After reading some of these messages, I'm glad to see that everybody can start getting along and stay that way. We need each other to help each other.
Hi Wolf,
"At a time where almost every printed chronicle has cut back, laid off and discontinued sections of their publications it is a wonder that you can expand."
It's funny that you make that observation. Actually when I started thinking about a newspaper for the taxi industry in late 2001, the newspaper industry was in trouble, as was the cab industry since it was post 9/11.
A lot of people said I was crazy to start a newspaper and for it to be for the taxi industry just made it an even worse decision to many of my advisers.
In spite of that, I took a chance and somehow it's worked.
Our decision to go weekly was made prior to our knowledge of the UTCC Voice. It was actually something I'd been wanting to do for many years. Jonathan and I had been planning it since about March and I announced the decision to my staff on Monday, April 21.
There was no mention of the UTCC Voice in this issue, though we had talked about it and had planned on writing about it. We were very limited for space and couldn't include all the stories we wanted to include. This is always the case.
As some people have pointed out on this forum, we had nothing on the CCO election either and you pointed out that the story about you could have been longer.
These are accurate and fair observations. As an independent newspaper we don't have unlimited space and have to make complicated decisions. For example, I would have liked to include something on the UTCC Voice and the CCO election, among other things. Both stories are still on a long list of potential stories.
People tend to think that the things that are important to them are the most important things, period. Being a newspaper for the industry, we have to look at all angles and be as objective as possible. In just about every issue, somebody thinks they got the short end of the stick and we field these issues all the time.
Somebody is upset because their story didn't make it in the issue. Somebody is upset because they didn't like the spot they were in. If they were on the bottom of the cover page, they want to know why they weren't at the top. If the news was favorable to them, they want to know why it wasn't more favorable. If there was negative news or an opinion about somebody, they take it personally and want to know why we printed it.
I get messages and phone calls about things we have included and not included all the time. It's just part of the territory. Your injunction story was important, which is why we included it. It could have been longer but that would mean that we would have had to sacrifice something else. We would have also probably been compelled to point out a lot of negative things about your injunction as well. Serious mistakes were made and not everybody is in favor of your strategy. If we didn't include anything about your injunction and had something about the CCO election in its place, or the UTCC Voice, I would have heard about that as well. Again, that just goes with the territory.
There is so much going on these days that we are trying to include as many items as possible. In doing so, the length of some stories have to be shortened. Publishing an independent newspaper is expensive.
I hope this clears things up.
George Lutfallah
Chicago Dispatcher
For the record:
I never sent the Chicago Dispatcher a press release about the CCO election results, as the results have yet to be determined and there's not much "news" to report to them at this time.
I have had no issue with the amount of coverage the CCO has or has not received in the Chicago Dispatcher.
Keep up the good work you started a long time ago, Mr. Lutfallah. You too, Jonathan Bullington.
For all the critics of your reporting and editorials, I've yet to see a single printed lie pointed out to me.
Include more letters like Mr. Abunassar's, and I think most of the criticism will be seen as it should: the selfish whinings of a few. The silent majority looks forward to the Chicago Dispatcher.
I wish more of them had time to speak up and use this website.
-Mike Foulks
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Hi Wolf,
"At a time where almost every printed chronicle has cut back, laid off and discontinued sections of their publications it is a wonder that you can expand."
It's funny that you make that observation. Actually when I started thinking about a newspaper for the taxi industry in late 2001, the newspaper industry was in trouble, as was the cab industry since it was post 9/11.
A lot of people said I was crazy to start a newspaper and for it to be for the taxi industry just made it an even worse decision to many of my advisers.
In spite of that, I took a chance and somehow it's worked.
Our decision to go weekly was made prior to our knowledge of the UTCC Voice. It was actually something I'd been wanting to do for many years. Jonathan and I had been planning it since about March and I announced the decision to my staff on Monday, April 21.
There was no mention of the UTCC Voice in this issue, though we had talked about it and had planned on writing about it. We were very limited for space and couldn't include all the stories we wanted to include. This is always the case.
As some people have pointed out on this forum, we had nothing on the CCO election either and you pointed out that the story about you could have been longer.
These are accurate and fair observations. As an independent newspaper we don't have unlimited space and have to make complicated decisions. For example, I would have liked to include something on the UTCC Voice and the CCO election, among other things. Both stories are still on a long list of potential stories.
People tend to think that the things that are important to them are the most important things, period. Being a newspaper for the industry, we have to look at all angles and be as objective as possible. In just about every issue, somebody thinks they got the short end of the stick and we field these issues all the time.
Somebody is upset because their story didn't make it in the issue. Somebody is upset because they didn't like the spot they were in. If they were on the bottom of the cover page, they want to know why they weren't at the top. If the news was favorable to them, they want to know why it wasn't more favorable. If there was negative news or an opinion about somebody, they take it personally and want to know why we printed it.
I get messages and phone calls about things we have included and not included all the time. It's just part of the territory. Your injunction story was important, which is why we included it. It could have been longer but that would mean that we would have had to sacrifice something else. We would have also probably been compelled to point out a lot of negative things about your injunction as well. Serious mistakes were made and not everybody is in favor of your strategy. If we didn't include anything about your injunction and had something about the CCO election in its place, or the UTCC Voice, I would have heard about that as well. Again, that just goes with the territory.
There is so much going on these days that we are trying to include as many items as possible. In doing so, the length of some stories have to be shortened. Publishing an independent newspaper is expensive.
I hope this clears things up.
George Lutfallah
Chicago Dispatcher
Mr. foulks,
Have you ever met these two mechanics at CCC's garage?
Bengler Vasqquez & Olman Guerra are brave enough to stand up for their rights.
Are they employees or independent contractors, Mr. Foulks? Do you know any garages in Chicago that are doing the same like CCC?
Mr. Tang
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
For the record:
I never sent the Chicago Dispatcher a press release about the CCO election results, as the results have yet to be determined and there's not much "news" to report to them at this time.
I have had no issue with the amount of coverage the CCO has or has not received in the Chicago Dispatcher.
Keep up the good work you started a long time ago, Mr. Lutfallah. You too, Jonathan Bullington.
For all the critics of your reporting and editorials, I've yet to see a single printed lie pointed out to me.
Include more letters like Mr. Abunassar's, and I think most of the criticism will be seen as it should: the selfish whinings of a few. The silent majority looks forward to the Chicago Dispatcher.
I wish more of them had time to speak up and use this website.
-Mike Foulks
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Hi Wolf,
"At a time where almost every printed chronicle has cut back, laid off and discontinued sections of their publications it is a wonder that you can expand."
It's funny that you make that observation. Actually when I started thinking about a newspaper for the taxi industry in late 2001, the newspaper industry was in trouble, as was the cab industry since it was post 9/11.
A lot of people said I was crazy to start a newspaper and for it to be for the taxi industry just made it an even worse decision to many of my advisers.
In spite of that, I took a chance and somehow it's worked.
Our decision to go weekly was made prior to our knowledge of the UTCC Voice. It was actually something I'd been wanting to do for many years. Jonathan and I had been planning it since about March and I announced the decision to my staff on Monday, April 21.
There was no mention of the UTCC Voice in this issue, though we had talked about it and had planned on writing about it. We were very limited for space and couldn't include all the stories we wanted to include. This is always the case.
As some people have pointed out on this forum, we had nothing on the CCO election either and you pointed out that the story about you could have been longer.
These are accurate and fair observations. As an independent newspaper we don't have unlimited space and have to make complicated decisions. For example, I would have liked to include something on the UTCC Voice and the CCO election, among other things. Both stories are still on a long list of potential stories.
People tend to think that the things that are important to them are the most important things, period. Being a newspaper for the industry, we have to look at all angles and be as objective as possible. In just about every issue, somebody thinks they got the short end of the stick and we field these issues all the time.
Somebody is upset because their story didn't make it in the issue. Somebody is upset because they didn't like the spot they were in. If they were on the bottom of the cover page, they want to know why they weren't at the top. If the news was favorable to them, they want to know why it wasn't more favorable. If there was negative news or an opinion about somebody, they take it personally and want to know why we printed it.
I get messages and phone calls about things we have included and not included all the time. It's just part of the territory. Your injunction story was important, which is why we included it. It could have been longer but that would mean that we would have had to sacrifice something else. We would have also probably been compelled to point out a lot of negative things about your injunction as well. Serious mistakes were made and not everybody is in favor of your strategy. If we didn't include anything about your injunction and had something about the CCO election in its place, or the UTCC Voice, I would have heard about that as well. Again, that just goes with the territory.
There is so much going on these days that we are trying to include as many items as possible. In doing so, the length of some stories have to be shortened. Publishing an independent newspaper is expensive.
I hope this clears things up.
George Lutfallah
Chicago Dispatcher
Mr. Tang,
I probably have met these two mechanics, especially if they work the night shift. I don't recognize their names. I'd more easily recognize their faces. Why do you ask?
I don't know if they are employees or independent contractors. I say it's almost certain that they are employees. Why do you ask?
What do you mean, "garages in Chicago that are doing the same like CCC"? And, why do you ask?
-Mike Foulks
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Mr. foulks,
Have you ever met these two mechanics at CCC's garage?
Bengler Vasqquez & Olman Guerra are brave enough to stand up for their rights.
Are they employees or independent contractors, Mr. Foulks? Do you know any garages in Chicago that are doing the same like CCC?
Mr. Tang
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
For the record:
I never sent the Chicago Dispatcher a press release about the CCO election results, as the results have yet to be determined and there's not much "news" to report to them at this time.
I have had no issue with the amount of coverage the CCO has or has not received in the Chicago Dispatcher.
Keep up the good work you started a long time ago, Mr. Lutfallah. You too, Jonathan Bullington.
For all the critics of your reporting and editorials, I've yet to see a single printed lie pointed out to me.
Include more letters like Mr. Abunassar's, and I think most of the criticism will be seen as it should: the selfish whinings of a few. The silent majority looks forward to the Chicago Dispatcher.
I wish more of them had time to speak up and use this website.
-Mike Foulks
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Hi Wolf,
"At a time where almost every printed chronicle has cut back, laid off and discontinued sections of their publications it is a wonder that you can expand."
It's funny that you make that observation. Actually when I started thinking about a newspaper for the taxi industry in late 2001, the newspaper industry was in trouble, as was the cab industry since it was post 9/11.
A lot of people said I was crazy to start a newspaper and for it to be for the taxi industry just made it an even worse decision to many of my advisers.
In spite of that, I took a chance and somehow it's worked.
Our decision to go weekly was made prior to our knowledge of the UTCC Voice. It was actually something I'd been wanting to do for many years. Jonathan and I had been planning it since about March and I announced the decision to my staff on Monday, April 21.
There was no mention of the UTCC Voice in this issue, though we had talked about it and had planned on writing about it. We were very limited for space and couldn't include all the stories we wanted to include. This is always the case.
As some people have pointed out on this forum, we had nothing on the CCO election either and you pointed out that the story about you could have been longer.
These are accurate and fair observations. As an independent newspaper we don't have unlimited space and have to make complicated decisions. For example, I would have liked to include something on the UTCC Voice and the CCO election, among other things. Both stories are still on a long list of potential stories.
People tend to think that the things that are important to them are the most important things, period. Being a newspaper for the industry, we have to look at all angles and be as objective as possible. In just about every issue, somebody thinks they got the short end of the stick and we field these issues all the time.
Somebody is upset because their story didn't make it in the issue. Somebody is upset because they didn't like the spot they were in. If they were on the bottom of the cover page, they want to know why they weren't at the top. If the news was favorable to them, they want to know why it wasn't more favorable. If there was negative news or an opinion about somebody, they take it personally and want to know why we printed it.
I get messages and phone calls about things we have included and not included all the time. It's just part of the territory. Your injunction story was important, which is why we included it. It could have been longer but that would mean that we would have had to sacrifice something else. We would have also probably been compelled to point out a lot of negative things about your injunction as well. Serious mistakes were made and not everybody is in favor of your strategy. If we didn't include anything about your injunction and had something about the CCO election in its place, or the UTCC Voice, I would have heard about that as well. Again, that just goes with the territory.
There is so much going on these days that we are trying to include as many items as possible. In doing so, the length of some stories have to be shortened. Publishing an independent newspaper is expensive.
I hope this clears things up.
George Lutfallah
Chicago Dispatcher
"I am a crook" speech:
And just like Richard "Tricky Dick" Nixon, who coined the phrase, Foulks too, will be hounded out of office for "blunders and bafoonery".
Tricky Mike's stolen slogan is I'm a crook."
On the night of May 17, 2008, former employees of the Foulks reelection campaign broke into the CCO headquarters in the Chintown Flophouse building.
This incident began the unraveling of the Foulks Administration's abuses of power and illegal actions and the administration's efforts to cover up these activities.
This was followed by one of Foulk's and Department of Injustice officials saying, "Remember, we don't talk until we get a lawyer."
"The fare increase fiasco last summer was not even the first by the Foulks'CCO Members.
They had previously broken into the office of the Mayor's psychiatrist.
And in the Foulks tapes, he [Foulks] tells aides how to break into such places as the DCS offices.
Ticky Mike says,"In all my taxi life, I never profited, never profited from taxi service. I have earned not a cent. And all my years in taxi service, I have never obstructed justice or traffic. And I think too, that I can say ... that people have got to know whether or not their president's a crook. Well I'm a crook. I haven't earned an honset penny in my life."
A sad time in our taxi industry's history indeed, but with the current state of the organizers and wolf-like extremists threatening to blow up their taxis before arriving at their destinations, this reflects that the context of Flophousegate was certainly a simpler time.
Still, one song referring to the Flophouse legacy of distrust is still appropriate today: "Gimme Me Some Truth" screamed Beatle John Lennon
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
For the record:
I never sent the Chicago Dispatcher a press release about the CCO election results, as the results have yet to be determined and there's not much "news" to report to them at this time.
I have had no issue with the amount of coverage the CCO has or has not received in the Chicago Dispatcher.
Keep up the good work you started a long time ago, Mr. Lutfallah. You too, Jonathan Bullington.
For all the critics of your reporting and editorials, I've yet to see a single printed lie pointed out to me.
Include more letters like Mr. Abunassar's, and I think most of the criticism will be seen as it should: the selfish whinings of a few. The silent majority looks forward to the Chicago Dispatcher.
I wish more of them had time to speak up and use this website.
-Mike Foulks
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Hi Wolf,
"At a time where almost every printed chronicle has cut back, laid off and discontinued sections of their publications it is a wonder that you can expand."
It's funny that you make that observation. Actually when I started thinking about a newspaper for the taxi industry in late 2001, the newspaper industry was in trouble, as was the cab industry since it was post 9/11.
A lot of people said I was crazy to start a newspaper and for it to be for the taxi industry just made it an even worse decision to many of my advisers.
In spite of that, I took a chance and somehow it's worked.
Our decision to go weekly was made prior to our knowledge of the UTCC Voice. It was actually something I'd been wanting to do for many years. Jonathan and I had been planning it since about March and I announced the decision to my staff on Monday, April 21.
There was no mention of the UTCC Voice in this issue, though we had talked about it and had planned on writing about it. We were very limited for space and couldn't include all the stories we wanted to include. This is always the case.
As some people have pointed out on this forum, we had nothing on the CCO election either and you pointed out that the story about you could have been longer.
These are accurate and fair observations. As an independent newspaper we don't have unlimited space and have to make complicated decisions. For example, I would have liked to include something on the UTCC Voice and the CCO election, among other things. Both stories are still on a long list of potential stories.
People tend to think that the things that are important to them are the most important things, period. Being a newspaper for the industry, we have to look at all angles and be as objective as possible. In just about every issue, somebody thinks they got the short end of the stick and we field these issues all the time.
Somebody is upset because their story didn't make it in the issue. Somebody is upset because they didn't like the spot they were in. If they were on the bottom of the cover page, they want to know why they weren't at the top. If the news was favorable to them, they want to know why it wasn't more favorable. If there was negative news or an opinion about somebody, they take it personally and want to know why we printed it.
I get messages and phone calls about things we have included and not included all the time. It's just part of the territory. Your injunction story was important, which is why we included it. It could have been longer but that would mean that we would have had to sacrifice something else. We would have also probably been compelled to point out a lot of negative things about your injunction as well. Serious mistakes were made and not everybody is in favor of your strategy. If we didn't include anything about your injunction and had something about the CCO election in its place, or the UTCC Voice, I would have heard about that as well. Again, that just goes with the territory.
There is so much going on these days that we are trying to include as many items as possible. In doing so, the length of some stories have to be shortened. Publishing an independent newspaper is expensive.
I hope this clears things up.
George Lutfallah
Chicago Dispatcher
