Mr. Nathan,
It's clear that you don't take independent Chicago cabdrivers seriously.
Either that, or you don't know how to read.
You have had a copy of the CCO Articles of Organization for about seven months.
You ask questions about my delay in selecting a Vice President for the CCO which could be answered if you actually read, kept, or could refer to that document.
You use your ignorance to suggest that I am a "one-man" show. I am neither a "one-man" anything nor a "show".
You also claim I have relatives in Arlington Heights or something "you don't even want to whisper about".
Who or what are you referring to? I haven't the slightest idea of what your "Apostle-like" "source" has told you.
You then use your "secrecy"? of these "thing unspoken" as proof of your "relative decency"???
Scum...bag.
You also are being deceptive once again, Mr. Nathan. You would like to see a "union" involving "Metro", not just current Chicago cabdrivers. Should I post your e-mail again?
Isn't that correct, Mr. Nathan?
I am not anti-union. I simply will not pretend to be "unionizing" cabdrivers as some others have. I am simply "organizing" them independently and politcally. They will always have the right to try and "unionize" from the better vantage point of being "organized" in the first place.
Being "united" still doesn't guarantee any "wins", Mr. Nathan. It simply gives us a better shot than "begging" individually. Get real and quit misleading people.
-Mike Foulks
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Mr. Nathan,
Are you having trouble communicating with your client again?
NO - NONE AT ALL. WE WERE JUST HAVING A HARD TIME GETTING A STRAIGHT ANSWER FROM YOU.
Or are you simply not paying enough attention (again)?
CALL IT WHATEVER YOU LIKE.
Mr. Tang has had the results of the CCO election for a week, now.
THAT SO? NOT SO CLEAR FROM THE NON-STOP BARRAGE OF E-MAILS YOU SEND. IF YOU DIDN'T BURY THINGS AMIDST ENDLESS INEXCUSABLE ATTACKS, MAYBE THEY WOULD GO NOTICED.
I'll re-post them here, to "bring you up to speed":
"Name: Mike Foulks
Date Posted: Jun 6, 08 - 3:50 PM
Message: Mr. Tang,
Foulks 26, Choudry 11, Admani 3, Rehman 3, 7 others 1 each.
-Mike Foulks"
GREAT --- MY HAT IS OFF TO YOU ON YOUR VICTORY. I DO HOPE YOU CAN DO SOME GOOD FOR THE FLOCK THAT YOU CLAIM TO SHEPHERD.
I still haven't officially made my selection for CCO Vice President or Recording Secretary of the CCO.
WHY NOT? WHY BE AN ARMY OF ONE? IT EXPOSES YOU TO PEOPLE LIKE "BRAIN DAMAGE" AND "CLUELESS" AND "BIG FAT MOUTH" AND ALL OF THE OTEHRS WHO TAKE POKES AT YOU. IF YOU WANT TO BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY, STOP BEING A ONE-MAN SHOW.
I still haven't made contact with a few of the people written in Cabdriver-Representatives.
SO WHAT? HOW DOES THAT PERTAIN TO NAMING A V.P? HOW DOES THAT PERTAIN TO NAMING A RECORDING SECRETARY? I'VE MET A COUPLE OF VERY IMPRESSIVE PEOPLE AMONG YOUR SUPPORTERS. YOU SHOULD GET THEM INVOLVED ASAP.
The problem is that the parties' haven't either returned my call or their contact information is incorrect, requiring me to take a further step of contacting the CCO member who voted for them and determining their proper contact information.
THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH NAMING OTHER OFFICERS, DOES IT?
Completing this process isn't the priority you wish it to be or as easy as you imagine.
CUT IT OUT. I'VE HAD TO TRACK DOWN CABDRIVERS FOR DECADES. OFTEN THEY MOVE WITH THE NIGHT. I KNOW HOW TOUGH IT CAN BE. SOME TAKE A TRIP TO THE OTHER SIDE OF THE PLANET LIKE YOU MIGHT VISIT YOUR RELATIVES IN ARLINGTON HEIGHTS.
There is nothing "hidden" or "in the closet". It is a shame you simply wish to "create suspicion".
NOT REALLY. WHEN YOU COME STRAIGHT UP WITH FACTS, I JUST SAY THANKS AND MOVE ON FROM THERE.
I can think of no other reason why you pretend to be so "curious" about an organization you can neither participate in or control, especially when your only obvious "beef" or "plan" involves your stated desire to create a "union" of "Metro cabdrivers" which includes suburban cabdrivers which are excluded from officially participating in the CCO.
Am I wrong about that, Mr. Nathan?
YES, YOU ARE WRONG. HOWEVER, I AM PROUD TO SAY I BELIEVE IN UNIONS. SO DO MOST PEOPLE IN THE CHICAGO METROPOLITIAN AREA. THIS IS A UNION TOWN.
DO YOU WANT TO TELL ME THAT UNIONS HURT THE ECONOMY OF CHICAGO? ARE YOU ANTI-UNION, MIKE? GET IT ON THE TABLE IF YOU ARE.
UNITED WE WIN. DIVIDED WE BEG.
TRY THAT ONE ON FOR SIZE.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
