george,
i have never stated that journalists were not allowed at our meetings. our monthly general meetings are open to cabdrivers and journalists alike. they are announced in our newsletter. your confusion may lie in the fact that a meeting to address the lease overcharge issues we had last winter was declared off limits to journalists, as we wanted to protect the anonymity of drivers who may have wanted to stand up. that was a strategic decision on one particular instance, not a blanket policy. we have had journalists attend several of our meetings.
as far as our regular subcommittee meetings, they are open to cabdrivers by invitation and inclination for drivers who want to participate in the work of the various issues that are taken on in them. we have a law and safety subcommittee, a fare increase subcommittee and a lease issues subcommittee. we would hope that anyone expressing an interest in coming to them would also profess unity with our basic principles and an interest in doing activist work to benefit the driver community as a whole, and not to either steal ideas, disrupt our process, get into personal antagonisms with other persons there, or report on our internal strategies to either the general public or other forces in the world that are antagonistic to our goals. we would frown on such activities, and would be inclined to disinvite such persons exhibiting these behaviors from future meetings.
all this will become clearer with the publication of our next newsletter.
george, you know very well these are all very sensitive subjects, and our stated goal of reforming the industry here in chicago will be strongly opposed by many social forces in and around our industry. please don't play dumb on here. you are smarter than that.
furthermore, i have never stated that i am a journalist. i do not have a journalism degree, i don't report on news as a journalist.
george, you keep complaining about not being invited to cabdriver meetings. steve and i sat in your office and asked you point blank FOUR TIMES whether you wanted to be invited to our meetings and take part in our organizing process. you refused four times! and on top of that, you insulted us by implying that we (steve and i, and by further implication the rest of our steering committee of 13 persons now) were merely puppets being controlled by the AFSC and their organizer. the idea is ludicrous on the face of it, and insulting to our agency and human dignity.
the fact of the matter is, you, george lutfallah, have a different politic and a different idea for what needs to be done to assist the cabdrivers and the industry here in chicago. it is evident in the piece of legislation you sponsored with george kasp last fall and it is evident in the editorials you publish in your paper. you have pointedly criticized the politics that we espouse on numerous occasions. why then would you want to join with us and be invited to our meetings? as i have stated many times since i started doing this work last summer, it is idealistic to think we could unite with everybody without regard to underlying principles. there has to be a BASIS for unity and coming together. we in the UTCC believe we have the basic principles that the most drivers could unite with and join us based upon. lets just see if we are right. only work in the interests of the people, and time, will tell.
george, we (you and the UTCC) would not be a good fit. i would recommend that you form your own organization, one that embodies your ideals and your ideas for how to improve the lot of cabdrivers. in the marketplace of ideas we could contend with your organization, and then we could see which org. the drivers prefer. that would be truly democracy in action.
anyway, why would you want to join with or participate in an organization whose core persons you have antagonisms with, and whose core principles you say you oppose, and whose strategies you don't agree with? it doesn't make sense.
peter
Mr. Eneger writes to George, "anyway, why would you want to join with or participate in an organization whose core persons you have antagonisms with, and whose core principles you say you oppose, and whose strategies you don't agree with? it doesn't make sense."
Maybe Mr. George has been listening to LONG EARS too much lately, and not following his own good sense.
He is capable of good sense when his "bad company" imaginary president of the "Long Eared Father of Fools Non-organization of One Dimwit" stops hee-hawing long enough to get in an intelligent thought edge-wise
Peter Enger,
I hereby make a principled declaration of responsibility for my actions and a promise to behave myself in the future with integrity. As usual.
Where's my invitation?
Full disclosure: I'm still "white". Is that still a problem for you and your "poltical opinions?
-Mike Foulks
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Peter, you wrote to Mike Foulks, "you would not be invited to our subcommittee meetings unless you make a principled declaration of responsibility for your actions and a promise to behave yourself in the future with integrity."
Mr. Enger,
One of your principled declarations was that journalists are not allowed at your meetings. That was Prateek Sampat's excuse for never allowing or even inviting me at his cabdriver meetings. Intitially you didn't agree with this "principle," but the last time I spoke with you, somehow you had changed your mind and said that it was proper to exclude me from cabdriver meetings on the basis that I'm a journalist.
Since you are a journalist now too, I want to invite you and Mike Foulks to lunch during your next UTCC meeting since none of us are going to be allowed to attend based on your principles. My treat. You pick the place.
George Lutfallah
Chicago Dispatcher
"Long Eared Father of Fools Non-organization of One Dimwit" can not be trusted.
Make him write and sign a sworn statement in his own blood.
I volunteer to draw the blood.
We will need about a gallon.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Peter Enger,
I hereby make a principled declaration of responsibility for my actions and a promise to behave myself in the future with integrity. As usual.
Where's my invitation?
Full disclosure: I'm still "white". Is that still a problem for you and your "poltical opinions?
-Mike Foulks
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Peter, you wrote to Mike Foulks, "you would not be invited to our subcommittee meetings unless you make a principled declaration of responsibility for your actions and a promise to behave yourself in the future with integrity."
Mr. Enger,
One of your principled declarations was that journalists are not allowed at your meetings. That was Prateek Sampat's excuse for never allowing or even inviting me at his cabdriver meetings. Intitially you didn't agree with this "principle," but the last time I spoke with you, somehow you had changed your mind and said that it was proper to exclude me from cabdriver meetings on the basis that I'm a journalist.
Since you are a journalist now too, I want to invite you and Mike Foulks to lunch during your next UTCC meeting since none of us are going to be allowed to attend based on your principles. My treat. You pick the place.
George Lutfallah
Chicago Dispatcher
George, Is there something about the George Lutfallah/Mike Foulks relationship you have neglected to tell the rest of us? No, sorry, this is a good question. How old were you when you first met Mike Foulks? Did you both plan on being taxi drivers back then?
