Rick-Be honest about the record--There was no debate-
-------------------------------------------------------------------
NOTE ON WHY I WROTE THE FOLLOWING, KNOWING IT WAS ADDRESSED TO A PERSON SUFFERING FROM SOME SERIOUS MENTAL ILLNESS:
I was sitting at my desk writing a brief, and on a break, I visited this thread. What a surprise to see Rick (of all people), calling Steve Bergman a liar. I read also his pattern of veiled insults directed at me. My inclination was at first to simply ignore him, but that would leave his distorted description of what really happened, possibly unchallenged.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
My Dear, Pathetic-Wanna be Correspondent, (that is you, Rick),
The facts are that you defamed CCEE by accusing it of fraud and a violation of the federal securities laws. When you were challenged, you engaged in an awkward exercise of prevarication and circumlocution, with the obvious intention of avoiding one of the lawsuits that companies have been winning when they sue detractors who lie about them on the internet.
The e-mail that Steve Bergman sent to me (reprinted in his post, above), was not pertinent to anything you had to say since all that you said centered on your pitiful effort to run away from your own published statement that CCEE was guilty of fraud by whining that I put those words in your mouth.
Steve, of course knew he was not writing to a mental patient, an ant nor a stump, so he realized he had no need to cite references or authority to me. In fact he was correct in his assumption, accomplished his purpose, and earned my gratitude in the process.
I happened to read a post of yours where you invoked the Federalist Papers and the Constitution to support your argument that you had a freedom of speech right,(apparently you invoked that right as a license to be malicious, annoying and a fool).
I disagree that you invoked that right pertinently since the First Amendment applies solely as a restriction on the government--which has not yet taken action to have you removed from this thread. (However, I have a firm belief the government has in fact taken action to have you removed from society in general, and that you are composing and posting on this thread a depiction of the mental demons that torment you from behind the walls of a well guarded mental institution; and if the government has not so acted yet, we have actual proof that the Republican's platform of curtailing social services leaves an afflicted, needy person like you in unattended misery and pain.)
If you have a First Amendment right to seek to engage people on this thread in conversation and to search for a friend, the others on this thread surely have a First Amendment (freedom of association) right to ignore you, to determine that you have neither the intellectual honesty nor any factual information that would make you worthy of discourse with them, and to elect to engage in group e-mail discussions about CCEE that were designed to be insulated from your delusional intrusions.
Looking through the posts since December of 1996 we see a multitude of unrelated participants referring to you as mentally deranged--and they were the ones who seemed to like you. There was a very compelling association between you and Norman Bates in drag (of the movie PSYCHO) and references to your paranoia. Others simply told you to shut up and but out.
Since December of 1996, the sheer number of people who found you to be unable to articulate a cogent thought and sick is impressive. Moreover it is even more impressive when we recognize that these people were strangers to each other but that each, acting independently, based on his or her own life experience found they had two things in common: an interest in learning more about CCEE; and a studied opinion that you had nothing of value to offer on point. They were not all supporters of CCEE's management, none appear to have been on the company's payroll, they expressed divergent views on subjects (other than the subject of whether you had emotional problems), and seemed to be a random sampling of responsible, civil, well educated American adults. I deal with groups like that all of the time--we call them the members of the "jury". They absorb the facts, and then render a verdict. Here the jury of your peers on this thread, saw your arguments, witnessed your behavior and reached the conclusion that you lacked any grasp of the fundamentals of CCEE's business and strategy; but did have an impressive inferiority complex.
I read another of your posts where you boasted to a newcomer how you bullied and harassed many the contributors on this thread into a state of silence or induced them to cease posting. I did not see you bragging that you convinced anyone by your brilliance that you had something worthwhile to say.
I saw also an oblique reference to the profession of a teacher, but you were careful to not say you were in fact a teacher. Instead you couched your phrases carefully to say that it was some readers who thought you were a teacher. [I am confident from observing you that you are not gainfully employed, that you are certainly not a teacher and if anything, you may be a student who is on a mental health leave of absence. You simply do not exhibit the mature judgement that someone who has ever worked attains naturally.]
I raise this because you are preoccupied with my professional status and seem to have wild notions about lawyers. We are neither FIREFIGHTERS, public servants nor defenders of the faith. Rather, we are simply the ones who marshall evidence and articulate positions to help settle disputes on behalf of those who pay us (commonly known as clients). Considering that anyone who wants to be a lawyer and is willing to go through the training process has the right to practice law, my profession reflects generally the strengths and weaknesses of people throughout society. In fact there are a few lawyers who suffer the same mental torture that you exhibit. They usually end up in treatment, but just as you are allowed to wander around on this thread despite your impairment, they are allowed to wander around the courts. When you call me an exterminator, I feel almost flattered. I have exterminated wrong doing and freed my clients of the tyranny of unwanted attention from people they abhorred. I have even had the privilege of exterminating ants, which I define as insignificant beings who do no real damage but are pests that annoy the innocent people as they conduct their normal, productive routines.
As I said in one of my earlier posts, you dwell more on the personalities who contribute to this thread, than on the substantive issues that pertain to CCEE. When you do address CCEE (which has been rare), you have engaged in libel. Yet in your posts you adopt the posture of one who merely seeks to discuss issues but are distracted by others who attack you. At the same time, when the attackers seek to leave you alone and to converse by group e-mail, you cry foul.
You made several references, to your former posting ally, and what you intended to do yourself about distributing my posts to judges or others in my field. What such a distribution is supposed to accomplish, is something that alludes me. Judges balk at reading briefs, I can imagine where in their piles of work your copies of my posts would end up. I chalked up those statements to your derangement, but I wonder if your delusions of grandeur are constant or do they come and go?
I wonder also, do you print copies of your own posts to show to your doctors? If not, I suggest that you consider doing so. It may speed your recovery. They probably could help you get over the hurt of being called "Norman Bates", the "STUMP" and the other less generous descriptions the people who got to know you have called you. |
