The ***** in the last post are W H O R E.
LOFEF is a T A R T, A W H O R E, A F O O L.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Long eared father of fools can ask all the questions it wants, fool.
Long eared father of fools has no standing, no authority to ask, so it do not deserve answers, fool.
Long eared father of fools' questions require no answer, fool.
Long eared father of fools' is possessed by foolish demons, fool.
What one does or does not do is not Long eared father of fools' business, fool.
Accusations are nothing but hot air, Long eared father of fools.
Long eared father of fools' has a serious illness in its head, fool.
Long eared father of fools has no qualifications, except that of a fool, fool.
Long eared father of fools has no experience, except making a fool out of itself, fool.
Long eared father of fools has knowledge of foolishness, fool.
Long eared father of fools' purpose is to act a fool, fool.
Long eared father of fools' character is that of long eared father of fool, ass-as-in-fool.
Long eared father of fools' questions are fool accusations, donkey-boy.
Long eared father of fools wouldn't know the truth if truth walked up to and bit Long eared father of fools' donkey nose off, fool.
Long eared father of fools is scared of intimate dates.
Long eared father of fools exposes its big donkey ass which it mistakes for brains.
Long eared father of fools is a tart, a *****, a fool.
Long eared father of fools wants to know what a tart, a *****, a fool does for a living.
Long eared father of fools' relationships are only with itself and its right hoof, which it uses often when jack-ass-ing off to distract it from any meaningful thoughts.
Long eared father of fools is just a silly fool, not cool, just pathetic and silly.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Peter Enger,
Are you or are you not an alcoholic or drug abuser?
It is a simple question, why don't you answer it?
To address the rest of the previous message:
"Accusing a person of using drugs is accusing the person of a serious crime."
-Not really. Most drug posession amounts are misdemeanors for users. I am asking if Peter Enger is a substance abuser. That includes alcohol.
"False accusations of a serious crime are also a serious crime."
-I agree. I am not falsely accusing Peter Enger of a serious crime.
"Accusing a person of alcoholism is accusing a person of a serious illness."
-I agree. I strongly suspect that Peter Enger has such a serious illness.
"Is the accuser qualified to make a professional determination of drug or contraband substance abuse?"
-No. I am trying to verify a reliable source which suggests first-hand knowledge of Peter Enger's psychological/medical problem.
"Does the accuser have first hand experience with this destructive and deadly illness?"
-Not exactly. I have never abused alcohol or drugs, though I have recreationally used both. I have non-immediate family members who have issues with both. Fortunately, not with deadly results as of yet.
"If the accuser has no such knowledge, no such experience or no such professional qualifications in these matters, what is the purpose of such accusations other than to abuse his target and create a false impression of his target's character?"
-I have knowledge and a reliable basis for the allegation. I have experience in "these matters". The purpose isn't to "abuse my target" or "create a false impression of Peter Enger's character". Rather, it is an attempt to verify the claims of my source which seem substantiated also by Peter Enger's behavior. A complete confirmation would explain a lot about Peter Enger.
"I use the word "target" because such accusations, especially when considering the source, are purely for the purpose of character assassination."
-I can only hope that those who hear adverse accusations from Peter Enger about me "consider the source" as they seem to be more attempts at character assassination than my simple, unanswered inquiries are.
"What would be the purpose of such accusations other than to damage the target's ability to carry out his contractual or other lawful business relationships?"
-The purpose of my questions, not accusations, are to get answers from Peter Enger. I do not know what "conractual or other lawful business relationships" you are suggesting? What are those, exactly?
"Character assassination may be considered tortious interference not only with the target on a personal level but also with the target's lawful business and activities."
-Asking questions and telling the truth are never "character assassinations" by any legal defintion you are imagining. Only the most minute applications of blackmail statutes might apply, but not to me, but rather, to Peter Enger's "intimidation" of "exposing me" if I don't stop or start doing as he wishes. Ask Donald Nathan if you don't believe me; if he doesn't see a problem with Peter Enger's blackmail/threats, ask a lawyer who knows the law better than Donald Nathan.
"Tortious interference is said to occur when one intentionally damages or tries to damage the target's contractual or other lawful business relationships."
-First, there would have to be a tort. Second, no "contractual or other lawful business relationships" are specified as of yet. What are they, exactly?
"It is reasonable to conclude that accusations of alcohol and drug abuse could easily cool relationships and dissuade people from participating in organizations and activities of the person who has been burdened with such accusations."
-I agree, and rightly so. So, Peter Enger, do you care to answer the question, yet?
"When considering past behavior of the attacker, this attack on Mr. Enger and the UTCC seems to be little more that one more desperate and pathetic attempt to gain attention and grab the spotlight -- to distract from any meaningful discussions that might benefit cab drivers."
-I'd love to discuss the issues affecting cabdrivers. Why don't you and Wolf Weiss and his aliases start discussing them without mentioning me? Peter Enger doesn't "discuss" anything here, anyway. He makes grandiose proclamations and refuses to answer most questions put to him.
Peter Enger's silence speaks volumes about him. Maybe he's passed out or incapable of having a respectful, two-way relationship? That would indicate alcoholism to me.
Funny how you don't chastise others for "accusing" me of being mentally ill. Call me crazy, but I don't think you like me. I don't think Peter Enger really has anything to do with it. Peter Enger certainly isn't a lovable drunk, in any case.
-Mike Foulks
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
"Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."
"Sanctimonious finger pointers should get their own house in order before attempting to lead campaigns condemning others as boozers and drug abusers."
Accusing a person of using drugs is accusing the person of a serious crime.
False accusations of a serious crime are also a serious crime.
If you do not believe me, ask the Chicago Police.
Accusing a person of alcoholism is accusing a person of a serious illness.
If you do not believe me, ask the American Medical Association.
Is the accuser qualified to make a professional determination of drug or contraband substance abuse?
Does the accuser have first hand experience with this destructive and deadly illness?
If the accuser has no such knowledge, no such experience or no such professional qualifications in these matters, what is the purpose of such accusations other than to abuse his target and create a false impression of his target's character?
I use the word "target" because such accusations, especially when considering the source, are purely for the purpose of character assassination.
What would be the purpose of such accusations other than to damage the target's ability to carry out his contractual or other lawful business relationships?
Character assassination may be considered tortious interference not only with the target on a personal level but also with the target's lawful business and activities.
Tortious interference is said to occur when one intentionally damages or tries to damage the target's contractual or other lawful business relationships.
It is reasonable to conclude that accusations of alcohol and drug abuse could easily cool relationships and dissuade people from participating in organizations and activities of the person who has been burdened with such accusations.
When considering past behavior of the attacker, this attack on Mr. Enger and the UTCC seems to be little more that one more desperate and pathetic attempt to gain attention and grab the spotlight -- to distract from any meaningful discussions that might benefit cab drivers.
Mike, Why not use this energy to fight the real evil doers? While you might not like Enger, he isn't hurting taxi drivers. He's helping! I again will go on record to say that if he were the front man at a city council hearing,the council will wonder about Engers appearance. He is an unusal sort and it takes time to realize he's a good guy.
When one makes a public speech or appearance before a city council he/she should look presentable. This is an unwritten law. In a one shot deal someone else needs to carry the ball other than PA Enger.
Welcome his coverage of the election since you have nothing to hide. Kill Enger with kindness the next time you see him. Please save your arows for Superior St. and the City council. Throw a few at Tom Allen too!
Ahmed R.,
I'm doing my level best.
I welcomed Peter Enger's "monitoring" or "coverage" of the CCO election. I have indeed tried to "kill him with kindness".
Peter Enger snapped at me, snapped pictures of me, and threatened to "expose me" to cabdrivers, but offered not to if I would stop what he objects to.
His preliminary "reports" about the CCO election bring into question of whether or not he was sober when he was there. He had previous interpersonal issues with the parking lot attendant that he couldn't resolve, due to his disrespectful, condescending approach to this man.
Peter Enger isn't always helping, in my opinion.
I have plenty of arrows for the "real enemies" AND Peter Enger...I simply pick up the ones that Peter Enger, Donald Nathan, Yi Tang, Wolf Weiss (and his "company") have continuously fired at me and I fire back.
What are you specific concerns about Tom Allen? How should you and I engage him to make positive changes for all of us Chicago cabdrivers? You can e-mail me at chinatownmike@yahoo.com, if you prefer.
-Mike Foulks
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Mike, Why not use this energy to fight the real evil doers? While you might not like Enger, he isn't hurting taxi drivers. He's helping! I again will go on record to say that if he were the front man at a city council hearing,the council will wonder about Engers appearance. He is an unusal sort and it takes time to realize he's a good guy.
When one makes a public speech or appearance before a city council he/she should look presentable. This is an unwritten law. In a one shot deal someone else needs to carry the ball other than PA Enger.
Welcome his coverage of the election since you have nothing to hide. Kill Enger with kindness the next time you see him. Please save your arows for Superior St. and the City council. Throw a few at Tom Allen too!
after all this time, mike foulks still does not know how to think. that is why he is always questioning how others would do things. he does not have a clue. now he wants ahmeds ideas.
well why don't you go ask your phantom CCO members what you should do, fike moulks? can you not think of ONE idea about what to do, and try to convince drivers to join you? at least the UTCC says they have a plan and committees to discuss what to do. thats where an organization needs to start, with ideas and plans and invitations to participate. (UH OH, now mike might know what he should do--shoot... that's ok, he still wont' know HOW to do it. he'll need an idea man and then some drivers who'll actually do the work, and plan how to do it--oh yeah, then they'll realize they don't need fike moulks anymore. hmmmmm)
Hey, give 'im a break. He's doing his long-eared beast, aint he?
Hey! "Ahmed R" could be an anagram of "Red Ham".
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
after all this time, mike foulks still does not know how to think. that is why he is always questioning how others would do things. he does not have a clue. now he wants ahmeds ideas.
well why don't you go ask your phantom CCO members what you should do, fike moulks? can you not think of ONE idea about what to do, and try to convince drivers to join you? at least the UTCC says they have a plan and committees to discuss what to do. thats where an organization needs to start, with ideas and plans and invitations to participate. (UH OH, now mike might know what he should do--shoot... that's ok, he still wont' know HOW to do it. he'll need an idea man and then some drivers who'll actually do the work, and plan how to do it--oh yeah, then they'll realize they don't need fike moulks anymore. hmmmmm)
Hello Mike. I will think about this issue and email you off this board over the weekend.
Boohoohooo Mike: "plenty of arrows for the "real enemies" AND Peter Enger...I simply pick up the ones that Peter Enger, Donald Nathan, Yi Tang, Wolf Weiss (and his "company") have continuously fired"
Get it right Ham Omlet:
To be, or not to be: that is the question:
Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer
The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune,
Or to take arms against a sea of troubles,
And by opposing end them? To die; to sleep;
No more; and by a sleep to say we end
The heart-ache and the thousand natural shocks
That flesh is heir to, 'tis a consummation
Devoutly to be wish'd. To die, to sleep;
To sleep: perchance to dream: ay, there's the rub;
For in that sleep of death what dreams may come
When we have shuffled off this mortal coil,
Must give us pause; there's the respect
That makes calamity of so long life;
For who would bear the whips and scorns of time,
The oppressor's wrong, the proud man's contumely,
The pangs of despised love, the law's delay,
The insolence of office and the spurns
That patient merit of the unworthy takes,
When he himself might his quietus make
With a bare bodkin? who would fardels bear,
To grunt and sweat under a weary life,
But that the dread of something after death,
That undiscover'd country from whose bourne
No traveller returns, puzzles the will
And makes us rather bear those ills we have
Than fly to others that we know not of?
Thus conscience does make cowards of us all;
And thus the native hue of resolution
Is sicklied o'er with the pale cast of thought,
And enterprises of great pith and moment
With this regard their currents turn awry,
And lose the name of action.
