A message from Mike Foulks about the 'haters' on this discussion forum...
Hello, 'haters'.
Hello, everyone else, who care about the issues more than throwing mud on Mike Foulks.
I am volunteering to refrain from responding to ANYTHING on this website for a while in order to let the focus return to the issues that affect Chicago cabdrivers, if that's possible.
My hope is that these issues can once again be discussed independent of the personal conflicts that a handful of 'contributors' here have with me.
While it is clear to me how misinformed and deliberately deceptive that these guys are, it may not be that clear to others.
In fact, the most damaging effects of these 'haters'' propaganda has not been to me. They have had zero impact upon me.
The most damaging effect they have had is to the truth. Let me be specific:
I spoke with a fellow cabdriver at Midway airport yesterday at length about our current situation. When the subject of the Chicago Dispatcher newspaper came up, this is what he told me:
"The Chicago Dispatcher is owned by the City."
Now, before I comment on this absurdity, let me identify my harshest critics by name, even though most of them refuse to identify themselves properly on this website:
Peter Enger
Pankaj Kapoor
Steve Kim
Wolfgang Weiss
Donald Nathan
Prateek Sampat
Yi Tang
Peter Enger - I believe that Peter Enger is sincere about creating positive changes for Chicago cabdrivers. I believe that he isn't interested in receiving monetary compensation for his organizing work, but I believe that he has heavily invested his ego into all of this, for better or worse.
Despite his claims to the contrary, he isn't that interested in creating a democratic organization representative of the entire community of cabdrivers. In my opinion, he's more interested in gathering together those who will agree with him and suppressing those who won't.
Simply put, Peter Enger's strength and weakness is his radical, far-left approach. While this is great for generating interest, it doesn't necessarily produce popular results.
Unfortunately, I think that Peter Enger sees my activities and goals as countering or competing with his own. The reverse is not true. I see Peter Enger and whatever amount of measurable support he has from active cabdrivers as a complement to that of all other individuals and groups, to be respected equitably.
The only criticism I have about Peter Enger with regards to this discssion forum is that he doesn't post here often enough, nor does he encourage others to do so. It is in the absence of intelligent remarks such as his and others that these virtual vandals thrive and lead weaker minds to believe that posting their insults and nonsense serves some good purpose.
Pankaj Kapoor - This guy is the exact opposite of Peter Enger. It is clear to me that Mr. Kapoor is focused on collecting large sums of money from cabdrivers. I don't think that he intends to do anything for free. He expects a personal payoff.
Steve Kim - Mr. Kim, who is a close associate of Peter Enger, suffers from similar narrow-mindedness. The difference between the two is that Mr. Kim has difficulty communicating complex ideas in English. While I respect Mr. Kim for his efforts, I can't ignore the fact that most Somalis who have been in America for a much shorter period of time are more easily understood than Mr. Kim.
Nonetheless, I encourage Mr. Kim to continue improving his language skills as well as he will continue to generously give of himself to help his fellow cabdrivers. He would do well to focus on organizing the active support of his fellow Korean cabdrivers, who likely understand his Korean better than mine. If he can't do that, I doubt he will do any better with anyone else.
Wolfgang Weiss - Where do I begin? Simply put, Mr. Weiss' utter failure to accomplish anything as the "Chicago Professional Taxi Drivers Association (CPTDA)" has led to more organized outsiders and serious insiders to quickly bypass him and any of his imagined relevance. He and Donald Nathan are currently co-dependents; without each using the other in a desperate attempt for attention with this ill-conceived lawsuit against the City's surcharge ordinance, neither could pretend to be doing much of anything to help Chicago cabdrivers.
While Mr. Weiss "stands in solidarity" (whatever that means) with the CCDAC, I am an instrumental member of the CCDAC who was successfully negotiating with the owners and management of the cabs we drive. Mr. Weiss and others on this discussion forum are so misinformed about the facts of the matter that they couldn't imagine that a twice-elected president of a Chicago cabdriver organization such as myself might actually share some responsibility for resolving a conflict at the garage he leases cabs from.
Mr. Weiss is most responsible for posting misinformation, insults, and nonsense on this discussion forum, usually using fake names or the names of others, however he spells them. He defends the practice. I don't.
I have repeatedly received and respected the honor of speaking for Chicago cabdrivers from Chicago cabdrivers. Mr. Weiss doesn't. He, like many other fakes, appointed himself to his 'position'.
While Mr. Weiss has a great intellect, he also has a great imagination. He needs to get real or get out of the way of those who are. And take all his pseudonyms with him.
Donald Nathan, Prateek Sampat, and Yi Tang are all OUTSIDERS (NOT Chicago cabdrivers) who have their own self-interests in trying to 'help' us. Simply put, there's no reason to pay any mind to any of these three. I invite them to tell us what value they have to Chicago cabdrivers. I have previously associated with all three of them and I see none. They create more problems than they solve.
Now, I ask all of you who have attempted to assassinate the characters of others, are you proud of yourself?
Are you proud that your overstated criticism of the Chicago Dispatcher accepting advertising or printing a column from the Commissioner has led some to believe that "the Chicago Dispatcher is owned by the City"?
Do you care about the truth?
Or, do you care to only tell the half-truths when it appears to give you an advantage?
My challenge to all of you is to start discussing the issues. Without me, if that's what it takes.
You can continue to pretend that I am not the legitimately-elected President of the Chicago Cabdriver Organization (CCO).
You can continue to pretend that Ola Shalom isn't a real cabdriver.
You can continue to pretend that I am not an instrumental member of the CCDAC.
You can continue to pretend that I am a legitimately-convicted felon, or that any arrest record of mine is relevant to holding a chauffeur's license or to Chicago cabdrivers who support me or my efforts.
You can continue to pretend that I've ever lived "in or near Waukegan" or ever driven a suburban taxi.
In my temporary absence, what you CAN'T continue to pretend is that discussing any of what you imagine to be true or relevant to any degree makes it any more true or relevant to Chicago cabdrivers.
If you persist, you might find that all you have accomplished is assassinating my character. I fail to see how assassinating my character or anyone else's character with misinformation, insults, or irrelevancies furthers the cause of Chicago cabdrivers.
If your goal is to "bring down" the Chicago Dispatcher or the President of the CCO, I say, good luck, gentlemen.
If your goal is to improve the situation for you and your felllow cabdrivers, I don't see how "bringing down" either the Chicago Dispatcher or someone such as myself helps that aim.
You are free to criticize me or anyone else. I just ask that you adhere to the truth. If you feel that you can do a better job representing as "President of the CCO" and you are a current Chicago cabdriver, I invite you to run in the third CCO election scheduled for this November.
Until then, those of you who wish others would respect Chicago cabdrivers might start by respecting me and the Chicago cabdrivers who participated in the two CCO elections held thus far.
Or, you could attempt to explain why others should respect you instead of someone else. Not an easy task. Defending hypocrisy never is.
In the meantime, I expect to be very busy in the coming weeks with the CCDAC and other WORK. I can only warn the less-informed to be skeptical about what you read in this discussion forum, especially if it is signed by a scrambled version the names "Mike Foulks, Ola Shalom, or Lutfallah".
Anyone who posts anything using "Donkey Boy/Long-Eared Father of Fools" should also be regarded with suspicion.
That, and anything by "Donald Nathan", who usually doesn't know what he's talking about, despite his law degree and experience driving a cab 30-40 YEARS AGO.
To put this into context, a guy could commit a murder, serve time, commit another murder, and serve more time in the time since Mr. Nathan last pulled a fare.
Mr. Nathan made an entire career working for cab owners. It wouldn't surprise me if he still is working for them. I know he's working for himself.
He's not working for Chicago cabdrivers or helping anybody put together a "union". Don't be fooled.
It's time for you to decide whether you 'haters' want to continue behaving like little ******* or start doing the work of real men.
Let me know. I'll lead by example.
-Mike Foulks, President, Chicago Cabdriver Organization (CCO)
1. The first feature of Ur-Fascism is the cult of tradition.
Traditionalism is of course much older than fascism. Not only was it typical of counterrevolutionary Catholic thought after the French revolution, but is was born in the late Hellenistic era, as a reaction to classical Greek rationalism. In the Mediterranean basin, people of different religions (most of the faiths indulgently accepted by the Roman pantheon) started dreaming of a revelation received at the dawn of human history. This revelation, according to the traditionalist mystique, had remained for a long time concealed under the veil of forgotten languages -- in Egyptian hieroglyphs, in the Celtic runes, in the scrolls of the little-known religions of Asia.
This new culture had to be syncretistic. Syncretism is not only, as the dictionary says, "the combination of different forms of belief or practice;" such a combination must tolerate contradictions. Each of the original messages contains a sliver of wisdom, and although they seem to say different or incompatible things, they all are nevertheless alluding, allegorically, to the same primeval truth.
As a consequence, there can be no advancement of learning. Truth already has been spelled out once and for all, and we can only keep interpreting its obscure message.
If you browse in the shelves that, in American bookstores, are labeled New Age, you can find there even Saint Augustine, who, as far as I know, was not a fascist. But combining Saint Augustine and Stonehenge -- that is a symptom of Ur-Fascism.
2. Traditionalism implies the rejection of modernism.
Both Fascists and Nazis worshipped technology, while traditionalist thinkers usually reject it as a negation of traditional spiritual values. However, even though Nazism was proud of its industrial achievements, its praise of modernism was only the surface of an ideology based upon blood and earth (Blut und Boden). The rejection of the modern world was disguised as a rebuttal of the capitalistic way of life. The Enlightenment, the Age of Reason, is seen as the beginning of modern depravity. In this sense Ur-Fascism can be defined as irrationalism.
3. Irrationalism also depends on the cult of action for action's sake.
Action being beautiful in itself, it must be taken before, or without, reflection. Thinking is a form of emasculation. Therefore culture is suspect insofar as it is identified with critical attitudes. Distrust of the intellectual world has always been a symptom of Ur-Fascism, from Hermann Goering's fondness for a phrase from a Hanns Johst play ("When I hear the word 'culture' I reach for my gun") to the frequent use of such expressions as "degenerate intellectuals," "eggheads," "effete snobs," and "universities are nests of reds." The official Fascist intellectuals were mainly engaged in attacking modern culture and the liberal intelligentsia for having betrayed traditional values.
4. The critical spirit makes distinctions, and to distinguish is a sign of modernism.
In modern culture the scientific community praises disagreement as a way to improve knowledge. For Ur-Fascism, disagreement is treason.
5. Besides, disagreement is a sign of diversity.
Ur-Fascism grows up and seeks consensus by exploiting and exacerbating the natural fear of difference. The first appeal of a fascist or prematurely fascist movement is an appeal against the intruders. Thus Ur-Fascism is racist by definition.
6. Ur-Fascism derives from individual or social frustration.
That is why one of the most typical features of the historical fascism was the appeal to a frustrated middle class, a class suffering from an economic crisis or feelings of political humiliation, and frightened by the pressure of lower social groups. In our time, when the old "proletarians" are becoming petty bourgeois (and the lumpen are largely excluded from the political scene), the fascism of tomorrow will find its audience in this new majority.
7. To people who feel deprived of a clear social identity, Ur-Fascism says that their only privilege is the most common one, to be born in the same country.
This is the origin of nationalism. Besides, the only ones who can provide an identity to the nation are its enemies. Thus at the root of the Ur-Fascist psychology there is the obsession with a plot, possibly an international one. The followers must feel besieged. The easiest way to solve the plot is the appeal to xenophobia. But the plot must also come from the inside: Jews are usually the best target because they have the advantage of being at the same time inside and outside. In the United States, a prominent instance of the plot obsession is to be found in Pat Robertson's The New World Order, but, as we have recently seen, there are many others.
8. The followers must feel humiliated by the ostentatious wealth and force of their enemies.
When I was a boy I was taught to think of Englishmen as the five-meal people. They ate more frequently than the poor but sober Italians. Jews are rich and help each other through a secret web of mutual assistance. However, the followers of Ur-Fascism must also be convinced that they can overwhelm the enemies. Thus, by a continuous shifting of rhetorical focus, the enemies are at the same time too strong and too weak. Fascist governments are condemned to lose wars because they are constitutionally incapable of objectively evaluating the force of the enemy.
9. For Ur-Fascism there is no struggle for life but, rather, life is lived for struggle.
Thus pacifism is trafficking with the enemy. It is bad because life is permanent warfare. This, however, brings about an Armageddon complex. Since enemies have to be defeated, there must be a final battle, after which the movement will have control of the world. But such "final solutions" implies a further era of peace, a Golden Age, which contradicts the principle of permanent war. No fascist leader has ever succeeded in solving this predicament.
10. Elitism is a typical aspect of any reactionary ideology, insofar as it is fundamentally aristocratic, and aristocratic and militaristic elitism cruelly implies contempt for the weak.
Ur-Fascism can only advocate a popular elitism. Every citizen belongs to the best people in the world, the members or the party are the best among the citizens, every citizen can (or ought to) become a member of the party. But there cannot be patricians without plebeians. In fact, the Leader, knowing that his power was not delegated to him democratically but was conquered by force, also knows that his force is based upon the weakness of the masses; they are so weak as to need and deserve a ruler.
11. In such a perspective everybody is educated to become a hero.
In every mythology the hero is an exceptional being, but in Ur-Fascist ideology heroism is the norm. This cult of heroism is strictly linked with the cult of death. It is not by chance that a motto of the Spanish Falangists was Viva la Muerte ("Long Live Death!"). In nonfascist societies, the lay public is told that death is unpleasant but must be faced with dignity; believers are told that it is the painful way to reach a supernatural happiness. By contrast, the Ur-Fascist hero craves heroic death, advertised as the best reward for a heroic life. The Ur-Fascist hero is impatient to die. In his impatience, he more frequently sends other people to death.
12. Since both permanent war and heroism are difficult games to play, the Ur-Fascist transfers his will to power to sexual matters.
This is the origin of machismo (which implies both disdain for women and intolerance and condemnation of nonstandard sexual habits, from chastity to homosexuality). Since even sex is a difficult game to play, the Ur-Fascist hero tends to play with weapons -- doing so becomes an ersatz phallic exercise.
13. Ur-Fascism is based upon a selective populism, a qualitative populism, one might say.
In a democracy, the citizens have individual rights, but the citizens in their entirety have a political impact only from a quantitative point of view -- one follows the decisions of the majority. For Ur-Fascism, however, individuals as individuals have no rights, and the People is conceived as a quality, a monolithic entity expressing the Common Will. Since no large quantity of human beings can have a common will, the Leader pretends to be their interpreter. Having lost their power of delegation, citizens do not act; they are only called on to play the role of the People. Thus the People is only a theatrical fiction. There is in our future a TV or Internet populism, in which the emotional response of a selected group of citizens can be presented and accepted as the Voice of the People.
Because of its qualitative populism, Ur-Fascism must be against "rotten" parliamentary governments. Wherever a politician casts doubt on the legitimacy of a parliament because it no longer represents the Voice of the People, we can smell Ur-Fascism.
14. Ur-Fascism speaks Newspeak.
Newspeak was invented by Orwell, in Nineteen Eighty-Four, as the official language of what he called Ingsoc, English Socialism. But elements of Ur-Fascism are common to different forms of dictatorship. All the Nazi or Fascist schoolbooks made use of an impoverished vocabulary, and an elementary syntax, in order to limit the instruments for complex and critical reasoning. But we must be ready to identify other kinds of Newspeak, even if they take the apparently innocent form of a popular talk show.
* * *
Ur-Fascism is still around us, sometimes in plainclothes. It would be so much easier for us if there appeared on the world scene somebody saying, "I want to reopen Auschwitz, I want the Blackshirts to parade again in the Italian squares." Life is not that simple. Ur-Fascism can come back under the most innocent of disguises. Our duty is to uncover it and to point our finger at any of its new instances — every day, in every part of the world. Franklin Roosevelt's words of November 4, 1938, are worth recalling: "If American democracy ceases to move forward as a living force, seeking day and night by peaceful means to better the lot of our citizens, fascism will grow in strength in our land." Freedom and liberation are an unending task.
Umberto Eco (c) 1995
THE HATER STARTS BY SAYING THAT HE IS NOT GOING TO ATTACK ANYONE.
THEN HE PROCEEDS TO ATTACK EVERYONE WHO HAS CRITICIZED HIM.
HE IS STILL A SCUMBAG FELON AND A HATER.
HE DOESN'T WANT TO REACH ISSUES WITHOUT TEARING AT THE EYES OF ANYONE WHO SEES HIM FOR WHAT HE IS, A CRIMINAL.
THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WHO OWNS THE DISPATCHER OR WHERE GEORGE LUTFALLAH MAKES HIS ADVERTISING MONEY.
THIS ONLY HAS TO DO WITH HATER FOULKS WHOSE EVIL NATURE MAKES IT IMPOSSIBLE FOR HIM TO FOCUS ON ISSUES WITHOUT ATTACKING HIS CRITICS.
man, it's like summer reruns here
you know we have been over this same old tripe over and over again
donkey boy accuses someone of something
donkey boy is challenged to prove his accusations
donkey boy ignores the challenge
donkey boy is proven wrong or caught lying
donkey boy donkey boy donkey boy
boy are you a donkey donkey boy
nobody cares about your donkey boy opinions
most of them are wrong anyway
nobody likes donkey boy
"If you repeat the lie often enough...." said the Brown-shirted Nazi Storm Trooper to his lackey.”
Talk about a lack of credibility!
Unfortunately for you, you pathological egotist, you can not be the judge, the jury, the prosecutor and the hangman. That is way too Nazi.
To quote from a previous entry: "an adversarial process can have general integrity [only] when both sides DEMONSTRATE WILLINGNESS to SHARE EVIDENCE, follow guidelines of debate and accept rulings from an arbitrator in a good faith effort to arrive at either the truth ..."
In other words "where's the beef?" show us what ya got donkey boy. Let’s see the evidence."
Your Lies Defined:
1) To make a statement that one knows to be false, especially with the intend to Deceive.
2) To give a false impression.
3) Anything that gives or is meant to give a false impression.
Variations of the Lie:
1) Derail: To change the subject of discussion in order to avoid the truth. (For Example, one might feign being offended in order to stop a conversation about ones questionable actions.
2) Confuse: quibble or confuse the issue, or deliberately use ambiguity in order to deceive or mislead.
3) Misinform: To invent or perpetrate a false story with the intent to deceive or mislead.
The Lie of Omission:
A lie of omission is to remain silent when ethical behavior calls for one to speak up.
A lie of omission is a method of deception and duplicity that uses the technique of simply remaining silent when speaking the truth would significantly alter the other person's capacity to make an informed decision.
The Truth About Lies: “A lie is not in the words, or lack of words; it's in the intention of the deceiver."
He just wants attention.
His lies have all been disputed, and/or refuted and/or repudiated.
He has never offered any proof to back up his false and dubious statements.
This is how it is on this forum.
Keep feeding the donkey and he will keep coming back for more.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
"If you repeat the lie often enough...." said the Brown-shirted Nazi Storm Trooper to his lackey.”
Talk about a lack of credibility!
Unfortunately for you, you pathological egotist, you can not be the judge, the jury, the prosecutor and the hangman. That is way too Nazi.
To quote from a previous entry: "an adversarial process can have general integrity [only] when both sides DEMONSTRATE WILLINGNESS to SHARE EVIDENCE, follow guidelines of debate and accept rulings from an arbitrator in a good faith effort to arrive at either the truth ..."
In other words "where's the beef?" show us what ya got donkey boy. Let’s see the evidence."
Your Lies Defined:
1) To make a statement that one knows to be false, especially with the intend to Deceive.
2) To give a false impression.
3) Anything that gives or is meant to give a false impression.
Variations of the Lie:
1) Derail: To change the subject of discussion in order to avoid the truth. (For Example, one might feign being offended in order to stop a conversation about ones questionable actions.
2) Confuse: quibble or confuse the issue, or deliberately use ambiguity in order to deceive or mislead.
3) Misinform: To invent or perpetrate a false story with the intent to deceive or mislead.
The Lie of Omission:
A lie of omission is to remain silent when ethical behavior calls for one to speak up.
A lie of omission is a method of deception and duplicity that uses the technique of simply remaining silent when speaking the truth would significantly alter the other person's capacity to make an informed decision.
The Truth About Lies: “A lie is not in the words, or lack of words; it's in the intention of the deceiver."
Re: [Taxi List] Re: "Usedtobe" Cab Driver & Medallions
7/21/2008 7:01 AM
Barb, I'm going to give you an opportunity to win my highest respect:
Please carefully tell me step-by-step how one launders money through the purchase and ownership of a taxi medallion.
You will not get a passing grade unless you use real numbers.
For bonus points, please explain how a law enforcement agency or auditor might detect or deter such a practice, and how much more per medallion does such an unchecked practice affect the market price.
Take your time.
-Mike Foulks
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
He just wants attention.
His lies have all been disputed, and/or refuted and/or repudiated.
He has never offered any proof to back up his false and dubious statements.
This is how it is on this forum.
Keep feeding the donkey and he will keep coming back for more.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
"If you repeat the lie often enough...." said the Brown-shirted Nazi Storm Trooper to his lackey.”
Talk about a lack of credibility!
Unfortunately for you, you pathological egotist, you can not be the judge, the jury, the prosecutor and the hangman. That is way too Nazi.
To quote from a previous entry: "an adversarial process can have general integrity [only] when both sides DEMONSTRATE WILLINGNESS to SHARE EVIDENCE, follow guidelines of debate and accept rulings from an arbitrator in a good faith effort to arrive at either the truth ..."
In other words "where's the beef?" show us what ya got donkey boy. Let’s see the evidence."
Your Lies Defined:
1) To make a statement that one knows to be false, especially with the intend to Deceive.
2) To give a false impression.
3) Anything that gives or is meant to give a false impression.
Variations of the Lie:
1) Derail: To change the subject of discussion in order to avoid the truth. (For Example, one might feign being offended in order to stop a conversation about ones questionable actions.
2) Confuse: quibble or confuse the issue, or deliberately use ambiguity in order to deceive or mislead.
3) Misinform: To invent or perpetrate a false story with the intent to deceive or mislead.
The Lie of Omission:
A lie of omission is to remain silent when ethical behavior calls for one to speak up.
A lie of omission is a method of deception and duplicity that uses the technique of simply remaining silent when speaking the truth would significantly alter the other person's capacity to make an informed decision.
The Truth About Lies: “A lie is not in the words, or lack of words; it's in the intention of the deceiver."
here is another stab in the backside with a big imaginery knife from george's brain or from ola:
anyone who has to ask how to commit a money laundry scheme scam felony crime on a public forum, plead guilty do time for it does not have all his crackers in the barrel if you know what I mean
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Re: [Taxi List] Re: "Usedtobe" Cab Driver & Medallions
7/21/2008 7:01 AM
Barb, I'm going to give you an opportunity to win my highest respect:
Please carefully tell me step-by-step how one launders money through the purchase and ownership of a taxi medallion.
You will not get a passing grade unless you use real numbers.
For bonus points, please explain how a law enforcement agency or auditor might detect or deter such a practice, and how much more per medallion does such an unchecked practice affect the market price.
Take your time.
-Mike Foulks
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
He just wants attention.
His lies have all been disputed, and/or refuted and/or repudiated.
He has never offered any proof to back up his false and dubious statements.
This is how it is on this forum.
Keep feeding the donkey and he will keep coming back for more.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
"If you repeat the lie often enough...." said the Brown-shirted Nazi Storm Trooper to his lackey.”
Talk about a lack of credibility!
Unfortunately for you, you pathological egotist, you can not be the judge, the jury, the prosecutor and the hangman. That is way too Nazi.
To quote from a previous entry: "an adversarial process can have general integrity [only] when both sides DEMONSTRATE WILLINGNESS to SHARE EVIDENCE, follow guidelines of debate and accept rulings from an arbitrator in a good faith effort to arrive at either the truth ..."
In other words "where's the beef?" show us what ya got donkey boy. Let’s see the evidence."
Your Lies Defined:
1) To make a statement that one knows to be false, especially with the intend to Deceive.
2) To give a false impression.
3) Anything that gives or is meant to give a false impression.
Variations of the Lie:
1) Derail: To change the subject of discussion in order to avoid the truth. (For Example, one might feign being offended in order to stop a conversation about ones questionable actions.
2) Confuse: quibble or confuse the issue, or deliberately use ambiguity in order to deceive or mislead.
3) Misinform: To invent or perpetrate a false story with the intent to deceive or mislead.
The Lie of Omission:
A lie of omission is to remain silent when ethical behavior calls for one to speak up.
A lie of omission is a method of deception and duplicity that uses the technique of simply remaining silent when speaking the truth would significantly alter the other person's capacity to make an informed decision.
The Truth About Lies: “A lie is not in the words, or lack of words; it's in the intention of the deceiver."
One has to believe if the felony is one that would disqualify, that the disqualification will happen soon.
I guess the disqualified one can try elsewhere, or perhaps even back in the North 'burbs where he once worked and knows a company owner real good. These last few are his words, not mine. FL HALL
