In this stage of development, children will sometimes tell fantastic and unbelievable lies because they lack the conceptual framework to judge whether a statement is believable or even to understand the concept of believability.
When children first learn how lying works, they lack the moral understanding of when to refrain from doing it. It takes years of watching people lie and the results of lies to develop a proper understanding. Propensity to lie varies greatly between children, some doing so habitually and others being habitually honest. Habits in this regard are likely to change into early adulthood.
Pseudo logia fantastica is a term applied by psychiatrists to the behavior of habitual or compulsive lying.
MORALITY OF LYING
The philosophers Saint Augustine, as well as Thomas Aquinas and Immanuel Kant, condemned all lying. However, Thomas Aquinas also had an argument for lying. According to all three, there are no circumstances in which one may lie. One must be murdered, suffer torture, or endure any other hardship, rather than lie, even if the only way to protect oneself is to lie. Each of these philosophers gave several arguments against lying, all compatible with each other. Among the more important arguments are:
1. Lying is a PERVERSION of the natural faculty of speech, the natural end of which is to communicate the thoughts of the speaker.
2. When one lies, one undermines trust in society.
CONSEQUENCES OF LYING
Once a lie has been told there can be two alternative consequences: it may be discovered or remain undiscovered.
* Discovery of a lie tends to discredit other statements by the same speaker and can lead to social or legal sanctions against the speaker, such as ostracizing or conviction for perjury.
* An undiscovered lie is a latent danger to the liar who is probably aware that it may be discovered, especially if that would lead to the sanctions above, as when the liar has obtained some unjust advantage by telling the lie.
PARADOXES ABOUT LYING
Within any scenario where dualistic (e.g., yes/no, black/white) answers are always given, a person who we know is consistently lying would paradoxically be a source of truth. There are many such paradoxes, the most famous one being known as the liar paradox, commonly expressed as "This sentence is a lie," or "This sentence is false." The so-called Epimenides paradox — "All Cretans are liars," as stated by Epimenides the Cretan — is a forerunner of this, though its status as a paradox is disputed. A class of related logic puzzles is known as knights and knaves, in which the goal is to determine who of a group of people, is lying and who is telling the truth.
REPRESENTATIONS OF LYING
* Carlo Collodi's Pinocchio is a wooden puppet often led into trouble by his propensity to lie. His nose grows with every lie. A long nose has thus become a caricature of liars.
* In the manga and anime "One Piece," one of the main characters -- Usopp -- lies and tells tales regularly. He has an exceptionally long nose.
* In the film Liar Liar, the lawyer Fletcher Reed (Jim Carrey) cannot lie for 24 hours due to a wish of his son which magically came true.
COVERING UP LIES
Sir Walter Scott's famous couplet "Oh, what a tangled web we weave / When first we practice to deceive!" describes the often difficult procedure of covering up a lie so that it is not detected at some future time.
