The "little trick" refers to Lutfallah's attempted disruption of a meeting.
This fiasco was also referred to as Fascisti or Nazi Brownshirt tactics, which it basically was.
The "planned purpose" refers to Lutfallah's goal, to disrupt the meeting. It was also reported that Lutfallah, in fact had a brown shirt on. How droll.
Which part of the last sentence in that supposedly private email did you not understand?
Posting emails that contain text such as "You are advised again, respectfully, not to circulate this e-mail among any others." indicates that you can not be trusted, other than to jab a knife in one's back at any given moment.
Big Bad Mouth:
Read more closely...you're answers and conclusions are wrong.
"You are advised again, respectfully, not to circulate this e-mail among others." is a statement from Donald Nathan to Yi Tang, not me, Mike Foulks.
Donald Nathan didn't ask Mike Foulks not to circulate this e-mail because Donald Nathan didn't intend for Mike Foulks to see it.
It seems Yi Tang had a little problem understanding Donald Nathan's instructions. How fortunate for the rest of us.
The "little trick" doesn't refer to "Lutfallah's attempted disruption of a meeting", does it, Yi Tang?
The "planned purpose" doesn't refer to "Lutfallah's goal", does it, Donald Nathan?
Donald Nathan and Yi Tang:
Why don't both of you post all of your e-mail exchanges in the 48 hours before and after this infamous meeting so that others may have a better idea of the "little trick" and its "planned purpose"?
It seems that George Lutfallah politely declined to attend your meeting...why would he suddenly act like a "street gangster"?
Oh, I've been honored and trusted. It is Donald Nathan and Yi Tang who aren't worthy of Chicago cabdrivers' trust due to their dishonorable behavior.
"Big Bad Mouth"? Why don't you post your real name, you big, bad, fake?
-Mike Foulks
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
The "little trick" refers to Lutfallah's attempted disruption of a meeting.
This fiasco was also referred to as Fascisti or Nazi Brownshirt tactics, which it basically was.
The "planned purpose" refers to Lutfallah's goal, to disrupt the meeting. It was also reported that Lutfallah, in fact had a brown shirt on. How droll.
Which part of the last sentence in that supposedly private email did you not understand?
Posting emails that contain text such as "You are advised again, respectfully, not to circulate this e-mail among any others." indicates that you can not be trusted, other than to jab a knife in one's back at any given moment.
Ordinarily I wouldn't respond to your latest nonsesnse, but this one needs five seconds.
I have no clue what you demand. But it hardly matters. Apart from the fact that I owe you zero, I have no idea what a "trick" refers to. Maybe it was George Lutfallah's plan to disrupt a meeting by storming in while wearing a shirt with something of a brown hue. You were sitting next to me at that meeting. In June of 2008, however, whatever Mr. Lutfallah did at that meeting matters not one iota.
Since then, you have worked so hard to alienate everyone who cares that it is hard to imagine anyone now willing to sit at your side anywhere. Is that why your massive march to somewhere in the "Loop" back at the end of May numbered six others? Five of those were brought by Melissa Callahan from informal reports.
It's like asking what did you have to eat for lunch on a random day nine months ago. Who would remember? Who would care at this point? In the context of a private e-mail from one person to another, the sender of it is likely not to remember whatever it was in his mind at the time. But who cares at this point?
Like all kinds of things taken out of context, that e-mail has no meaning for me at all. Nor has it meaning other than whatever you try to tack onto it close to a year after the fact.
Take a happy pill, Mike, and go back to work. You're not retired so as to be able to do these endless postings like others.
Donald Nathan
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Big Bad Mouth:
Read more closely...you're answers and conclusions are wrong.
"You are advised again, respectfully, not to circulate this e-mail among others." is a statement from Donald Nathan to Yi Tang, not me, Mike Foulks.
Donald Nathan didn't ask Mike Foulks not to circulate this e-mail because Donald Nathan didn't intend for Mike Foulks to see it.
It seems Yi Tang had a little problem understanding Donald Nathan's instructions. How fortunate for the rest of us.
The "little trick" doesn't refer to "Lutfallah's attempted disruption of a meeting", does it, Yi Tang?
The "planned purpose" doesn't refer to "Lutfallah's goal", does it, Donald Nathan?
Donald Nathan and Yi Tang:
Why don't both of you post all of your e-mail exchanges in the 48 hours before and after this infamous meeting so that others may have a better idea of the "little trick" and its "planned purpose"?
It seems that George Lutfallah politely declined to attend your meeting...why would he suddenly act like a "street gangster"?
Oh, I've been honored and trusted. It is Donald Nathan and Yi Tang who aren't worthy of Chicago cabdrivers' trust due to their dishonorable behavior.
"Big Bad Mouth"? Why don't you post your real name, you big, bad, fake?
-Mike Foulks
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
The "little trick" refers to Lutfallah's attempted disruption of a meeting.
This fiasco was also referred to as Fascisti or Nazi Brownshirt tactics, which it basically was.
The "planned purpose" refers to Lutfallah's goal, to disrupt the meeting. It was also reported that Lutfallah, in fact had a brown shirt on. How droll.
Which part of the last sentence in that supposedly private email did you not understand?
Posting emails that contain text such as "You are advised again, respectfully, not to circulate this e-mail among any others." indicates that you can not be trusted, other than to jab a knife in one's back at any given moment.
Mr. Nathan,
I didn't eat lunch on November 16, 2007. How is that relevant to my question, anyways?
How are you aware of any "plan" of George Lutfallah's to disrupt a meeting?
Did he discuss such a "plan" with you?
Did you discuss such a "plan" with any co-conspirators?
It seems obvious by e-mail exchanges that George Lutfallah's "plan" was to respectfully decline your invitations and not attend at all, based on the conduct of a meeting of yours he did attend where nothing was accomplished.
Why didn't he "disrupt" that meeting? Why would he be so concerned to "disrupt" meetings of people which nothing is accomplished?
Mr. Nathan, could you and Yi Tang post all of your e-mails from the 48 hours before and after the infamous meeting so that we all can better understand what the "little trick" was and its "planned purpose"?
Your informal reports are incorrect, as usual, and probably deliberately. Melissa Callahan didn't bring five people. Where did you get that information from?
I am the one who has been "alienated", Mr. Nathan. Nobody cares as much as you suggest, however.
The unflattering e-mails will no longer be "out of context" to any degree once you post all of yours here on CabMarket.com.
I'm not holding my breath, Mr. Nathan. That would be too ****ing to you and your acceptance of too much responsibility for the consequences of your truly reprehensible behavior regarding Mr. Lutfallah's reaction to your deliberate insults.
The truth be ****ed, right, "Counselor"?
I don't needs pills to make me "happy". Perhaps you've confused me with Peter Enger, as a few cabdrivers unfortunately have.
I am quite happy to "expose" you, Mr. Nathan, in such a fashion that Peter Enger can only idly threaten me with.
Focus on your, I mean, "The Magnificent Seven's", lawsuit, Jackass.
Guess they can't afford to fire you for your misconduct, eh, Mr. Nathan?
-Mike Foulks
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Ordinarily I wouldn't respond to your latest nonsesnse, but this one needs five seconds.
I have no clue what you demand. But it hardly matters. Apart from the fact that I owe you zero, I have no idea what a "trick" refers to. Maybe it was George Lutfallah's plan to disrupt a meeting by storming in while wearing a shirt with something of a brown hue. You were sitting next to me at that meeting. In June of 2008, however, whatever Mr. Lutfallah did at that meeting matters not one iota.
Since then, you have worked so hard to alienate everyone who cares that it is hard to imagine anyone now willing to sit at your side anywhere. Is that why your massive march to somewhere in the "Loop" back at the end of May numbered six others? Five of those were brought by Melissa Callahan from informal reports.
It's like asking what did you have to eat for lunch on a random day nine months ago. Who would remember? Who would care at this point? In the context of a private e-mail from one person to another, the sender of it is likely not to remember whatever it was in his mind at the time. But who cares at this point?
Like all kinds of things taken out of context, that e-mail has no meaning for me at all. Nor has it meaning other than whatever you try to tack onto it close to a year after the fact.
Take a happy pill, Mike, and go back to work. You're not retired so as to be able to do these endless postings like others.
Donald Nathan
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Big Bad Mouth:
Read more closely...you're answers and conclusions are wrong.
"You are advised again, respectfully, not to circulate this e-mail among others." is a statement from Donald Nathan to Yi Tang, not me, Mike Foulks.
Donald Nathan didn't ask Mike Foulks not to circulate this e-mail because Donald Nathan didn't intend for Mike Foulks to see it.
It seems Yi Tang had a little problem understanding Donald Nathan's instructions. How fortunate for the rest of us.
The "little trick" doesn't refer to "Lutfallah's attempted disruption of a meeting", does it, Yi Tang?
The "planned purpose" doesn't refer to "Lutfallah's goal", does it, Donald Nathan?
Donald Nathan and Yi Tang:
Why don't both of you post all of your e-mail exchanges in the 48 hours before and after this infamous meeting so that others may have a better idea of the "little trick" and its "planned purpose"?
It seems that George Lutfallah politely declined to attend your meeting...why would he suddenly act like a "street gangster"?
Oh, I've been honored and trusted. It is Donald Nathan and Yi Tang who aren't worthy of Chicago cabdrivers' trust due to their dishonorable behavior.
"Big Bad Mouth"? Why don't you post your real name, you big, bad, fake?
-Mike Foulks
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
The "little trick" refers to Lutfallah's attempted disruption of a meeting.
This fiasco was also referred to as Fascisti or Nazi Brownshirt tactics, which it basically was.
The "planned purpose" refers to Lutfallah's goal, to disrupt the meeting. It was also reported that Lutfallah, in fact had a brown shirt on. How droll.
Which part of the last sentence in that supposedly private email did you not understand?
Posting emails that contain text such as "You are advised again, respectfully, not to circulate this e-mail among any others." indicates that you can not be trusted, other than to jab a knife in one's back at any given moment.
My answer is correct. Your brain does not work right and you have no spine.
You are a mental f u c k u p who doesn't know the difference between your ass and a hole in the ground, which is where you belong.
For those who see this and know better, if one gets an email that has a privacy statement, you have the moral, ethical and honorable duty to honor it, even if it is included in an email or as an attachment to you.
But not f u c k u p f o u l k s !
You have no respect for anyone or anything, especially yourself, otherwise you would not do this kind of thing.
I already have all the excuse I need to to give you a taste of my Big Fat Foot. You're begging for it.
"Big Bad Mouth",
Can your "logic" hold this argument?
Hypothetical e-mail:
George Bush: How's ripping off the taxpaying voter coming along, Dick?
Dick Cheney: It's going great. Just don't forward this e-mail to anyone, okay? I think as long as we play with truth, we'll continue to make big profits for us and all of our oil buddies!
........................................
Would it be "immoral, unethical, or dishonorable" for me to post such an e-mail if George Bush was stupid enough to send it to me?
I think not. I think you need to re-think your position.
The true Donald Nathan and Yi Tang are revealed in e-mails they never expected you to see, and they explain a lot.
There will be more e-mails to come, keep reading carefully!
-Mike Foulks
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
My answer is correct. Your brain does not work right and you have no spine.
You are a mental f u c k u p who doesn't know the difference between your ass and a hole in the ground, which is where you belong.
For those who see this and know better, if one gets an email that has a privacy statement, you have the moral, ethical and honorable duty to honor it, even if it is included in an email or as an attachment to you.
But not f u c k u p f o u l k s !
You have no respect for anyone or anything, especially yourself, otherwise you would not do this kind of thing.
I already have all the excuse I need to to give you a taste of my Big Fat Foot. You're begging for it.
Get real.
Hypothetical email.
You are still a mental f u c k u p.
Where did you learn to think, to reason?
OH, you didn't. OK.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
"Big Bad Mouth",
Can your "logic" hold this argument?
Hypothetical e-mail:
George Bush: How's ripping off the taxpaying voter coming along, Dick?
Dick Cheney: It's going great. Just don't forward this e-mail to anyone, okay? I think as long as we play with truth, we'll continue to make big profits for us and all of our oil buddies!
........................................
Would it be "immoral, unethical, or dishonorable" for me to post such an e-mail if George Bush was stupid enough to send it to me?
I think not. I think you need to re-think your position.
The true Donald Nathan and Yi Tang are revealed in e-mails they never expected you to see, and they explain a lot.
There will be more e-mails to come, keep reading carefully!
-Mike Foulks
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
My answer is correct. Your brain does not work right and you have no spine.
You are a mental f u c k u p who doesn't know the difference between your ass and a hole in the ground, which is where you belong.
For those who see this and know better, if one gets an email that has a privacy statement, you have the moral, ethical and honorable duty to honor it, even if it is included in an email or as an attachment to you.
But not f u c k u p f o u l k s !
You have no respect for anyone or anything, especially yourself, otherwise you would not do this kind of thing.
I already have all the excuse I need to to give you a taste of my Big Fat Foot. You're begging for it.
Read - but don't read into the message things that are not there because it makes you look like you are crazy.
In my view, the email offered as evidence speaks rather nicely of the then current leaders in the limelight of the moment.
So Mr. Nathan and Mr. Tang are formulating a conspiracy to be nice? A criminal cabal of do-good-ers?
The unmitigated mugs! The unmentionable mopes!
How dare they try to be nice to cab drivers when the Mayor has forbidden it!
How dare they help them out of the mess they are in, thanks to their big bosses, the city!
Only somebody on the Mayors side would twist their efforts into trying to manipulate cab drivers.
How does a "peace and love" email to Ms. Callahan respond to the a call for discussion about the four great virtues?
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Big Bad Mouth:
Read more closely...you're answers and conclusions are wrong.
"You are advised again, respectfully, not to circulate this e-mail among others." is a statement from Donald Nathan to Yi Tang, not me, Mike Foulks.
Donald Nathan didn't ask Mike Foulks not to circulate this e-mail because Donald Nathan didn't intend for Mike Foulks to see it.
It seems Yi Tang had a little problem understanding Donald Nathan's instructions. How fortunate for the rest of us.
The "little trick" doesn't refer to "Lutfallah's attempted disruption of a meeting", does it, Yi Tang?
The "planned purpose" doesn't refer to "Lutfallah's goal", does it, Donald Nathan?
Donald Nathan and Yi Tang:
Why don't both of you post all of your e-mail exchanges in the 48 hours before and after this infamous meeting so that others may have a better idea of the "little trick" and its "planned purpose"?
It seems that George Lutfallah politely declined to attend your meeting...why would he suddenly act like a "street gangster"?
Oh, I've been honored and trusted. It is Donald Nathan and Yi Tang who aren't worthy of Chicago cabdrivers' trust due to their dishonorable behavior.
"Big Bad Mouth"? Why don't you post your real name, you big, bad, fake?
-Mike Foulks
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
The "little trick" refers to Lutfallah's attempted disruption of a meeting.
This fiasco was also referred to as Fascisti or Nazi Brownshirt tactics, which it basically was.
The "planned purpose" refers to Lutfallah's goal, to disrupt the meeting. It was also reported that Lutfallah, in fact had a brown shirt on. How droll.
Which part of the last sentence in that supposedly private email did you not understand?
Posting emails that contain text such as "You are advised again, respectfully, not to circulate this e-mail among any others." indicates that you can not be trusted, other than to jab a knife in one's back at any given moment.
Big Bad Mouth, (or whoever you or Wolf wants to be called in this post),
I am simply asking them about their "little trick" which, apparently, didn't achieve its "planned purpose".
If you can't see that, you're blind or crazy.
Where do you read that Mr. Nathan and Mr. Tang are forming a "conspiracy to be nice"?
Why don't they reveal the e-mails 48 hours before and after this meeting so we can see just how "nice" their secret conspiracy is and intends to be?
Well, Yi Tang, well, Donald Nathan, where are your e-mails?
-Mike Foulks
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Read - but don't read into the message things that are not there because it makes you look like you are crazy.
In my view, the email offered as evidence speaks rather nicely of the then current leaders in the limelight of the moment.
So Mr. Nathan and Mr. Tang are formulating a conspiracy to be nice? A criminal cabal of do-good-ers?
The unmitigated mugs! The unmentionable mopes!
How dare they try to be nice to cab drivers when the Mayor has forbidden it!
How dare they help them out of the mess they are in, thanks to their big bosses, the city!
Only somebody on the Mayors side would twist their efforts into trying to manipulate cab drivers.
How does a "peace and love" email to Ms. Callahan respond to the a call for discussion about the four great virtues?
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Big Bad Mouth:
Read more closely...you're answers and conclusions are wrong.
"You are advised again, respectfully, not to circulate this e-mail among others." is a statement from Donald Nathan to Yi Tang, not me, Mike Foulks.
Donald Nathan didn't ask Mike Foulks not to circulate this e-mail because Donald Nathan didn't intend for Mike Foulks to see it.
It seems Yi Tang had a little problem understanding Donald Nathan's instructions. How fortunate for the rest of us.
The "little trick" doesn't refer to "Lutfallah's attempted disruption of a meeting", does it, Yi Tang?
The "planned purpose" doesn't refer to "Lutfallah's goal", does it, Donald Nathan?
Donald Nathan and Yi Tang:
Why don't both of you post all of your e-mail exchanges in the 48 hours before and after this infamous meeting so that others may have a better idea of the "little trick" and its "planned purpose"?
It seems that George Lutfallah politely declined to attend your meeting...why would he suddenly act like a "street gangster"?
Oh, I've been honored and trusted. It is Donald Nathan and Yi Tang who aren't worthy of Chicago cabdrivers' trust due to their dishonorable behavior.
"Big Bad Mouth"? Why don't you post your real name, you big, bad, fake?
-Mike Foulks
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
The "little trick" refers to Lutfallah's attempted disruption of a meeting.
This fiasco was also referred to as Fascisti or Nazi Brownshirt tactics, which it basically was.
The "planned purpose" refers to Lutfallah's goal, to disrupt the meeting. It was also reported that Lutfallah, in fact had a brown shirt on. How droll.
Which part of the last sentence in that supposedly private email did you not understand?
Posting emails that contain text such as "You are advised again, respectfully, not to circulate this e-mail among any others." indicates that you can not be trusted, other than to jab a knife in one's back at any given moment.
Hey lame brain did you read this:
The "little trick" refers to Lutfallah's attempted disruption of a meeting.
This fiasco was also referred to as Fascisti or Nazi Brownshirt tactics, which it basically was.
The "planned purpose" refers to Lutfallah's goal, to disrupt the meeting.
If the above are false, prove it Twinky Fluff Foulks.
Girly-man fraud fake.
I will come up with something about your planned porpoise later,maybe.
