CONTACTING MY LAWYER - PERMISSION GRANTED!

[dgvreiman]

CONTACTING MY LAWYER - PERMISSION GRANTED!


Note that I have received some email requesting that I reduce my
rebuttals into shorter posts so they can be read more carefully. I
will start this procedure with this series of rebuttals to Nigel
Brooks cons, fraud and false accusations:

(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. This article is being
posted for entertainment purposes only. 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 to entertain,
and to present articles to USENET readers prior to publication to
determine interest, and 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, libeled, 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).

SMEAR MERCHANT DISCLAIMER TWO: Considering the typical ridiculous,
absurd and obviously false claims about my military service that
originates from the crackpot smear and con gang that operates on
alt.war.Vietnam, I also hereby certify and attest this article is NOT
a secret coded message that only gang members can decode with their
secret Federal Agent/Sp4 draftee/former Junior Reserve Officer/ midget
decoder and mind reading rings.

This means the Brownie crackpots’ inevitable accusations and howls
that this article is really me claiming in a special soothsaying code
(a code only crackpots et al smear gang can only read of course which
involves their typical claim the American Heritage Dictionary’s
definitions of simple terms, such as “we” “estimated” “involved”
“retired from” and “not representing any biographical claim” are all
incorrect, and only their “special interpretations of the English
language can apply to all English terms I use, and of course the
gang’s standard nonsensical mind reading and soothsaying claims that
(1) I was a CIA cross border assassin that sniper killed Ho Chi Minh,
HOORAH - (2) that I personally killed 1803 enemy soldiers in Vietnam
and then feasted on their bodies (burp) (3) that I was a secret member
of the Mi Lai massacre, (let god sort them out) that I hunted down and
murdered unarmed Priests (take that choir boy) (4) that I was trained
by the Martian Army on Mars, and I have green blood, and retractable
fangs (slurp), (5) that the movie "Rambo" was copied after my deeds in
Vietnam and I still live in caves in the northwest (6) and best of
all, I went to the Carlise War College to study WWII tactics even
before I was born!!!! BWHAHAHAHAHHA.

Needless to say, the smear gang misrepresentations of my past posts
are of course, not true.


I have posted dozens of times on USENET that I will not post
autobiographical facts about my life on USENET in any detail. Only a
quip now and then. And, if anyone wants to know the true facts, or a
clarification of any quip, or more information and details about an
issue which are clearly missing in my quips they must first contact
me via email, identify themselves, and then I will determine if I want
to exchange such personal information with them.

Although the above is my standing offer, I should mention that NOT ONE
member of the gang has ever contacted me directly over any one of my
posts. It is clear the gang does not want to know about obvious
typos, errors, and occasional ambiguities, nor clarifications, nor
corrections, nor do they even want verification whether I was the
actual author of the post in question.

As experts on Investigations and the US Military have noted, the gang
leaders and their members clearly want to avoid the truth whenever it
contradicts their contrived and conspired defaming parsing and
fraudulent misrepresentations and distortions of what I have written
in the past, or contradicts their lies and fraud in respect to what is
and is not truly contained in my military records, and of course,
their fraudulent use of USENET posts they know others have written to
use to smear me, defame me, hold me up to public ridicule, stalk me,
and otherwise further their years’ long demonizing and vilification
campaign they have been regularly waging against me.

In short, the gang does not want to know the truth, and they are
desperate to stop me from defending myself as they know my truthful
rebuttals, which they cannot defend as they know what I am posting is
true, reveals them for what they really are.

The gangs lies and fraud border on the pathological, and include the
gang’ preposterous and goofy fraud that (7) a Purple Heart VA card is
the same as a Purple Heart Medal (I have posted on USENET dozens of
times I did not receive a Purple Heart Medal) (8) Nor that removing
hundreds of typos, errors, misstatements made by typists and I found
so far in about thirty-five THOUSAND extemporaneous posts under
accounts I used, and then replacing the errors with the true intended
context and meaning by the author is somehow “sinister” and the
original discarded post was the correct intended post and the
corrected version is false! (Giggle).
Such glaring preposterous crackpot et al smear and fraud gang claims
about me are, as usual, blatantly false and equally ridiculous. (Ask
the gang leaders for proof of their claims the next time they make
such ludicrous claims and watch them scurry for their rocks or produce
their own forgeries, or perhaps typos, errors and such that have long
been detected and discarded in my waste basket they have dug out of
that trash). And no, regardless of forgeries and discarded posts found
in my waste basket that were thrown there because of an error or
typist misstatement by one of our typist’s, I have posted about two
dozen times in the past that my time in South America was spent (other
than an assignment and short visit to Southern Command after I left
Vietnam) exclusively as a Civilian working for Montana Western Oil and
Gas or PCA, which evidence was scanned and posted years ago.)

Also, in response to the smear gang’s et al repeated and convenient
outright lie and fraud that I never said that others were using the
same accounts to post on USENET as I did until the smear gang leaders
started their fraud, con and smear campaign against me and thereby
forced me to post on this newsgroup to defend myself, please see the
following proof that of course the gang leaders et al have been caught
lying again:


http://tinyurl.com/7kfaqz

Experts on Smear Gangs reveal what the Nigel Brooks con and smear gang
is all about.

http://tinyurl.com/6d4aay
TYPISTS’ GALORE POST proves there were about 71 previous posts prior
to the gang’s glaring lie that I never mentioned others posting under
the same accounts I used until after the gang leaders started to use a
few typos, errors and post fragments written by many different people,
years apart, never written on any military forum, deceptively spliced
together with forged words added into or subtracted from the
hodgepodge of different context post fragments so as to fraudulently
alter their meaning or context.


http://tinyurl.com/8hesja Just SOME of Nigel Brooks forgeries
revealed - proof.


End Disclaimer - Rebuttal Begins below:

Clown Continues:

>> Considering you claim you have consulted with yet another alleged
>> attorney, and you were waiting for their advice as to proceed or
>> not
>> on yet another lawsuit, why have you
>> 1.) refused to furnish the name of the firm that they might
>> be contacted directly and given direct information regarding
>> your posting history?


Offer to Send my Lawyer Evidence is Hereby Accepted

Gang Conspiracy Obvious

(Isn’t it also strange that Brooks was the only gang member that filed
the FOIA request about me, and Brooks said he never showed my records
to anyone else. Yet SEVERAL gang members have stated they reviewed
the records that Brooks received - and Brooks tries to whine “there is
no gang” - sure right). Either Brooks shared information with his
gang members, or they have “another source” to find out information
about me. Mr. Rau said he was receiving information from someone
about disabled Vets - perhaps that is their “source?”
http://tinyurl.com/bxrf2b US Government Web Site and independent
Experts on the US Military confirm Nigel Brooks lied about my
military service and my military records.

Doug’s Rebuttal to Nigel Brooks: I do not mind if you or any other
gang member send any of my past posts (in the correct context) to my
lawyer. (I suspect the gang will have plenty of opportunity to do so
under oath in the form of Interrogatories or statements of admissions,
or perhaps to law enforcement in the future).

Regardless, I just hope the gang continues to lie about those posts in
respect to context, intent, meaning and such under oath. I can’t wait
to see them repeat under oath what they have so profusely lied about
on USENET.

However, with that said, and if you (or any other gang member) wish
to send some of my past posts to my present law firm let me know via
email and I will arrange that event immediately. Provided of course
you are willing to swear and attest under penalty of perjury that what
you are sending them is true and correct, and any characterizations,
conclusions or descriptions of any post you might add to the contents
or description of that post is also true and correct, and that you
have also confirmed my original intent and context in respect to such
a post, and of course the post you are referencing was actually posted
by me and is not a smear gang forgery (such as we are seeing being
posted by the gang recently - more on this later).

In other words, making up fraudulent context, forgeries, lies and such
about my past posts will be prosecuted as perjury. So, please let me
know when you want to send my law firm some of my past posts (watch
the gang scurry for their holes on this one - take away their ability
to lie and falsely accuse and they suddenly grow very silent).

Sending “evidence” to a lawyer or court needs to conform to the rules
of evidence - not con man bullshit like we see coming from the Nigel
Brooks smear and fraud gang.

Doug Grant (Tm)