Asshole claiming to be "CIA assassin" is busted -- send him an e-mail
Spiritus Sanctus
fact, you can find his book on Amazon.
--------
Roland W. Haas
Roland W. Haas is an assistant deputy chief of staff and the
command senior intelligence officer of the U.S. Army Reserve
Command. He lives in Peachtree City, Georgia.
Enter the Past Tense
My Secret Life as a CIA Assassin
Roland W. Haas
Naval officer, family man, scholar, professional hit man
320 pages; 6" x 9"; 17 b&w photos
Clothbound; $24.95 $19.96
Description:
While at Purdue University on an NROTC scholarship in 1971, Roland
Haas was recruited to become a CIA deep clandestine operative. He
underwent intensive training to prepare for insertion into hostile
areas, including High Altitude Low Opening (HALO) parachuting and
weapons instruction. In the course of his first mission (to East and
West Germany, Turkey, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, Bulgaria,
Romania, and Austria), he assassinated several international drug
dealers. On his return, he was thrown into an Iranian prison, where he
was physically and psychologically tortured. Over the next thirty
years, he served the agency on an as-needed basis, engaging in such
activities as hunting down and eliminating members of the Red Army
Faction and extracting Soviet Spetsnaz officers from East Germany. His
cover jobs included being a part owner of an Oakland health club,
which brought him into close contact with steroid abuse in
professional athletics, drug abuse in general, and the Hell's Angels,
whom he believes tried to have him killed. He also served in Germany
as site commander for the Conventional Forces in Europe weapons
treaty. His most recent cover was as the deputy director of
intelligence in the U.S. Army Reserve Command, which involved him with
the Guantanamo detention facility.
A true story that pulls no punches, Enter the Past Tense also
chronicles Haas's descent into, and recovery from, alcoholism that
resulted from the stress of this extraordinary life. It is an eye-
opening look at the dark, but many would argue necessary, side of
intelligence work-and one that readers won't soon forget.
About The Author:
Roland W. Haas is an assistant deputy chief of staff and the command
senior intelligence officer of the U.S. Army Reserve Command. He lives
in Peachtree City, Georgia.
Reviews/Endorsements:
Haas's tale is definitely entertaining. . . .[his] insights into the
cultures he encounters are often engrossing, and he goes into
fascinating detail about aspects of his 'profession.' "
-- Sam Jemielity, Playboy.com
"An incredible story of derring-do well told, including international
intrigue, assassination, and deception, with a dash of Hells Angels
and personal redemption mixed in. Not only does Haas reaffirm the old
adage that 'truth is stranger than fiction,' but his is an account
likely to cause considerable heartburn at the CIA, for which he worked
as a contract employee for nearly three decades."
-- Don Bohning, author of The Castro Obsession: U.S. Covert Operations
Against Cuba, 1959-1965
"The story of our government's role in using highly trained
professionals to do certain unsavory but very necessary types of
undercover/clandestine missions is not often pretty but has been in
need of telling for some time. I can't think of a more knowledgeable
and experienced person to tell that very important story than Roland
Haas."
-- From the Foreword by Col. Ben S. Malcom, USA (Ret.)
------
NOW, HERE ARE THE FACTS ABOUT THIS LYING DIRTBAG PIECE OF SHIT:
One of my friends found the guy. He is a GG-14 Department of the
Army civilian working at Army Reserve Command Headquarters at Ft.
McPherson, GA. Even got his e-mail: rolan...@us.army.mil.
Other research by another friend [deleted for privacy] reveals
that according to the Army's National Ground Intelligence Center, "GG"
means "General Government," and that "GG is the Intelligence Community
equivalent to GS or General Schedule. The two pay scales are the
same."
In other words, this jerk really does have a security
clearance and really does work for the Army Reserve Command, although
as a GS-14 (or the equivalent) he is clearly NOT, as he claims, the
Command's senior intelligence officer, as he claims.
In my own internet checking I found one place where he told people he
was an Information Security Officer with the Army Reserve Command -
that sounds about right.
I am absolutely appalled that this guy could write a book like
this and retain employment with the US Army. In the book he claims to
have killed 18 people on the orders of the US government. That means
that a) he violated U.S. law (the law against assassinations), or b)
he is an out and out liar. In either case that should be prima facie
grounds for immediate dismissal from the kind of sensitive job he
seems to hold - or perhaps he is currently on leave for reasons of
mental instability?
Roland
>
> Other research by another friend [deleted for privacy] reveals
> that according to the Army's National Ground Intelligence Center, "GG"
> means "General Government," and that "GG is the Intelligence Community
> equivalent to GS or General Schedule. The two pay scales are the
> same."
>
> In other words, this jerk really does have a security
> clearance and really does work for the Army Reserve Command, although
> as a GS-14 (or the equivalent) he is clearly NOT, as he claims, the
> Command's senior intelligence officer, as he claims.
>
> In my own internet checking I found one place where he told people he
> was an Information Security Officer with the Army Reserve Command -
> that sounds about right.
>
> I am absolutely appalled that this guy could write a book like
> this and retain employment with the US Army. In the book he claims to
> have killed 18 people on the orders of the US government. That means
> that a) he violated U.S. law (the law against assassinations), or b)
> he is an out and out liar. In either case that should be prima facie
> grounds for immediate dismissal from the kind of sensitive job he
> seems to hold - or perhaps he is currently on leave for reasons of
> mental instability?
****************************************************************************************************************
My Reply to Spiritus Sanctus:
Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE
Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE
I am the author of the book you questioned, Enter The Past Tense.
Before I reply let me say simply that I respect your opinions and your
rights to express them - rights I presume you fought for in Viet Nam.
Now to my reply:
1) I am a GG-0132-14, as you stated. GG is the general classification
for intelligence and intelligence related positions. The 132
delineates that I am specifically intelligence, as opposed to
security. 14 is my grade. I stated that much in my book.
2) At one point in time, some years back, I was in charge of
information security for my command. That was over a decade ago -
when you get info from a web site you should also check the date and
verify that things have not changed..
3) I have official Army orders designating me as the Senior
Intelligence Officer of the command, signed by a Major General (2
Star) who was the DCG of this command. Yes, we have higher ranking
officers in Intel, but since uniformed personnel rotate every two
years, the command wanted continuity in that position. As the highest
ranking civilian in intelligence, that fell to me.
4) I also have official orders sending me to GTMO to "coordinate
special intelligence activities." A copy of those orders was included
in my book. As a matter of fact, I have documentary evidence to back
up most of what I claim in my book. Obviously, I don't have pictures
of actual 'kills', but that would be absurd.
5) Yes, there is an Executive Order prohibiting the practice of
targeted killings, or assassinations, by U.S. personnel. An executive
order is not a law, but a statement of policy. The Agency has since
(within the last 4 weeks) come out and admitted that it did indeed use
targeted killings. This was also reported in the Washington Post. The
Agency is releasing this info they call "the family jewels."
6) My story has been vetted by a number of official sources! I have
now been invited by the Deprtment of the Navy to present an address
about my story from the deck of the USS Brady, a cold war era
destroyer. I am also slated to speak at a number of other high
military venues, something that would not be happening if my story
were a lie. Finally, I have made it clear that I stand ready to
testify before both the Senate and House Select Committees on
Intelligence.
7) Both the Department of the Army and my command are aware of my
book, have read it, and a number of general officers and current and/
or retired CIA personnel have gone out of their way to get autographed
copies. I believe that their knowledge of me and current operations
is a bit more credible than yours would be, considering you base your
'judgments' on 'one of his friends'.
8) I am really surprised and disappointed at the venom and anger you
put out in your 'denounciatin' of me. I would think that after the
horrible reception many of our Viet Nam vets got after that war,
somebody who went through that would be a little more understanding
and at least get the facts from more than just 'a friend'. There
really is no basis for your over-the-top pronoucements.
9) Finally, I am not hiding behind a nickname or incomplete e:mail
address. I have made myself accessible to anybody who wished to take
issue with what I have to say. My military e:mail is haas.rola@usarc-
emh2.army.mil
But again, I support your right to your opinion. I just don't think
it is well founded or thought out.
Regards,
Roland W. Haas
Assistant Deputy Chief of Staff, G2
USARC
Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE
Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE
Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE
roland haas
>
> Other research by another friend [deleted for privacy] reveals
> that according to the Army's National Ground Intelligence Center, "GG"
> means "General Government," and that "GG is the Intelligence Community
> equivalent to GS or General Schedule. The two pay scales are the
> same."
>
> In other words, this jerk really does have a security
> clearance and really does work for the Army Reserve Command, although
> as a GS-14 (or the equivalent) he is clearly NOT, as he claims, the
> Command's senior intelligence officer, as he claims.
>
> In my own internet checking I found one place where he told people he
> was an Information Security Officer with the Army Reserve Command -
> that sounds about right.
>
> I am absolutely appalled that this guy could write a book like
> this and retain employment with the US Army. In the book he claims to
> have killed 18 people on the orders of the US government. That means
> that a) he violated U.S. law (the law against assassinations), or b)
> he is an out and out liar. In either case that should be prima facie
> grounds for immediate dismissal from the kind of sensitive job he
> seems to hold - or perhaps he is currently on leave for reasons of
> mental instability?
My Response to Spiritus Sanctus:
Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE
redvet
##################################################Classification:
UNCLASSIFIED
>Caveats: NONE
Concise response...Haven't read your book, but its on the to-do list.
Tell me, were you posting from work?
"Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
>Caveats: NONE"
Or was that style? - redvet
Kickin' Ass and Takin' Names
He would tell you that but he'd have to kill you if he did.
Remember -- he was a CIA assassin with 18 kills to his credit.
I can hardly wait for the movie. Who'll play him -- Bruce Willis?
Chuck Norris? Steven Seagal?
BWWAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
> "Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
>
> >Caveats: NONE"
>
> Or was that style? - redvet- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Old Redneck
>
> Other research by another friend [deleted for privacy] reveals
> that according to the Army's National Ground Intelligence Center, "GG"
> means "General Government," and that "GG is the Intelligence Community
> equivalent to GS or General Schedule. The two pay scales are the
> same."
>
> In other words, this jerk really does have a security
> clearance and really does work for the Army Reserve Command, although
> as a GS-14 (or the equivalent) he is clearly NOT, as he claims, the
> Command's senior intelligence officer, as he claims.
>
> In my own internet checking I found one place where he told people he
> was an Information Security Officer with the Army Reserve Command -
> that sounds about right.
>
> I am absolutely appalled that this guy could write a book like
> this and retain employment with the US Army. In the book he claims to
> have killed 18 people on the orders of the US government. That means
> that a) he violated U.S. law (the law against assassinations), or b)
> he is an out and out liar. In either case that should be prima facie
> grounds for immediate dismissal from the kind of sensitive job he
> seems to hold - or perhaps he is currently on leave for reasons of
> mental instability?
I just read this guy's book.
It's a load of crap.
Reminds me of another clown who claimed to have been involved in all
sorts of strange shit, including infiltrating Hell's Angels for the
FBI. His name was Scott Barnes and he was phony as a $3.00 bill.
"Soldier of Fortune" magazine ran an article on Barnes back in the
1980's -- title was something like "My Favorite Flake."
In fact, when I read the blurbs for Haas's book, I immediately thought
of Barnes -- their stories sound eerily alike. Maybe Haas read
Barnes' book "BOHICA" and decided to put toogether his own work of
fiction.
In fact -- as I recall, Barnes' book had several pages of photos,
copies of pages of phone numbers, and the like that he used as "proof"
of his exploits.
Nigel Brooks
news:k0p8e313vd13c7l6q...@4ax.com...
If you enjoyed Doogies stories - you'll really enjoy this one
--
Nigel Brooks
!Dick Barber
"Nigel Brooks" <nbr...@msn.com> wrote in message
news:5kjd60F...@mid.individual.net...
took him on a one-way fishing trip
i2p6 west
Son, you have not read it. But you do believe the official U.S. government statement that
the U.S. does not engage in assassinations. You have U.S. documents, a paper trail, to
support your belief. (you believed this lie, no longer denied, for years in Vietnam, didn't you, son)
In fact, son, while you strenuously deny this activity occurs today, you will
simultaneously defend it as a good thing...just as you did/do with torture.
he he he...but you are not overtly lying...you really are an honest simpleton.
;-)
!Dick Barber
"i2p6 west" <i2p6...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:13e9mu3...@corp.supernews.com...
anyhting bigger than a cockroach. that sorta fits your species to a
tee...a cockroach that is.
Voda...@verizon.net
> On Sep 2, 2:45 pm, Spiritus Sanctus <innominepa...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> My Response to Spiritus Sanctus:
>
> Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
> Caveats: NONE
>
> I am the author of the book you questioned, Enter The Past Tense.
> Before I reply let me say simply that I respect your opinions and
> your rights to express them - rights I presume you fought for
> in Viet Nam.
>
> Now to my reply:
>
> 1) I am a GG-0132-14, as you stated. GG is the general
> classification for intelligence and intelligence related positions.
> The 132 delineates that I am specifically intelligence, as
> opposed to security. 14 is my grade. I stated that much in
> my book.
> 9) Finally, I am not hiding behind a nickname or incomplete e:mail
> address. I have made myself accessible to anybody who wished to take
> issue with what I have to say. My military e:mail ishaas.rola@usarc-
> emh2.army.mil
>
> But again, I support your right to your opinion. I just don't think
> it is well founded or thought out.
>
> Regards,RolandW.Haas
> Assistant Deputy Chief of Staff, G2
> USARC
> Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
> Caveats: NONE
> Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
> Caveats: NONE
>
> Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
> Caveats: NONE
Mr. Haas,
One does not need detailed knowledge of how our intelligence services
operate to recognize that your story is nonsense.
Any reasonably intelligent, moderately well-informed person who is
willing to remove his or her ideological blinders and examine your
story with a little common sense and logic should be able to recognize
it as the fiction that it is.
In the 2 Sep 07 note cited above you wrote: "The Agency has since
(within the last 4 weeks) come out and admitted that it did indeed use
targeted killings. This was also reported in the Washington Post. The
Agency is releasing this info they call 'the family jewels.'"
Mr. Haas, what is the date and headline of the Washington Post article
you refer to? A Google search of the Internet and a search of the
Washington Post on-line archive using two combinations of keywords
"assassin CIA" (without quotes), and "targeted killing" CIA (with
quotes), yielded only four items published in the six weeks before you
wrote the above sentence:
· A transcript of an interview with NY Times correspondent Tim Weiner
about his book "Legacy of Ashes: The History of the CIA", which is
critical of the CIA;
· This blurb about a movie: "'Hitman,' adapted from the hit video game
"Hitman: Codename 47," stars Timothy Olyphant as Agent 47, a
genetically engineered assassin who works for a shadowy agency called,
of all things, the Agency."
· This blurb about the book "The Bourne Ultimatum" (Bantam, $7.99), by
Robert Ludlum: "A master assassin renews his struggle against an
international terrorist."
· This blurb about a movie based on Ludlum's book: ""The Bourne
Ultimatum." Hyperkinetic thriller -- gloriously dizzying and paranoid
-- is a stunning finale to the Bourne trilogy ("The Bourne Identity,"
2002; "The Bourne Supremacy," 2004, PG-13s), updating Robert Ludlum's
Cold War novels to the terror-tainted present; Matt Damon, as amnesiac
CIA assassin Jason Bourne, gets to the source of his identity and why
most (but not all) CIA higher-ups want him dead. Violence approaches
bloody R levels in bone-crushing fights, lethal gunplay; foot chases,
car chases are breathlessly shot and edited and could induce motion
sickness; mild profanity. High schoolers."
A Google search on the keywords "CIA's family jewels" yielded a
keyword-searchable 702-page collection of CIA documents made public in
June 2007, that has been described as "the family jewels" and appears
to be the "jewels" you referred to. If so, I believe you have
misrepresented the contents of the "family jewels" collection.
The collection describes shopworn allegations by various journalists
and wannabes that the CIA uses political assassination as a weapon and
that Operation Phoenix during the Vietnam war was a CIA-run program of
political assassinations.
Far from the CIA admitting, as you wrote, "that it did indeed use
targeted killings," in 1972, the then Executive Director of the CIA,
William E. Colby, with concurrence of the then Director of CIA,
Richard Helms, wrote that he could say under oath that:
"a. CIA does not and has not used political assassination as a
weapon.
"b. Operation Phoenix was run not by the CIA but by the Government of
Vietnam, with the support of the CORDS element of the U. S. Military
Assistance Command in coordination with several U. S. agencies
including CIA.
"c. Operation Phoenix in not and was not a program of assassination."
Mr. Haas, I have been unable to find any authoritative reference that,
by any stretch of imagination, could be accurately characterized as a
report by the Washington Post--or any other publication--that the CIA
"admitted that it did indeed use targeted killings."
In the same 2 Sep 07 note, you wrote: "My story has been vetted by a
number of official sources!"
Mr. Haas, specifically what "official sources"?
Also on 2 Sep 07, you wrote: "I have now been invited by the
Department of the Navy to present an address about my story from the
deck of the USS Brady, a cold war era destroyer."
Mr. Haas, specifically which office of the Department of the Navy
extended the alleged invitation?
Specifically, when and where will you present your story? On the deck
of which USS Brady?
The National Association of Destroyer Veterans has posted on its
website what appears to be comprehensive lists of every US Navy
destroyer ever commissioned. See the links at
http://www.destroyers.org/shipinfocenter/destroyer-info-ctr.htm. I
did not find any vessel named USS Brady on any of these lists.
Or, is it possible that you have been invited to present you story on
the deck of the starship U.S.S. Brady, NCC-71500? See description
and photos at http://members.aol.com/Griffworks/Brady.html.
On 2 Sep 07, you wrote: "I am also slated to speak at a number of
other high military venues, something that would not be happening if
my story were a lie."
Mr. Haas, specifically what "high level military venues" are you
slated to speak at? Also, dates and locations, please?
On 2 Sep 07, you wrote: "Finally, I have made it clear that I stand
ready to testify before both the Senate and House Select Committees on
Intelligence."
Mr. Haas, you might wish to be careful what you wish for. Those
fellows customarily place witnesses under oath.
On 2 Sep 07, you wrote: "Both the Department of the Army and my
command are aware of my book, have read it, and a number of general
officers and current and/or retired CIA personnel have gone out of
their way to get autographed copies."
Mr. Haas, do you mean to imply that the Department of the Army has
endorsed the content of your book?
If so, specifically, what reviewing authority signed the memorandum of
record stating that "This manuscript has been cleared for open
publication and unrestricted distribution."?
Also, since you seem to imply that "a number of the general officers
and current and/or retired CIA personnel" vouch for your story, please
name them. Every retired CIA officer I know is convinced that your
story is false and that you are a pathetic armchair wannabe.
Additionally, they are disgusted that you have smeared the reputations
of the thousands of authentic members of the clandestine services who
have dedicated their lives and talents in service to our nation during
the 30 years you claim to have worked for the CIA.
On 2 Sep 07, referring to the alleged "number of the general officers
and current and/or retired CIA personnel" you wrote: "I believe that
their knowledge of me and current operations is a bit more credible
than yours would be, considering you base your 'judgments' on 'one of
his friends'.
Mr. Haas, I don't know the person to whom you addressed the foregoing
comments, but I have more than forty years experience in various
intelligence assignments and disciplines at home and abroad.
Based on my experience, I believe you are a fraud. However, I will
happily reconsider my opinion if you can provide verifiably accurate
answers to the questions I posed above.
Vo Danh
DGVREIMAN
I warned you to stop referencing me in the fraudulent manner you
have done in the past. Your fraudulent use of forgeries,
outright lies, misrepresentations of my military records, and
false accusations do not represent in any manner any "story" I
have ever told. Your constant attacks and fraud in this manner
will now be addressed.
I waited for a while to see if you could find a way to cure your
obsessive outrageous fraud and misrepresentations of my military
records, and your other numerous lies, miss-associations , false
innuendo, outright fraud and forgeries and other unethical and
deliberate deceit and fraud you have perpetrated against me for
the past two years or so.
No wonder not less than eleven Web Site managers have forced down
a similar number of your web sites for violating their terms of
service. I assume you hold the record for web sites forced down
due to abuse or fraud or false accusations - which tells us a lot
about your lack of veracity and use of outright fraud to smear
and defame your and your smear gang's target victims.
Now if you disagree with the above opinions, then I suggest
binding Arbitration from the American Association Arbitrators.
If they disagree with what I said above I will pay for the
Arbitration, if they agree then you pay.
Time to walk the walk Mr. Brooks, or cure your obsession with
the use of fraud and forgeries to smear your target victims.
Doug Grant (Tm)
"Nigel Brooks" <nbr...@msn.com> wrote in message
news:5kjd60F...@mid.individual.net...
DGVREIMAN
Doug Grant (Tm)
DGVREIMAN
Doug Grant (Tm)
DGVREIMAN
Doug Grant (Tm)
Pepperoni
"DGVREIMAN" <dgvr...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:eNednWQ7ss3fLmrb...@comcast.com...
Welcome back, Doug.
I didn't know if you were on vacation, or your PC was in the shop. Good to
see things back to normal around here.
I can't stay to chat; got to work on my filters. I think I'll set my
filter limit to message size 6KB.
Nigel Brooks
>
Arkell v. Pressdram
--
Nigel Brooks
Nigel Brooks
> Mr. Brooks:
>
> I warned you to stop referencing me in the fraudulent manner you
> have done in the past. Your fraudulent use of forgeries,
> outright lies, misrepresentations of my military records, and
> false accusations do not represent in any manner any "story" I
> have ever told. Your constant attacks and fraud in this manner
> will now be addressed.
>
Formosa's Law invoked
--
Nigel Brooks
Nigel Brooks
--
Nigel Brooks
"DGVREIMAN" <dgvr...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:iIednVY3R8HALmrb...@comcast.com...
> Mr. Brooks:
>
> I warned you to stop referencing me in the fraudulent manner you
> have done in the past. Your fraudulent use of forgeries,
> outright lies, misrepresentations of my military records, and
> false accusations do not represent in any manner any "story" I
> have ever told. Your constant attacks and fraud in this manner
> will now be addressed.
>
Nigel Brooks
> Mr. Brooks:
>
> I warned you to stop referencing me in the fraudulent manner you
> have done in the past. Your fraudulent use of forgeries,
> outright lies, misrepresentations of my military records, and
> false accusations do not represent in any manner any "story" I
> have ever told. Your constant attacks and fraud in this manner
> will now be addressed.
>
DGVREIMAN
I warned you to stop referencing me in the fraudulent manner you
have done in the past. Your fraudulent use of forgeries,
outright lies, misrepresentations of my military records, and
false accusations do not represent in any manner any "story" I
have ever told. Your constant attacks and fraud in this manner
will now be addressed.
I waited for a while to see if you could find a way to cure your
obsessive outrageous fraud and misrepresentations of my military
records, and your other numerous lies, miss-associations , false
innuendo, outright fraud and forgeries and other unethical and
deliberate deceit and fraud you have perpetrated against me for
the past two years or so.
No wonder not less than eleven Web Site managers have forced down
a similar number of your web sites for violating their terms of
service. I assume you hold the record for web sites forced down
due to abuse or fraud or false accusations - which tells us a lot
about your lack of veracity and use of outright fraud to smear
and defame your and your smear gang's target victims.
Now if you disagree with the above opinions, then I suggest
binding Arbitration from the American Association Arbitrators.
If they disagree with what I said above I will pay for the
Arbitration, if they agree then you pay.
Time to walk the walk Mr. Brooks, or cure your obsession with
the use of fraud and forgeries to smear your target victims.
Doug Grant (Tm)
"Nigel Brooks" <nbr...@msn.com> wrote in message
news:5lpsu0F...@mid.individual.net...
Mr. Brooks it is time for you to walk the walk. If you have not
lied and used the fraud I stated above, then agree to the
Arbitration I stated loser pays. If you keep avoiding this
simple and independent review of the facts and the resulting
decision by the American Association of Arbitrators, then you are
clearly de facto admitting to my allegations stated above.
Moreover, if you continue to duck and cower from this impartial
review then it will occur anyway via a legal expert, and I will
publish his conclusions. So step up and back up your claims, or
the world will know you have been caught in mid fraud again.
Doug Grant (Tm)
>
>
DGVREIMAN
Doug Grant (Tm)
news:5lpsu0F...@mid.individual.net...
> "DGVREIMAN" <dgvr...@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:eNednWc7ss3fLmrb...@comcast.com...
>> Mr. Brooks:
>>
>> I warned you to stop referencing me in the fraudulent manner
>> you
>> have done in the past. Your fraudulent use of forgeries,
>> outright lies, misrepresentations of my military records, and
>> false accusations do not represent in any manner any "story" I
>> have ever told. Your constant attacks and fraud in this
>> manner
>> will now be addressed.
>>
>
>
>
> Formosa's Law invoked
>
> --
> Nigel Brooks
Mr. Brooks it is time for you to walk the walk. If you have not
lied and used the fraud I stated above, then agree to the
Arbitration I stated loser pays. If you keep avoiding this
simple and independent review of the facts and the resulting
decision by the American Association of Arbitrators, then you are
clearly de facto admitting to my allegations stated above.
Moreover, if you continue to duck and cower from this impartial
review then it will occur anyway via a legal expert, and I will
publish his conclusions. So step up and back up your claims, or
the world will know you have been caught in mid fraud again.
Doug Grant (Tm)
"Nigel Brooks" <nbr...@msn.com> wrote in message
news:5lpsq1F...@mid.individual.net...
DGVREIMAN
I warned you to stop referencing me in the fraudulent manner you
have done in the past. Your fraudulent use of forgeries,
outright lies, misrepresentations of my military records, and
false accusations do not represent in any manner any "story" I
have ever told. Your constant attacks and fraud in this manner
will now be addressed.
I waited for a while to see if you could find a way to cure your
obsessive outrageous fraud and misrepresentations of my military
records, and your other numerous lies, miss-associations , false
innuendo, outright fraud and forgeries and other unethical and
deliberate deceit and fraud you have perpetrated against me for
the past two years or so.
No wonder not less than eleven Web Site managers have forced down
a similar number of your web sites for violating their terms of
service. I assume you hold the record for web sites forced down
due to abuse or fraud or false accusations - which tells us a lot
about your lack of veracity and use of outright fraud to smear
and defame your and your smear gang's target victims.
Now if you disagree with the above opinions, then I suggest
binding Arbitration from the American Association Arbitrators.
If they disagree with what I said above I will pay for the
Arbitration, if they agree then you pay.
Time to walk the walk Mr. Brooks, or cure your obsession with
the use of fraud and forgeries to smear your target victims.
Doug Grant (Tm)
"Nigel Brooks" <nbr...@msn.com> wrote in message
news:5lpsu0F...@mid.individual.net...
> "DGVREIMAN" <dgvr...@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:eNednWc7ss3fLmrb...@comcast.com...
>> Mr. Brooks:
>>
>> I warned you to stop referencing me in the fraudulent manner
>> you
>> have done in the past. Your fraudulent use of forgeries,
>> outright lies, misrepresentations of my military records, and
>> false accusations do not represent in any manner any "story" I
>> have ever told. Your constant attacks and fraud in this
>> manner
>> will now be addressed.
>>
>
>
>
> Formosa's Law invoked
>
> --
> Nigel Brooks
Mr. Brooks it is time for you to walk the walk. If you have not
lied and used the fraud I stated above, then agree to the
Arbitration I stated loser pays. If you keep avoiding this
simple and independent review of the facts and the resulting
decision by the American Association of Arbitrators, then you are
clearly de facto admitting to my allegations stated above.
Moreover, if you continue to duck and cower from this impartial
review then it will occur anyway via a legal expert, and I will
publish his conclusions. So step up and back up your claims, or
the world will know you have been caught in mid fraud again.
Doug Grant (Tm)
"Nigel Brooks" <nbr...@msn.com> wrote in message
news:5lpsuvF...@mid.individual.net...
DGVREIMAN
I warned you to stop referencing me in the fraudulent manner you
have done in the past. Your fraudulent use of forgeries,
outright lies, misrepresentations of my military records, and
false accusations do not represent in any manner any "story" I
have ever told. Your constant attacks and fraud in this manner
will now be addressed.
I waited for a while to see if you could find a way to cure your
obsessive outrageous fraud and misrepresentations of my military
records, and your other numerous lies, miss-associations , false
innuendo, outright fraud and forgeries and other unethical and
deliberate deceit and fraud you have perpetrated against me for
the past two years or so.
No wonder not less than eleven Web Site managers have forced down
a similar number of your web sites for violating their terms of
service. I assume you hold the record for web sites forced down
due to abuse or fraud or false accusations - which tells us a lot
about your lack of veracity and use of outright fraud to smear
and defame your and your smear gang's target victims.
Now if you disagree with the above opinions, then I suggest
binding Arbitration from the American Association Arbitrators.
If they disagree with what I said above I will pay for the
Arbitration, if they agree then you pay.
Time to walk the walk Mr. Brooks, or cure your obsession with
the use of fraud and forgeries to smear your target victims.
Doug Grant (Tm)
"Nigel Brooks" <nbr...@msn.com> wrote in message
news:5lpsu0F...@mid.individual.net...
> "DGVREIMAN" <dgvr...@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:eNednWc7ss3fLmrb...@comcast.com...
>> Mr. Brooks:
>>
>> I warned you to stop referencing me in the fraudulent manner
>> you
>> have done in the past. Your fraudulent use of forgeries,
>> outright lies, misrepresentations of my military records, and
>> false accusations do not represent in any manner any "story" I
>> have ever told. Your constant attacks and fraud in this
>> manner
>> will now be addressed.
>>
>
>
>
> Formosa's Law invoked
>
> --
> Nigel Brooks
Mr. Brooks it is time for you to walk the walk. If you have not
lied and used the fraud I stated above, then agree to the
Arbitration I stated loser pays. If you keep avoiding this
simple and independent review of the facts and the resulting
decision by the American Association of Arbitrators, then you are
clearly de facto admitting to my allegations stated above.
Moreover, if you continue to duck and cower from this impartial
review then it will occur anyway via a legal expert, and I will
publish his conclusions. So step up and back up your claims, or
the world will know you have been caught in mid fraud again.
Doug Grant (Tm)
"Nigel Brooks" <nbr...@msn.com> wrote in message
news:5lpsvrF...@mid.individual.net...
Mac
<dgvr...@comcast.net> wrote:
>Mr. Brooks:
SNIP the Usual NCO "Butter-Ball" codswallop
*****************************************
You have threatened lawsuits for years.
You already have one Judge stating that your case was "FATUOUS".
Which, describes yourself...
---Mac, the Medic
Nigel Brooks
> Mr. Brooks:
>
> I warned you to stop referencing me in the fraudulent manner you
> have done in the past. Your fraudulent use of forgeries,
> outright lies, misrepresentations of my military records, and
> false accusations do not represent in any manner any "story" I
> have ever told. Your constant attacks and fraud in this manner
> will now be addressed.
Formosa's Law:
It is common, both on the Internet and in real life, to seek amusement by
ridiculing people who spout bogus nonsense or engage in silly behavior, on
the basis that they have effectively invited this ridicule by their own
overt behavior, usually some combination of stupidity, hypocrisy, and
pomposity, but in any case behavior that they presumably have control over.
However, in some cases, the behavior is the result of actual mental illness
or dysfunction, rather than mere boneheadedness or intentional misconduct.
Formosa's law states that if someone's weird behavior is caused by an actual
pathology, it is inappropriate for others to increase their suffering by
adding ridicule.
hth
--
Nigel Brooks
DGVREIMAN
"Mac" <NoSpa...@NoSpamToday.net> wrote in message
news:q33hf3l3h98eekge5...@4ax.com...
Mr. McDonnell, no Judge ever said *my* case was "Fatuous"
you are lying as usual. If you disagree then I suggest
binding arbitration loser pays over this issue and the rest
of the fraud and false statements you have published about
me. In fact, don't you think it is about time you revealed
what the DA said about your malicious prosecution?
Moreover, if you are referencing the Butter Ball above in
the context I said it, meaning a Platoon Leader, then it
surely is not codswallop...but if you are forging and
fraudulently misrepresenting my context, then you can only
be doing so out of a malicious intent to defame and
cyberstalk.
Time to walk the walk Mr. McDonnell...Either back up your
statements about me or lose what little credibility you have
left.
BTW, do you still work in the medical field or was that a
lie also?
Doug Grant (Tm)
DGVREIMAN
Mr. Brooks, if you are referencing some mental illness you
possess in respect to your obsession with me, I can
understand your statement above. But you still have not
addressed the following. Time to walk the walk Mr. Brooks
or admit you are a fraud merchant.
Mr. Brooks:
I warned you to stop referencing me in the fraudulent manner
you
have done in the past. Your fraudulent use of forgeries,
outright lies, misrepresentations of my military records,
and
false accusations do not represent in any manner any "story"
I
have ever told. Your constant attacks and fraud in this
manner
will now be addressed.
I waited for a while to see if you could find a way to cure
your
obsessive outrageous fraud and misrepresentations of my
military
Pepperoni
>
>
> Mr. Brooks, if you are referencing some mental illness you possess in
http://groups.google.com/group/namesofcyberstalkers/topics
(Doug's Nigel Brooks Fan site)
SteveL
SteveL
wrote:
>
>"Mac" <NoSpa...@NoSpamToday.net> wrote in message
>news:q33hf3l3h98eekge5...@4ax.com...
>> On Mon, 24 Sep 2007 16:43:08 -0700, "DGVREIMAN"
>> <dgvr...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>>Mr. Brooks:
>> SNIP the Usual NCO "Butter-Ball" codswallop
>> *****************************************
>>
>> You have threatened lawsuits for years.
>> You already have one Judge stating that your case was
>> "FATUOUS".
>> Which, describes yourself...
>> ---Mac, the Medic
>
>Mr. McDonnell, no Judge ever said *my* case was "Fatuous"
>you are lying as usual.
I suppose that's actually technically true.
He called it "a fatuity".
DGVREIMAN
"Pepperoni" <undelive...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:nu-dnfBwZdc9f5za...@comcast.com...
Doug Says: First, everything that was posted on that site
has been posted on this NG and on other NG. Second, you
and Brooks and all have been invited to join that site.
Third, my rebuttals are *responses and rebuttals* to Mr.
Brooks obsessive forgeries and fraud he and you and other
members of the gang regularly initiate about me. I stopped
posting for almost a full month while I worked on amassing
evidence, and still Brooks could not help himself from
defaming me.
Fourth, if Brooks disagrees with these facts, he should
agree to binding Arbitration loser pays...unless of course
he is lying. This is a simple and independent means to
prove one way or another the truth about Brooks obsessive
smear campaign, and there is no reason he or other gang
members would duck this offer if they were not lying and
using the forgeries and fraud I say they are using.
Doug Grant (Tm)
>
>
>
>
>
>
Nigel Brooks
**Temporary Suspension of Formosa's Law**
Begin Commentary:
FUCK OFF YOU LOON!!!
End Commentary
**Resumption of Formosa's Law**
--
Nigel Brooks(Tm)
Mac
File your friggin' lawsuit you blathering gob of codswallop.
You claim to have an attorney.
He must not be any too good if he allows or encourages you to spew
forth your balderdash and cyberstalking in public forums instead of
proceeding with your threats...
And, yes, you are FATUOUS.
And a fatuity.
---Mac, the Medic
********************************************
>
DGVREIMAN
news:b935g3p70rntubtmd...@4ax.com...
>
> File your friggin' lawsuit you blathering gob of
> codswallop.
> You claim to have an attorney.
> He must not be any too good if he allows or encourages you
> to spew
> forth your balderdash and cyberstalking in public forums
> instead of
> proceeding with your threats...
> And, yes, you are FATUOUS.
> And a fatuity.
> ---Mac, the Medic
> ********************************************
> On Mon, 1 Oct 2007 21:19:34 -0700, "DGVREIMAN"
> <dgvr...@comcast.net>
> wrote:
Mr. McDonnell, you know everything I am posting I can prove.
And you lied about any Judge calling me Fatuous...stop lying
and using fraud and forged statements then attributing your
own fraud and forgeries to me....moreover, if you do not
know about me already filing a Federal Lawsuit and then
dismissing temporarily it so I can amass all the evidence
the Judge wanted prior to granting Subponeas...then you are
the only gang member that has not got the word from your
gang leader. I have a year to refile and the statutes are
tolled....wake up McDonnell. BTW, when are you going to
answer the question whether you work in the medical field in
Oregon like you claimed, or was that just another lie as
well?
Doug Grant (Tm)
DGVREIMAN
"SteveL" <stev...@deletethisbitntlworld.com> wrote in
message
news:iuadnffKru-nk5_a...@giganews.com...
Doug Says: YOu are lying, no Judge ever called *my* case a
fatuity...stop using outright fraud and lies to cyberstalk
SteveL.
Doug Grant (Tm)
>
DGVREIMAN
REBUTTAL NIGEL BROOKS PAST LAWSUITS FRAUD
© Copyright all materials written by Author DGV Reiman 2007,
all rights reserved. By posting or publishing this article
and other copyrighted articles on USENET and/or elsewhere,
Author is expressly NOT granting any implied authorization
to reproduce his copyrighted work in any manner. The Author
further does not accept as "Fair Use" under U.S. Code Title
17, nor will condone, the reproduction of any portion of his
copyrighted materials IN ANY MANNER for the purpose of
harassing, stalking or defaming the Author, or in
conjunction with any violation of any civil or criminal
statutes. Violators will face legal action. If anyone wishes
to reproduce my copyrighted materials all they need to do
first is email me and receive back via email my written
permission to do so - such permission will not be
unreasonably withheld.
(Smear Merchant Disclaimer: Please note this article (the
same as all of my past articles and exchanges with posters)
represents an editorial on contemporary issues and events -
my opinion. Nothing in this article represents in any manner
any asseveration of biographical fact, nor is about,
directed toward or against any particular person - other
than those specifically mentioned herein. If any person
finds this post personally annoying, abusive, defaming or
otherwise disturbing, please notify me of your specific
reasons for annoyance via email at legal...@comcast.net.
If we find your detailed objections reasonable (considering
the "reasonable person" doctrine and case law) we will then
remove this post, or the offending passages contained
therein, from the Google archive, publicly apologize and
retract. My intent is not to annoy, abuse, humiliate, or in
any way cause anyone emotional harm by posting on USENET or
elsewhere. Please note that defending myself from harassment
and obloquy with rebuttal posts has been deemed a "lawful
and legitimate" publication by my legal counsel. If I am not
attacked, defamed or harassed, or my copyrighted articles
not interrupted nor infringed upon, I clearly do not have a
reason to respond with a rebuttal. Please also note that I
intend to notify any and all ISP's and web hosts of any
annoying or calumnious post, web site or other similar
entity about me after I give the offender an opportunity to
retract, apologize and remove said post from the Google
archive).
Arbitration Notice: If any person claims something I said
about them in this post is not true, then I invite them to
email me and request arbitration. The loser will pay for the
arbitrator. I also invite arbitration in respect to me
claiming something someone said about me is untrue. Again,
the loser will pay for the arbitration. Truth as defined in
this offer will be statements in correct context and
representing original intent, and key omissions of fact will
be considered untruthful. Arbitrators will be selected from
the American Association of Arbitrators. This offer
exclusively applies to all statements of fact in this post.
"Nigel Brooks" <
> wrote in message
> news:5iu02eF...@mid.individual.net...
Path:
border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!newsfeed01.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: "Nigel Brooks" <nbr...@msn.com>
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam
Subject: Sanctions under Rule 11 FRCP
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2007 12:07:29 -0500
Lines: 52
Message-ID: <5iu02eF...@mid.individual.net>
X-Trace: individual.net
KFZR3EX6fO/rhrcBTAP4EAEubRwimFmMsNZTudsHPdZheQqCM=
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Tf7s74qufdRTBbatYg5iLpBdxN8=
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3138
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original
Bytes: 3648
Xref: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com alt.war.vietnam:678412
> By presenting to the court (whether by signing, filing,
> submitting, or later
> advocating) a pleading, written motion, or other paper, an
> attorney or
> unrepresented party is certifying that to the best of the
> person's
> knowledge, information, and belief, formed after an
> inquiry reasonable under
> the circumstances,--
>
> (1) it is not being presented for any improper purpose,
> such as to harass or
> to cause unnecessary delay or needless increase in the
> cost of litigation;
>
> (2) the claims, defenses, and other legal contentions
> therein are warranted
> by existing law or by a nonfrivolous argument for the
> extension,
> modification, or reversal of existing law or the
> establishment of new law;
>
> (3) the allegations and other factual contentions have
> evidentiary support
> or, if specifically so identified, are likely to have
> evidentiary support
> after a reasonable opportunity for further investigation
> or discovery; and
>
> (4) the denials of factual contentions are warranted on
> the evidence or, if
> specifically so identified, are reasonably based on a lack
> of information or
> belief.
> > The court has available a variety of possible sanctions
> > to impose for
> violations, The rule does not attempt to enumerate the
> factors a court
> should consider in deciding whether to impose a sanction
> or what sanctions
> would be appropriate in the circumstances; but, for
> emphasis, it does
> specifically note that a sanction may be nonmonetary as
> well as monetary.
> Whether the improper conduct was willful, or negligent;
> whether it was part
> of a pattern of activity, or an isolated event; whether it
> infected the
> entire pleading, or only one particular count or defense;
>
> whether the person has engaged in similar conduct in other
> litigation;
>
> whether it was intended to injure; what effect it had on
> the litigation
> process in time or expense; whether the responsible person
> is trained in the
> law; what amount, given the financial resources of the
> responsible person,
> is needed to deter that person from repetition in the same
> case; what amount
> is needed to deter similar activity by other litigants:
> all of these may in
> a particular case be proper considerations. The court has
> significant
> discretion in determining what sanctions, if any, should
> be imposed for a
> violation, subject to the principle that the sanctions
> should not be more
> severe than reasonably necessary to deter repetition of
> the conduct by the
> offending person or comparable conduct by similarly
> situated persons.
>
> The sanction should be imposed on the persons--whether
> attorneys, law firms,
> or parties--who have violated the rule or who may be
> determined to be
> responsible for the violation. The person signing, filing,
> submitting, or
> advocating a document has a nondelegable responsibility to
> the court, and in
> most situations should be sanctioned for a violation.
Rebuttal
Brooks Copyright Misrepresentations
Doug Says: Please note that I am defending myself from Nigel
Brook's latest fraud about me, and I am including some of
his quotations since he did not place a copyright notice on
his posts. (If anyone does not wish me to excerpt their
posts, please let me know by placing a copyright notice on
your posts. I will then simply paraphrase what you said and
not directly excerpt elements from your posts. We all know,
contrary to Mr. Brooks misrepresentations, it is not
necessary to violate anyone's copyrights simply to respond
to what was said in any copyrighted work.
"Paraphrase" is usually the process used to respond without
copyright infringement, and further, case law proves that
USENET FAQ 's do not circumvent nor supercede our copyright
laws.
par·a·phrase (p²r".-fr³z") n. 1. A restatement of a text or
passage in another form or other words. 2. The restatement
of texts in other words as a studying or teaching device. -
Nigel Brooks continued defamation attacks with forgeries,
fraud and misrepresentations:
Also understand this is a rebuttal to Brooks fraud and false
accusations. As long as the Brooks smear gang continues with
their smear campaign against me, expect me to defend myself
with the truth, as this post provides:
Court Imposed Sanctions
Since it seems to me that Brooks is suddenly very worried
about a Judge imposing sanctions, probably for some hasty or
fraudulent countersuit he is contemplating, he probably has
found out that sanctions are imposed in many cases due to
frivolous counter-claims.
Since I am not a lawyer, and due to Brook's and his gang's
previously posted ridiculous legal claims that have been
completely discredited by real lawyers so many times, I
*know* Brooks, and those crackpot gang members that keep
posting hilarious legal statements are not lawyers either, I
will provide all with some of the information in respect to
the "sanction" issue I have been told in the past by real
lawyers and Judges.
Defamation, Threats of Death and Violence, Libel, Libel per
se, Harassment and Cyberstalking Lawsuit Status
Note that Nigel Brooks (and also probably his gang since he
keeps them informed about being sued for fraud or harassment
or stalking) knows that I recently voluntarily dismissed a
John Doe complaint so it could be rewritten and filed later
(new defendants and new lawyers) and the statute of
limitations have been tolled. The Federal Judge granted my
motion to refile with my stipulations intact. The Judge even
refused to assign me any costs for the suit as apparently it
was so well constructed. (I even offered to pay costs and he
refused my offer).
The lawsuit defendants could not be processed completely
within the time frame normally allowed by the Federal Court.
(Note that gang member Thomas Rau revealed that I had filed
this complaint in the Western Washington Federal District
and was in the process of naming defendants so it should not
be a surprise to anyone that I have been spending my time
amassing the evidence the court requires for Subpoenas).
Note the Docket number is available to anyone's legal
representative, or if they are going to represent
themselves, to them personally).
I also suppose Mr. Nigel Brooks and his smear gang et al are
getting nervous as Nigel Brooks knows I have a year to
refile and name all defendants, or since his gang continues
to stupidly extend the statutes of limitations with their
continued harassment and stalking and copyright violations,
(one gang member extends the statutes for them all since
each gang member is individually responsible and culpable
for all overt acts all the other gang members perpetrate) I
probably have at least two years to file a completely new
complaint.
I hired two more lawyers in this respect, (if you want to
know their names email me at legal...@comcast.com ) one is
a former JAG officer and the other is a well known former
Federal court lawyer). If the gang continues doing what they
normally do, we should be able to refile in just a few
months, or at least publish an evidentiary review by someone
that specializes in reviewing and determining the truth of
claims and evidence.
Smear Gang Members Culpable for the Actions of all other
Gang Members - CONFIRMED BY CASE LAW
WARNING! If you are a smear gang member, and you have not
received notice from your gang leaders (normally Nigel
Brooks sends out the emails or posts updates on his members
only sites in respect to what is going on, you might want to
email your gang leaders. Keep in mind you could be held
individually responsible for what your fellow gang members
are doing, including the threats of violence, death and
injury I keep receiving. You should know by now that joining
on-line smear and stalking gangs such as the Nigel Brooks
smear gang, is not a wise thing to do. (Check with your own
lawyer or your local prosecutor if you do not believe me).
Moreover, proving Brooks is operating with a common-purpose
gang to smear, harass, stalk and incite similar acts is a
"slam dunk." There are hundreds of posts that prove this
fact irrefutably not to mention each piece of correspondence
you have received from the gang leaders, whether posted or
sent directly). When the Subpoenas start to arrive, you will
be forced to reveal all contacts you have had with all gang
members, and reveal all aliases you have used or know others
have used to post or send email. If you have participated in
the Nigel Brooks smear gang and have decided to continue to
do so, I urge you to contact your lawyer and have him or her
contact me.
Evidence is Key to Sanctions
The above sanctions post from Nigel Brooks appears to me to
be just another desperate attempt by Mr. Brooks to deter me
from pursuing in court his defaming fraud, forgeries and
false accusations, witch hunt defamation, false readings,
defaming innuendos and misrepresentations of my military
records so to claim those records agree with his fraud,
slanted defaming opinions and innuendoes, and his incitement
of threats, copyright violations, copyright violation
incitements, slanted and fragmented misrepresentations,
false statements to the US Army, (which I have just recently
confirmed) and a host of other causes of action that have
been well researched by *real* lawyers, and not by fake
Federal Agents or psycho gang members.
Mr. Brooks has also posted laughable case references that
have nothing to do with his copyright violations, defamation
and his incitements, and in fact some of this clown's case
examples actually awarded legal costs and sanctions to the
Plaintiff and not the Defendant! (No one said Brooks was
smart).
So am I to be deterred from pursuing in a legal arena his
outrageous fraud and obloquy by "Lawyer Brooks?"
Considering I believe Mr. Brooks holds the internet record
for web sites being forced down by their web hosts due to
violations of their terms of service in respect to
harassment or abuse or defamation or obloquy, (Books has
lost approximately ELEVEN such web sites due to said
violations) and some of his and his gang's "legal
proclamations" have been completely discredited by real
lawyers and other experts (such as his goofy conclusion
copyrighted articles cannot be protected on USENET or the
FAQ of a Newsgroup supercedes Federal Law) and even appear
to me to be inciting and promoting further gang and
conspiratorial stalking, threats and harassment, and
considering all the residual threats and deliberate
emotional distress such actions incite and create in respect
to me and my family, I doubt seriously if Mr. Brooks
ridiculous and clownish "better not sue me" posts will be
something my lawyers even momentarily consider. (Not to
mention similar hilarious posts from Mr. Brooks' gang
members - almost childish whines and warnings from anonymous
cyberstalkers that never cease to amaze me due to their
abject stupidity).
My only remaining question about Mr. Nigel Brooks and some
of his gang members is what actually motivates people like
Nigel Brooks and his main gang member Thomas Rau (a.k.a. Dai
Uy) to launch smear attacks against people they target for
their "sport" of defamation and obloquy? And why do they
resort to using outright fraud, forgeries, false
accusations, cyberstalking and harassment to do so?
Mr. Brooks arrogantly and deliberately announced that he was
researching my past posts to defame me without consulting me
in respect to content, author or context, and he even
boasted that he was appointing himself as a Judge over me.
The Dai Uy nut case even claimed that he knew what everyone
did in Vietnam (or did not do) simply if they made a
sarcastic quip, or posted "figures of speech!" I know those
claims sound completely ridiculous and crackpotish, but this
is about the jist of the glaring lack of ethics and sheer
stupidity of these two clowns.
I can only wonder: Do these clowns have some major
inferiorly complex that compels them to become obsessive in
their smearing of other people with fraud, lies and
forgeries? What compels people such as Nigel Brooks and Tom
Rau to lower themselves into the filth of false accusations,
accusatory posts, and outright forgeries and fabrications
they regularly use to smear their target victims?
I know most of the Village rats I met in Vietnam stayed in
Vietnam after their ETS simply because the whores and drugs
were cheaper in Vietnam than in the States, and those people
(I knew) were so pathetic they could not find a women
without a fistful of money - and I *know* the pitiful
absence of ethics and morals for those Village Rats that I
met in Vietnam.
However, with that said I don't know if Brooks fits my
description of Village Rats or not as he refuses to discuss
whom he was living with in Vietnam, or why he chose to stay
in that shit hole malaria infested country when he could
have taken his Freedom Bird home. But could it be that is
the kind of person I am dealing with here? A Vietnamese
whore marrying pathetic dreg of life Village Rat that should
have stayed in Vietnam for life - as far as I am concerned?
Like I said, Nigel Brooks is not talking about his desire to
stay in Vietnam after his ETS, but since I know he lied
about his military service (several times - coming later if
his fraud continues) I will assume (until he tells me
otherwise) that he was a Village Rat along the lines and
ethics of those I had the misfortune to meet while I was
in-country...and that would explain a lot about his
perpetual fraud about me and the fact his own Web Managers
forced down about ELEVEN of his web sites for fraud or
defamation or abuse or false accusations about me.
In my opinion, there were only two reasons to stay in
Vietnam after your ETS date - and getting a good job was not
one of them. Jobs were easily found back in the States.
The POW Issue
I am beginning to opine that perhaps Mr. Brooks and Mr. Rau
did not want anything to do with the USA, nor did they feel
they belonged there. They seem to me to be more in touch
with the Vietnamese people than US Citizens or their fellow
Veterans. I don't know why, but the term "renegade" comes to
mind when they refuse to acknowledge their Vietnamese
friends held back some of our POW's for ransom after the war
was over. Tom Rau in fact denied that ANY of our POW's were
held back and even referenced some PC Colonel "opinion" in
that respect that contradicted the Ross Perot report and
hundreds of other compelling and factual evidence - and
Rau's
lie and his referenced lie contradicts the historical record
and just about everything that was written in the recent
book on the subject titled "An Enormous Crime."
Look at Rau's constant whining about the Montanyards
plight - which he had to know would occur when SF bribed
them to send their kids into the Vietnam war on ARVN's side.
Yet Mr. Rau dismisses and denies the commie goons retained
hundreds of our POW's after the war was over. Is Rau
Vietnamese or American? Ask me how much I care about the
Montanyards compared to our brethren that were held for
ransom after the war and you will quickly find out I care
about the American GI's that were turned into slaves a
hellva lot more than a bunch of stone aged dimwits that
would send their brainless kids out to die for nothing, or
for a few bucks or water buffalos thrown in the direction of
the tribal chief.
I also cannot understand why Tom Rau would proudly call
himself "Dai Uy" representing an officer of perhaps the most
corrupt and cowardly Army and Government the world has ever
seen.
What *real* American patriot would be so proud of that
cowardly Army and corrupt Government to proudly name himself
as an officer of that Government and Army? Sounds like
someone is delusional to me or is a renegade...of course all
this is just mere speculation on my part - but I find it
very strange that Nigel Brooks and Tom Rau demands
information from other Vets, regularly uses fraud. forgeries
and false representations to defame them, yet refuses to
provide any details of their service? What are they ashamed
of? (I have found out much in the past few months and I
think I know).
Honest Debate
Obviously, I have some political and ideological differences
with Brooks and Rau and their way of thinking about Vietnam
and supporting the dregs that attack our troops fighting in
Iraq like the SteveL anonymous cyberstalker and America
hater, but does that excuse their outright fraud and
creation of forgeries to smear and defame me? Of course not.
If these smear merchants cannot debate the issues honestly
(because they know they will lose) they resort to name
calling, fraud, false accusations and the use of their own
forgeries to smear and defame. I believe something is
seriously wrong with these people - I don't know what - but
I know they are not right.
I once thought that all Vietnam Vets were my brethren. Boy
was I wrong! Nigel Brooks and Thomas Rau (Mr. Uy Uy), and
Junior NCO's that have been in the Army 31 years and cannot
get promoted (probably because they brown nose all of their
officers all the time as his posts clearly indicate, and his
fraudulent misrepresentation that he is posting from some US
Army sanctioned web site) and a "combat cook" a John Kerry
supporter, and a ward attendant that calls himself a "medic"
and similar dregs, failures and child like pathetic minds
that are connected with the Nigel Brooks smear gang have
well convinced me otherwise.
These Nigel Brooks and Thomas Rau incited dregs attack
fellow veterans with fabricated fraud and forgeries, and
repeatedly incite and encourage gang stalking and harassment
to repeatedly cause their victim emotional and physical
harm, and in some cases to incite threats of physical harm
and violence. They Forged FBI documents, forged posts
numbering in the hundreds, they posted private medical
information, they posted fraudulent child porno accusations,
abounding, and these unethical dregs are no more my brethren
than Mr. Victor Charlie was, with my apologies to the VC.
"Band of Brothers" - sure right - not in Vietnam it seems as
long as people like Nigel Brooks and Mr. Rau and fellow gang
members are around.
Psychological Obsessions of Brooks et al
People so obsessed with me they would forge my past posts to
make them sound or appear completely different from their
original meaning or context, (even after these clowns were
told directly by me their context was a forgery) and forge
my signature to Government documents, then use their own
forgeries as a fraudulent representation of something I
wrote, and then create not less than eleven web sites to
display their fraud, and to send their fraud and forgeries
to dozens of third parties, and to add or incite death and
violence threats to the mix, along with outrageous
fraudulent accusations that I am a murderer, have child
porno on my computer and show it to children, and repeatedly
and fraudulently state I am a murderer, rapist, wife beater,
the cops said I was a pedophile, war criminal, cannibal, and
let us not forget a murderer of unarmed priests, and to also
visit Muslim Mosques and provide them with forged copies of
my past posts so as to deliberately incite those Muslim
organizations to send me death threats, is beyond "flame
wars" or "sport" or even any rational understanding as it
would apply to any honorable or ethical person.
I, and every lawyer I have consulted believe this gang's
"sport" is a matter for the courts.
http://tinyurl.com/2blglv One of my more recent rebuttal
replies to the smear merchant Thomas Rau, which provides
proof of his fraud and forgeries, and further, provides him
notice to cease and desist his forgeries and resulting false
accusations. (If Mr. Rau disagrees with this post I hereby
invite him to agree to Arbitration, and if the Arbitrator
finds in his favor I will pay for the Arbitration, and if
the Arbitrator finds in my favor he pays for the
Arbitration. So will Mr. Rau "Walk the Walk?" I think he
will run and cower under his rock in respect to this
challenge as he knows he is lying).
http://tinyurl.com/yon3o3 This is one of the previous
rebuttals to much of Nigel Brooks fraud, forgeries and
deliberate incitements of threats, and of course his false
representations in respect to my military records. Note that
Mr. Brooks has suffered not less than eleven forced web site
take downs due to his propensity to use abuse or defamation
or false accusations in his web sites, and thereby violate
the terms of service of those web hosts. (If Mr. Brooks
disagrees with this post I hereby invite him to agree to
Arbitration, and if the Arbitrator finds in his favor I will
pay for the Arbitration, and if the Arbitrator finds in my
favor he pays for the Arbitration. So will Mr. Brooks "Walk
the Walk?" I think he will run and cower under his rock like
Mr. Rau does in respect to this challenge as they both know
they are lying).
Brooks' Web Sites Forced Down
ALL web managers that have reviewed the information Mr.
Brooks uses to defame and harass, and the evidence proving
he is lying and misrepresenting facts, have decided to force
down and permanently remove his web sites from the Internet.
Books has suffered not less than ELEVEN such force downs,
and he probably holds the Internet record for having web
sites forced down by web hosts due to fraud or defamation or
abuse or harassment. (I should also mention that a local
District Attorney has also recently found one of Brook's
gang members false accusations to be bogus and even
"ridiculous" was the word I heard I believe - more about
this later).
Nigel Brooks and Tom Rau are the type of unethical people I
am forced to rebut every so often, and all independent
sources that I have consulted that have reviewed the
evidence pro and con in respect to Brooks fraudulent claims
have agreed with me - gang members are of course excepted
because when Brooks farts they run behind him to fan his
stink. (The gang parrots everything Brooks tells them to
parrot, and it is the anonymous gang members that typically
post or send the death threats, or threats of violence and
hate about me that Brooks and his main gang members like
Thomas Rau clearly incite).
Also, note that in Brooks now defunct eleven web sites he
constantly removed passages when he was caught in a lie, and
replaced them with just another lie, defaming innuendo or
outright misrepresentation. I have all original copies of
his web sites, and I have the secondary "amended" copies
where certain false accusations he originally posted were
removed and replaced with his new fraud. Each time Brooks is
caught in an outright lie he tries to hide it. But I have
the evidence, hard evidence...now who would like to see it?
Don't worry, if the gang continues with their fraud,
forgeries and smears about me, you will see all of Brooks
fraud and forgeries in my future rebuttals - and a written
opinion about Brooks and his fraud and his gang's fraud from
a very well respected former prosecutor and lawyer.
I have been given the green light to defend myself from the
Brooks gang, and I will rebut and defend myself from their
fraud and false accusations in each case.
Back to Sanctions and Lawsuits
When exhibits containing evidence are attached to a properly
filed lawsuit, the court will either accept the case claims
(causes of action) based upon those exhibits, or it can
refuse to accept the case altogether (rarely happens) or
demand more evidence prior to accepting the case in its
jurisdiction. Moreover, if the court requires the Plaintiff
provide prima facie evidence for any reason such as prior to
allowing the processing of Subpoenas, or other motions,
(such as it did in this case) it has already de facto ruled
the case is probably valid when it grants those motions. A
court will most likely dismiss a case, or order additional
evidence to be presented in respect to frivolous claims long
before sanctions are even considered. (It is important to
note that sanctions are imposed against the losing party in
less than 99% of all summary judgement cases).
If the evidence submitted with the original filing of the
case provide prima facie evidence of the causes of action in
the case, and the court accepts the exhibits as true, and
they are true (such as copies of USENET publications which
contained forged posts that have been falsely attributed to
the Plaintiff, or copies of obloquy or defamation or posts
that reflect a pattern of harassment or stalking) then I
assure you that you do not need to worry about any Judge
filing sanctions against you for a claim. Just make sure you
have the evidence, and that evidence is not submitted in a
false light, such as forging someone's past statements and
then using your own forgeries to fraudulently claim
something derogatory about the person you are filing a
counterclaim against, or false and fraudulent statements
about a person's past involvement in lawsuits, or other
similar types of fraud and outright lies and gross
misrepresentations that we see regularly published by Nigel
Brooks and his gang members. Courts do not like liars and
fraud merchants.
Note forging past posts by a targeted smear victim, and then
using forged context, misrepresentations, and outright fraud
in respect to using your own forgeries to defame and smear,
and to even falsely misrepresent the contents of military
records, is not something I recommend you do in a real court
of law. If you do it on USENET then be prepared to answer
for it when you get to court. The "Statement of Admissions"
goes something like this:
1. Did you post or incite or reply to posts that Mr. Reiman
was a child molester?
2. Did you forge or incite the forgery of the context of any
of Mr. Reiman's past posted quips or figures of speech even
after Mr. Reiman informed you of his intent and context of
the quip in question?
3. Did Mr. Reiman inform that aside from mind reading
skills, it is impossible to know the intent or context of an
author unless he confirms or reveals it?
4. Were you aware that all posts on USENET are not always
presented as autobiographical statements of fact by the
author?
4a. Mr. Reiman provided you with his email address and
telephone number and invited all to contact him to determine
true context and more information about the out of context
post fragments you excerpted and forged and then used to
defame Mr. Reiman. Did you ever contact Mr. Reiman directly
in respect to these post fragments you were using to defame
Mr. Reiman? And if not, why not?
5. Were you informed that USENET posts are considered the
same as Email in respect to the Federal Cyberstalking Laws?
6. Did you know that cyberstalking is a crime? Did you ever
use any false names or handles to post anything to or about
Mr. Reiman? If so, name them.
7. Did you post any forged FBI documents about Mr. Reiman?
8. Did you post, incite or repeat that Mr. Reiman was a
murderer, or a wife beater, or a thief, or a rapist, or a
cannibal, or a war criminal?
9. Did you post, incite or respond to or add to any threats
of death, or violence or injury about or to Mr. Reiman?
10. Did you incite, or distort and forge the context of any
of Mr. Reiman's past quips, by deliberately excerpting
fragments from some of his past posts and then rewriting
them in a completely different defaming and false light
context and meaning?
11. Did you incite, state, post or imply that all derogatory
and vitriolic statements about a case against the Casino
industry Mr. Reiman was partially involved in that were
published by a Judge were being directed to or about Mr.
Reiman?
12. Did you communicate in any manner with other posters
about Mr. Reiman?
13. Please provide your tax returns and all business
affiliations and income for the past five years.
14. Please state item by item your net worth.
15. Please state all transfers of money or property you have
effected since March 2005.
16. Please state the names of all individuals that used your
computer to post on USENET on alt.war.Vietnam, and to send
email.
17. Please state the true names of the following aliases,
and state their addresses and telephone numbers if known:
(Names of other defendants in which we have not yet secured
an address or a proper name).
18. Were you involved in any way with the now dismissed
fraudulent and malicious criminal charges filed against Mr.
Reiman by members of the Brooks gang?
There are probably going to be several hundred Statements of
Admissions, and at least fifty interrogatory questions the
gang will be required to answer. A few are listed above.
(Note I personally wrote the Interrogatories in the Long
Island case, and within three days after I delivered them to
the Referee lawyer appointed by the court the casino agents
offered a settlement agreement. Needless to say the
Interrogatories were never answered - and if you read them
you would know why. I still have a copy of them - I am sure
they can be used again).
Past Lawsuits are an Important Consideration in Respect to
Sanctions
I do agree that past lawsuit involvement and specifically
whether several past lawsuits indicate a pattern of filing
frivolous lawsuits or threatening frivolous counterclaims,
should be something the court considers for the possible
imposition of sanctions, as well as considering for
sanctions someone that has a history of forging documents
and then attempting to fraudulently attribute his own
forgeries to another person, and that also files
countersuits due to him being sued over his obvious
forgeries and gang stalking.
(I have never been involved in a lawsuit as a Plaintiff in
which I was not countersued for something or other. Such is
common practice by Defendants so as to try and gain leverage
and duck justice. Frivolous countersuits are something that
should be expected. Nevertheless, in many cases the
defendants destroy themselves with such frivolous
counterclaims, especially when they are trying to explain
away hard evidence that proves they are guilty of the
charges brought forth against them in the original
complaint. In many cases the Plaintiff is awarded legal fees
for such frivolous counterclaims).
Another interesting point is that in all of the lawsuits I
have been involved with ALL but one has either settled to my
satisfaction or has been adjudged in my favor in the courts:
(Note I realize I will be required to prove all of these
statements about my past involvement in lawsuits in court or
in Arbitration and I of course am prepared to do so, as
usual).
Here are the FACTS in respect to the cases I was previously
involved with: (If anyone disputes these facts which of
course contradict what Nigel Brooks wrote about them, I
hereby again invite binding Arbitration loser pays). *I* am
willing to "Walk the Walk" but are Brooks and gang members
et al? If they refuse they have lost all credibility as that
refusal is tantamount to a confession they have been lying
all along.
1. The Jerry Fox case against the casinos (I was an expert
witness for Plaintiffs).
The NJ Superior Court judge refused a motion to dismiss by
the Casinos. After that motion was denied the case settled
in Mr. Fox (and his Wife's) favor due to a cash offer from
Defendants. (New Jersey). (The casinos fraudulently accused
Jerry of stealing chips from a shill next to him. This was a
common ruse the casinos used to get rid of card counters
without actually barring them. The casinos were using (and
still use) false criminal charges against people that use
their brains to play casino games, and the AC municipal
courts (infamous for their corruption and casino collusion)
to charge and convict people that dared to use their brains
to play Blackjack on some trumped up charge. In this case
Mr. Fox hired a lawyer and fought the false charges, and
when the shill did not show in court, and when the film of
the incident was subpoenaed and it clearly showed the casino
shill was lying, then Jerry was found innocent by a Jury.
After that verdict, Jerry sued the casinos and of course the
casinos hurriedly settled.
2. The Long Island Casino Agent case: (We were sued by
agents of the casino industry because we refused to allow
casino agents to operate one of our franchises, (we refused
to sell them a franchise after we found out who they were)
and we were sued in New Jersey where our corporate
headquarters was located). Again, a Superior Court Judge
refused to dismiss our counterclaims, and the case was
settled to our satisfaction due to an offer of settlement by
the Defendants. (Northern New Jersey) My company was a named
Defendant, and a Plaintiff in respect to the countersuit.
3. The Doug Grant Inc., case against the Radisson Flagship
Hotel New Jersey:
Again, a Superior Court Judge refused a motion to dismiss by
the Defendants. (Which of course means the Judge believed
the case and charges were valid). I was a Plaintiff
attorney-in-fact agent for the Corporation. The case was
settled in our favor by a cash offer from Defendants while
the Jury was deliberating. The case was tried in Atlantic
City New Jersey.
4. Lawyer Malpractice case for allowing the statutes of
limitations to expire in the corporate claims against the
casinos for RICO and malicious interference: A Superior
Court Judge in New Jersey refused a motion by Defendant
lawyers to dismiss. I was a agent Attorney in fact Plaintiff
for the Corporation.: The case was settled in our favor due
to a cash offer by the
Defendants.
5. Libel case: New Jersey:
I was one of the Plaintiffs. The case was settled due to
compliance and admission of false statements and apologies
by two of the potential defendants, and a third Defendant
settled due to an offer of settlement from his Lawyer, which
was executed under the direction of Judge Bell. Again, the
Judge refused a motion to dismiss the case which of course
means the Judge believed the case had merit. (Note that
Brooks listed on his now forced down eleven defunct web
sites that all of my libel lawsuits were dismissed with
prejudice due to me not serving anyone. Nothing could be
further from the truth. What Brooks is failing to mention is
that all of those lawsuits were settled to our satisfaction,
and as a part of the settlement it was agreed those lawsuits
would be dismissed with prejudice. IN one case in
particular, Brooks is even calling Judge Bell, who was the
Judge that presided over one of the settlements that Brooks
says did not happen, a liar by claiming none of those
lawsuits were settled, or omitting those settlement facts so
as to present the results of these libel cases in a
fraudulent false light, in typical Nigel Brooks style. In
one case Nigel Brooks listed a letter I received from a
California Judge asking for costs, but then Brooks omitted
my response, and the Judge's final conclusion, which was no
sanctions and no costs. (I scanned that final order and
posted it at
Nigel Brooks knew those final orders showing no costs nor
sanctions were on the docket file. Now I wonder why Nigel
Brooks hid that final order that removed all sanctions and
costs and continued to display the letter that asked for
them? To present the case in a false and defaming light of
course - which he fraudulently did.
6. Corporate Claims against casinos: Doug Grant Inc., v.
Greate Bay.
I was the corporate Plaintiff attorney-in-fact for the
closed out corporations in that case, and I was appointed as
an agent for the closed out corporations in an
Attorney-in-fact written agreement with the shareholders of
those corporations. My claims and interest in this case were
*exclusively* corporate and libel, and my attorney-in-fact
agreement was *exclusively* with the corporations so they
could be represented as Plaintiffs. (Closed out corporations
have no legal status unless they appoint a former
shareholder as an agent or attorney-in-fact for the
corporations ((same as having power of attorney to act on
behalf of the closed corporations)).
Tossed by Judge Irenas due to expiration of statute of
limitations, which caused the aforesaid malpractice case,
(see case #4) which was settled to our satisfaction due to a
cash offer by the Defendants.
7. Campione V. Adamar -Expert Witness and shared Plaintiff.
(I have documents signed by Tony Campione to prove the
shared Plaintiff status). A motion to dismiss by the casinos
was dismissed by a Superior Court Judge, and all
counterclaims against Campione and I were dismissed. Tony
Campione (a personal friend and a member of my team) was
originally awarded 1.5 Million Dollars by a Jury. The case
was later overturned by NJ Supreme Court and a new trial
ordered. The case settled prior to the new trial due to a
cash offer of settlement by the Casinos .
8. Doug Grant Inc. v. Greate Bay.
This is clearly a corporation and not an individual lead
Plaintiff. Nigel Brooks fraudulently claimed in several
posts, including a recent one, the above lawsuit was
exclusively MY personal lawsuit, and everything Judge Irenas
opined about it applied to me personally. Once again we will
see much evidence of Nigel Brook's fraud and
misrepresentations in my next post that irrefutably prove
Brooks and his gang are lying about this case and whom Judge
Irenas was really talking about.
Here is the completely fraudulent passage (among others)
from Mr. Nigel Brooks that prompted these two rebuttals:
And Brooks went on to fraudulently state: (Note he names me
directly is this fraud).
"Actually Mr. Reiman, the United States Court of Appeals for
the Third Circuit agreed with the decision in Campion that
"labeling of the shuffling at will as `cheating' is
specious" . That decision was upheld by the Supreme Court of
the United States of America when it denied *you Certiorari.
Reiman* - *you* have been adjudicated as being Specious and
Fatuous." -- Nigel Brooks
Nothing could be further from the truth following posts will
prove. In fact Judge Irenas specifically stated he was not
referencing me when he refused the Casinos demand for
sanctions against me personally. Judge Irenas's reply to the
casinos in this regard (which I have in my possession) makes
it very clear that he was upset with the lawyers that wrote
the complaint, and his refusal to impose any sanctions
against me clearly proved that Nigel Brooks is lying when he
claims the Judge was addressing me personally.
Doug Grant (Tm)
"SteveL" <stev...@deletethisbitntlworld.com> wrote in
message
news:iuadnffKru-nk5_a...@giganews.com...
Doug says: You are using lies and fraud to cyberstalk
anonymously against SteveL --and I am still waiting for your
promised contact by your lawyer...more lies and fraud from
SteveL...and you know that no Judge EVER said *my* case was
a fatuity....stop lying you have already lost all
credibility....and stop the anonymous cyberstalking
immediately or I will take legal action in respect to law
enforcement. This is your last warning.
Doug Grant (Tm)
>
DGVREIMAN
> Mr. Brooks. You do realize that is a de facto admission
> of the allegations I have set forth against you.
Doug Grant (Tm)
Nigel Brooks
>> Mr. Brooks. You do realize that is a de facto admission of the
>> allegations I have set forth against you.
>
> Doug Grant (Tm)
*****Temporary Suspension of Formsa's Law******
Begin Commentary:
DeFacto This
/'_/)
,/_ /
/ /
/'_'/' '/'__'7,
/'/ / / /" /_\
('( /' ')
\ /
'\'Wanker .'
\ (
\ \
Now Fuck Off
******Reinstatement of Formosa's Law******
--
Nigel Brooks
Mac
wrote:
========= REPLY ==========
Simple: put in the name Doug Grant into GOOGLE.
Look for his previous postings on one of the blackjack
newsgroups.
Put the following into GOOGLE: Doug Grant AND lawsuits.
OR, Doug Grant AND lawsuits AND casino's...
That just might tell you quite a lot of that person.
Take a careful look at the decision of the Judge and what he
declared as being "FATUOUS"...
Then, if you wish "fun", go to GOOGLE, put in
< alt.war.vietnam>
put in Doug Grant and scroll through some of his postings and
his many "military stories" ---- often many of his statements
are a variance with the official government record.
Read the above Search Results and that might help you get an
idea of "Doug Grant"
When you read the comments of the Judge regarding those "lawsuits"
you will notice the words FATUOUS and FATULTY...
---Mac, the Medic
---Mac
Mac
wrote:
> BTW, when are you going to
>answer the question whether you work in the medical field in
>Oregon like you claimed, or was that just another lie as
>well?
>
>Doug Grant (Tm)
****************************
For months you have claimed you have an attorney.
If you have an attorney you will certainly know that responding to
answering your questions is not necessary.
You have the address.
Have your attorney sent a Certifited Letter and I will have my
attorney respond to your attorney.
Given the state of your mind, as evidenced by years of your threats,
and cyberstalking, you have to show the attorney the foundation and
reason for anything you ask.
By the way, how are you doing on your Meds?
Are you still having a reaction?
Have you managed to lose weight?
Or is that interferring with your health progress?
---Mac, the Medic
DGVREIMAN
>fraud about me you must know I am going to rebut your fraud
>and defend myself? And your refusal to accept independent
>Arbitration clearly reflects the fact you know you have
>been caught lying and using fraud to smear and defame. Now
>you want me to stop posting the truth about your fraud? I
>guess you do...but don't count on it. As long as you
>attack me with your fraud and forgeries expect me to rebut
>your fraud with the truth.
Since you are going to see these statements in discovery
anyway, I have absolutely no problem with posting them, and
then proving them in Arbitration or in a court of law...so
when are YOU going to Walk the Walk Mr. Brooks and agree to
binding arbitration loser pays?
Doug Grant (Tm)
DGVREIMAN
"Mac" <NoSpa...@NoSpamToday.net> wrote in message
Doug Says: Mac the Ward Attendant....you know the Judge's
comments were NOT about my lawsuit, anyone can read that
simple fact by reading the case documents....so you have
been caught in a fraud and a lie again. Moreover, nothing I
said was a variance with the official government record,
that is a lie and more fraud...in fact you are parroting
Nigel Brooks fraud and forgeries again. Now if you
disagree, I suggest binding Arbitration on these issues and
loser pays. If the Arbitrator agrees with your fraud above,
I will pay for the arbitration, but he disagrees, you pay.
So how about it MAC the Ward Attendant (No Medic) are you
going to Walk the Walk or just continue to talk shit and
fraud? Is it Big Hat and No Cattle again MAC the Ward
Attendant (no Medic).
You also must have missed my recent post about all of my
past lawsuits. If you dispute anything I said in that post
then I invite you to accept independent Arbitration again,
or run and cower because you know you are lying...again.
Also, look for my "malicious prosecution" update post coming
soon.
And my lawyers have no problem with me posting the truth.
You will see it anyway in discovery, and I will be required
to prove it then, so I might as well agree to prove it
now...but you keep hiding and running MAC the Ward Attendant
(No Medic) ...how come?
Doug Grant (Tm)
Mac
wrote:
>And my lawyers have no problem with me posting the truth.
>You will see it anyway in discovery, and I will be required
>to prove it then, so I might as well agree to prove it
>now...but you keep hiding and running MAC the Ward Attendant
>(No Medic) ...how come?
>
>Doug Grant (Tm)
*********************
Is the above on a par with your previous statements about your Purple
Heart; about killing those priests; about the more than 1,800 VC
killed and then feasting upon some of the bodies...?
Is the above on a par with your previous accusation that I had not
been in the military and had not been in Vietnam?
And, when challenged to provide PROOF of your accusation you did
what?
You agreed to have Dai Uy as referee.
You made the claim that I would NOT send any documents to Dai Uy.
After all, I stated that you should provide PROOF of your
accusations and I would send two documents refuting your accusations.
What did your provide in the way of PROOF ??
Come on, tell us.
What did you send to Dai Uy?
As for the other matter you have been threatening for YEARS lawsuits.
You sent specific dates and then back out.
I am NOT look for arbitration.
File your bloody lawsuit you crazy little turnip, and let the attorney
handle it.
---Mac, the Medic
SteveL
wrote:
>
>Doug Says: Mac the Ward Attendant.
That "ward attendant" won the Silver Star. How low can you go Doogie?
Who "hates the troops" now? Got a kind word to say about anyone?
SteveL
wrote:
>
>and stop the anonymous cyberstalking
Sane people know that Usenet posts contradicting another person are
not "Cyberstalking". However, contacting ISPs, sending threatening
emails, and daily threats of lawsuits *IS*.
>immediately or I will take legal action in respect to law
>enforcement. This is your last warning.
My last warning? after all the hundreds you've issued up to now?
Really???
I'll kind of (sniff) *miss* them, after all this time. You could
almost set your clock by them.
But if you say you're going to stop "warning" me I'll accept your word
for it.
After all, you "Never Lie", do you?.
So if you warn me again that means you'll be an admitted liar.
And we couldn't have that!!!
DGVREIMAN
>>> Mr. Brooks. You do realize that is a de facto admission
>>> of the allegations I have set forth against you.
>>
>> Doug Grant (Tm)
>
>
>
> *****Temporary Suspension of Formsa's Law******
>
> Begin Commentary:
>
> DeFacto This
>
>
> /'_/)
> ,/_ /
> / /
> /'_'/' '/'__'7,
> /'/ / / /" /_\
> ('( /' ')
> \ /
> '\'Wanker .'
> \ (
> \ \
>
>
> Now Fuck Off
>
> ******Reinstatement of Formosa's Law******
>
>
> --
> Nigel Brooks
>Doug Says: Mr. Brooks, when you post your forgeries and
>fraud about me you must know I am going to rebut your fraud
>and defend myself? And your refusal to accept independent
>been caught lying and using fraud to smear and defame. Now
>you want me to stop posting the truth about your fraud? I
>guess you do...but don't count on it. As long as you
>attack me with your fraud and forgeries expect me to rebut
>your fraud with the truth.
Since you are going to see these statements in discovery
anyway, I have absolutely no problem with posting them, and
then proving them in Arbitration or in a court of law...so
when are YOU going to Walk the Walk Mr. Brooks and agree to
binding arbitration loser pays?
Doug Grant (Tm)
"Mac" <NoSpa...@NoSpamToday.net> wrote in message
news:i876g3hkqefn82d52...@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 2 Oct 2007 20:23:03 -0700, "DGVREIMAN"
> <dgvr...@comcast.net>
> wrote:
>
>>And my lawyers have no problem with me posting the truth.
>>You will see it anyway in discovery, and I will be
>>required
>>to prove it then, so I might as well agree to prove it
>>now...but you keep hiding and running MAC the Ward
>>Attendant
>>(No Medic) ...how come?
>>
>>Doug Grant (Tm)
> *********************
> Is the above on a par with your previous statements about
> your Purple
> Heart; about killing those priests; about the more than
> 1,800 VC
> killed and then feasting upon some of the bodies...?
Doug Says: You know McDonnell that all you are stating
above is nothing more than outright fraud based upon
forgeries from you and your fraud gang. If you disagree, I
suggest binding Arbitration over these issues loser pays.
If you refuse this offer all rational people will know that
refusal is tantamount to a confession that you ARE the fraud
merchant and forger I say you are.
Doug Grant (Tm)
>
>
DGVREIMAN
Cyberstalking.
(1) A person is guilty of cyberstalking if he or she, with
intent to harass, intimidate, torment, or embarrass any
other person, and under circumstances not constituting
telephone harassment, makes an electronic communication to
such other person or a third party:
(a) Using any lewd, lascivious, indecent, or obscene
words, images, or language, or suggesting the commission of
any lewd or lascivious act;
(b) Anonymously or repeatedly whether or not
conversation occurs; or
(c) Threatening to inflict injury on the person or
property of the person called or any member of his or her
family or household.
(2) Cyberstalking is a gross misdemeanor, except as
provided in subsection (3) of this section.
"SteveL" <stev...@deletethisbitntlworld.com> wrote in
message
news:A-GdnbFc9PE2LZna...@giganews.com...
> On Tue, 2 Oct 2007 17:54:41 -0700, "DGVREIMAN"
> <dgvr...@comcast.net>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>and stop the anonymous cyberstalking
>
> Sane people know that Usenet posts contradicting another
> person are
> not "Cyberstalking". However, contacting ISPs, sending
> threatening
> emails, and daily threats of lawsuits *IS*.
The above statutes in my state alone prove you ARE
cyberstalking, and notice to cease and desist cyberstalking
are required by the courts. Moreover, since your
cyberstalking and criminal acts are violating the terms of
service of your servers, they ask to be notified if any such
violations occur by their clients.
Doug Grant (Tm)
>
SteveL
wrote:
>
>The above statutes in my state alone prove you ARE
>cyberstalking, and notice to cease and desist cyberstalking
>are required by the courts. Moreover, since your
>cyberstalking and criminal acts are violating the terms of
>service of your servers, they ask to be notified if any such
>violations occur by their clients.
"Imaginary stalking justifies real stalking"
No surprise considering your resumé:
Douglas "Doogie" Grant aka DGVREIMAN
Kook of the Month, December 1998
Looney Maroon Award, September 1999
Looney Maroon Award, April 2001
Unabomber Surprise March 2006
Busted Urinal Award May 2007.
Richard M. Nixon Memorial "Pathological Liar" Award
(nominated Aug 2007)
>
>Doug Grant (Tm)
>>
>