Kevin Ryan - All Claims against UL Dismissed - with prejudice

[LashL]

Well, well, well.

I popped in at PACER tonight to check on the status of the Ryan v. UL litigation, idly wondering whether UL had brought a new motion to dismiss. Imagine my surprise when I saw several new documents entered and the case listed as "terminated".

It appears that Kevin Ryan's lawyers ongoing struggles to get things right have done them in again.

As mentioned last week, Ryan filed his Second Amended Complaint (a day after the "without prejudice" period for filing had passed). At that time, the Second Amended Complaint was on the PACER site and subsequently posted here as the subject of this thread (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=90210).

It appears that he had filed it without first filing a motion for leave to file the Second Amended Complaint, and without first filing a motion for leave to extend the time for filing.

His motion for leave to extend time, and his motion for leave to file his Second Amended Complaint are now on PACER but the Second Amended Complaint is no longer listed.

Why, you ask?

The judge was not impressed by the reasons given by Ryan's lawyers for missing the deadline, and was not impressed with the proposed Second Amended Complaint. He felt that the Second Amended Complaint was not properly pleaded; he was not persuaded that the new claim was not being brought “in a desperate effort to protract the litigation and complicate the defense”; and he was not convinced that the request to amend the complaint was based on discovery of facts not known prior to the original dismissal.

In the result, the judge denied Ryan's motion to extend time, refused to accept the Second Amended Complaint, and dismissed the entirety of Ryan's action against UL with prejudice.

(There's also an interesting side story in the documents about how only one of Ryan's three lawyers was willing to sign the filings because of the judge's clear warnings about sanctions against them in the prior dismissal.)

Damn, that's gotta be embarrassing!

I'll get the docs to ~enigma~ once again and ask him to post them on the Aquaman site.

[Unsecured Coins]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v236/powers05/simpsons_nelson_haha2.jpg

[Alareth]

Yessir, things sure are happening in the "Truth" movement

[defaultdotxbe]

Yessir, things sure are happening in the "Truth" movement
of course, this proves the conspriacy extends to all the courts in the US, thus justifying the truthers decision to take the law into their own hands and begin executing those of use who would dare disagree with the truth

[orphia nay]

Thanks for the info, LashL! :)

I'm sort of laughing at the outcome, but I just keep picturing the sad little wheels spinning in his and other twoofers' heads trying to form a conspiracy out of this, and twisting their minds deeper into delusion.

[Viper Daimao]

so what was his excuse exactly?

ETA: Does this mean he has to pay the defendents' legal costs? or is he threw with this case?

[Good Lt]

In the result, the judge denied Ryan's motion to extend time, refused to accept the Second Amended Complaint, and dismissed the entirety of Ryan's action against UL with prejudice.

FAIL

:v:

[Hans]

With my brain set in fringe mode:

The NWO got to the attorney and made him mess up.

[SpitfireIX]

. . . the judge denied Ryan's motion to extend time, refused to accept the Second Amended Complaint, and dismissed the entirety of Ryan's action against UL with prejudice.


http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/1706046d7828cda9b7.jpg

[Digest]

On a more important side note south park just signed on for 3 more years!

[Gravy]

Thanks for the good news, LashL. Perhaps the rest of the truth movement will get the message that lying fools shouldn't file lawsuits.

[SpitfireIX]

. . . Perhaps the rest of the truth movement will get the message that lying fools shouldn't file lawsuits.


:pigsfly :pigsfly :pigsfly

[Crungy]

Much thanks for the info LashL! It made my day knowing that slandering momma's boy Kevin got a bucket full of ice cold justice poured on him.

[Jonnyclueless]

Gosh I guess a court of law is not quite as easy as a blog or chat forum...

Perhaps if Ryan had made a conspiracy video and posted it on YouTube the judge would have been more impressed?

[PhantomWolf]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v236/powers05/simpsons_nelson_haha2.jpg

I second your Haha and add a

http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/1557946d7899ee0aae.jpg

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Ahh... sweet shadenfruede.

Someone tell me that Ryan did this in a "loser pays" state?

[LashL]

so what was his excuse exactly?


The excuse was a combination of:

1. Counsel had to review the Court's August 9 order and this was "complicated" by the fact that counsel had other matters to deal with;

2. Mick didn't provide a draft of the pleadings to his co-counsel until the last day of the deadline;

3. Both co-counsel were not willing to sign the pleadings in order to file them because of the court's prior warnings about the sanctions that they could face personally;

4. Mick didn't know this until the night of the deadline (since he had not provided the draft to the other lawyers until the evening of the deadline);

5. Mick supposedly tried to file the pleading that night but couldn't manage to do so before midnight because he realized that he also forgot to attach his proposed order, and it would take him past midnight to do so, so he aborted his attempts;

6. Mick then belatedly filed a motion for an extension of time;

ETA: Does this mean he has to pay the defendents' legal costs? or is he threw with this case?

Having his entire action now dismissed with prejudice means that he cannot re-assert his claims, in the absence of a successful appeal to a higher court, as it is a final order.

"Costs follow the event" is a general rule here, and normally, the judgment on a motion like this would either assess costs explicitly and incorporate a costs order into the dismissal order or it would say something like "if the parties cannot agree as to costs, they may make written submissions to the court within X days."

Costs were not specifically addressed in the initial dismissal or in this dismissal, but I do not know how it works in Indiana, so I am not sure if they will have a costs hearing after the fact or what the procedure is. Perhaps Loss Leader can assist in this regard.

[LashL]

Thanks for the good news, LashL. Perhaps the rest of the truth movement will get the message that lying fools shouldn't file lawsuits.

Unfortunately, lying fools appear to be universally oblivious to the message.

On the up side, at least they provide us with some "legaltainment". ;)

[LashL]

With my brain set in fringe mode:

The NWO got to the attorney and made him mess up.

And made two of his three attorneys smarten up. :D

[SpitfireIX]

Ahh... sweet shadenfruede.

Someone tell me that Ryan did this in a "loser pays" state?


In Indiana, it's up to the judge to award costs to one side or the other, but this generally only happens if the lawsuit in question is particularly frivolous or outrageous. A friend of mine recently settled a lawsuit brought by the contractor who built my friend's new home, claiming that my friend owed about $80,000 more than agreed. The case had already been to arbitration, and the arbitrator had found for my friend and his wife, but the contractor sued anyway on various shaky legal theories. Despite having neither law nor facts on his side, the contractor pressed ahead. The judge eventually ruled that the arbitrator had been absolutely correct, but declined to award my friend legal fees, as had been requested. :(

[LashL]

In Indiana, it's up to the judge to award costs to one side or the other, but this generally only happens if the lawsuit in question is particularly frivolous or outrageous. A friend of mine recently settled a lawsuit brought by the contractor who built my friend's new home, claiming that my friend owed about $80,000 more than agreed. The case had already been to arbitration, and the arbitrator had found for my friend and his wife, but the contractor sued anyway on various shaky legal theories. Despite having neither law nor facts on his side, the contractor pressed ahead. The judge eventually ruled that the arbitrator had been absolutely correct, but declined to award my friend legal fees, as had been requested. :(

That seems grossly unfair. :(

Here, the standard is "costs follow the event" - in other words, "loser pays" (except in extraordinary circumstances).

[JamesB]

Terminate.... with extreme prejudice.

Hey, somebody had to say it. :cool:

[ref]

http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/1363946d7b29d5f1a2.jpg

[Brainster]

Oh, somewhere in this favored land the sun is shining bright;
The band is playing somewhere, and somewhere hearts are light,
And somewhere men are laughing, and somewhere children shout;
But there is no joy in Trutherville—mighty Kevin has struck out.

Ah well, at least he has his peer-review job to fall back on!

[SpitfireIX]

That seems grossly unfair. :(

Here, the standard is "costs follow the event" - in other words, "loser pays" (except in extraordinary circumstances).


I'm sure my friend would agree with you. Something similar happened to my father several years ago. He invested heavily in a business venture proposed by the son (Tom) of some old friends (then deceased) of my parents; the former owner agreed to several concessions and guarantees in return for taking the then-failing business off his hands. The deal eventually went south due to Tom's mismanagement, but the former owner claimed not to remember having signed the contract with my father, and the only witness was Tom. The legal wrangling went on for years (egged on by the former owner's psychotic wife). Eventually the former owner agreed to settle, and my parents got about 60% of their money back, but a large chunk of that was eaten up by legal fees. My father's attorney had been asking for legal fees, but they were not included in the settlement. I felt really bad, because when this was first proposed, I was just starting my studies in accounting. I looked everything over, but I told my dad, "this looks reasonable to me, but you need to talk to a lawyer and a CPA." But my dad didn't, because Tom told him that everything was taken care of. :mad: I'm not certain that "loser pays" would have applied in this case, but it might have discouraged the former owner from pressing his weak case, and my father might have been more inclined to press on.

[Spins]

Sorry Kevin Ryan you are the weakest link ... claim dismissed, and don't forget to close the door on your way out...

http://www.mugen.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/CaseDismissed.jpg

:D

[Sabrina]

Couldn't happen to a more deserving person.

[kookbreaker]

Looks like the Troofer legal help is as effective as their 'engineers'.

[~enigma~]

Saga finally ended or in the words of the Terminator...TERMINATED WITH EXTREME PREJUDICE.

http://enigmanwoliaison.googlepages.com/home

[~enigma~]

Damn...PDOPE is trying his best to make sure this info isnT disseminated on LCF. Is he really Aquaboy?

[Jonnyclueless]

I never did trust those NWO judges...

[Loss Leader]

Costs were not specifically addressed in the initial dismissal or in this dismissal, but I do not know how it works in Indiana, so I am not sure if they will have a costs hearing after the fact or what the procedure is. Perhaps Loss Leader can assist in this regard.


Yeah, maybe I could have assisted if someone had told me about the damned thread.

Seriously, though, I'd have to agree with Spitfire. When it comes to costs (and especially legal fees), there's the rule and then there's the reality. The rule is that the winner should be able to submit a bill of costs with statutorily defined prices for various actions it had to take (motion fees, process, etc.). And then in many actions, a motion for legal fees could be made and probably should be granted. In reality, the more quickly cases end, the more unwilling courts are even to grant statutorily allowable costs. And unless there has been egregious misconduct after multiple court orders, legal fees are usually out of the question.

If I were the lawyer for UL, even if there's a chance of getting any costs or fees, I would advise them just to let the whole thing go. They're big and rich and there's no need to seem petty or to give this guy one more minute of access to the judicial system.

Now, on a related note, this latest development appears to prove my prediction about this case wrong. But it ain't over yet. Ryan can submit a motion for reconsideration, appeal the current dismissal order, appeal the first order, sue somebody else in some other court and much, much more. There's still a world of opportunity for this moron to continue to make a jackass of himself.

[Sabrina]

And we'll be there to watch. With popcorn, no less!

[Loss Leader]

Incidentally, I sent an email to this guy (http://www.bloomingtonalternative.com/node/8620) to tell him his assertions about Ryan are entirely wrong (and that there are court documents to prove it).

[LashL]

Yeah, maybe I could have assisted if someone had told me about the damned thread.

Sorry about that, LossLeader. I sent you an email last night but I received an "undeliverable" message earlier today. Upon closer inspection, I realize that I mistyped your email address, which resulted in the "undeliverable" status. Mea culpa.

[Loss Leader]

NP. Can't wait to see the documents, though. I'm kind of sorry Ryan ate it over a filing deadline.

Also, I'm a little surprised that the feds wanted a motion to ammend the complaint. The decision of the judge looked like he was already granting (practically ordering) that.

Fed practice is too formalistic for me.

[LashL]

NP. Can't wait to see the documents, though. I'm kind of sorry Ryan ate it over a filing deadline.

Also, I'm a little surprised that the feds wanted a motion to ammend the complaint. The decision of the judge looked like he was already granting (practically ordering) that.

Fed practice is too formalistic for me.

I don't know for sure if the federal rules required the motion to amend or if it was a result of Mick realizing he was going to miss the deadline, thus triggering the requirement for a motion to extend time and him just putting in the motion to amend out of an abundance of (belated) caution. However, in light of the existence of the previous motions to amend in this case, I would guess that it is a requirement under the rules.

The docs are posted here: http://enigmanwoliaison.googlepages.com/home

Scroll down to the last three. :)

Or, if you prefer, I can email them to you.

ETA2: I also emailed them to you :)

[Apollo20]

I can't understand why anyone would waste their time following this case if Mr. Ryan is such a looser. Lord Black's case is much more interesting...

[~enigma~]

I can't understand why anyone would waste their time following this case if Mr. Ryan is such a looser. Lord Black's case is much more interesting...
We could follow your court case. Want to post the docs?

[LashL]

I can't understand why anyone would waste their time following this case if Mr. Ryan is such a looser. Lord Black's case is much more interesting...

There are many good reasons to follow frivolous lawsuits. It is always a good thing to examine the workings of the judicial system. Frivolous lawsuits cost taxpayers money - lots of money, and should be discouraged, and even openly ridiculed. Frivolous lawsuits cost innocent defendants money - lots of money, and should be discouraged, and even openly ridiculed. There are many, many good reasons to follow such lawsuits. I suspect that if you put your thinking cap on, even you can think of a few good reasons. Go ahead, give it a shot.

And then, like I said above, the lame attempts of troofers to try to make the legal system bend to their woo also amounts to legaltainmentTM. If the legal gymnastics of twoofers don't interest you, feel free not to indulge yourself in threads about their antics.

I agree that Conrad Black's case is fascinating, and I have followed it closely since the beginning. There is no conspiracy theory involved in it, though, so it outside the scope of this sub-forum. Now, if you'd like to start a thread about it in an appropriate sub-forum, I'll be happy to discuss it with you there.

ETA: Alternatively, as ~enigma~ said above, we could discuss your court cases if you care to post the documents for discussion.

[Loss Leader]

The docs are posted here: http://enigmanwoliaison.googlepages.com/home




Holy [canyousaycrapunderthenewrule10?], that was a beating.

You can tell just how strongly the judge felt about all of this by one simple fact: he didn't even wait for UL's papers to make his ruling. I've only ever seen that when a judge is just personally angry over a party's behavior. In any case, he just saved UL about $8,000.00 in legal fees.

So, I was wrong. The judge was far, far more upset by Ryan's obvious unstated objectives than I gave him credit for. I honestly thought he would let Ryan maintain the fiction that this was an employment law case.

Ryan's options are very few at this point. His only real avenue is to appeal the judge's first ruling dismissing his Complaint. That seems to me to be a non-starter. But I wouldn't put it past him.

Look for Ryan to make some sort of public statement about appealing this case all the way to the Supreme Court and then just never appeal anything at all.

TY to LashL, as always, for the great reporting.

[~enigma~]

Holy [canyousaycrapunderthenewrule10?], that was a beating.

You can tell just how strongly the judge felt about all of this by one simple fact: he didn't even wait for UL's papers to make his ruling. I've only ever seen that when a judge is just personally angry over a party's behavior. In any case, he just saved UL about $8,000.00 in legal fees.

So, I was wrong. The judge was far, far more upset by Ryan's obvious unstated objectives than I gave him credit for. I honestly thought he would let Ryan maintain the fiction that this was an employment law case.

Ryan's options are very few at this point. His only real avenue is to appeal the judge's first ruling dismissing his Complaint. That seems to me to be a non-starter. But I wouldn't put it past him.

Look for Ryan to make some sort of public statement about appealing this case all the way to the Supreme Court and then just never appeal anything at all.

TY to LashL, as always, for the great reporting.
What no kudos to the great website...

[Loss Leader]

What no kudos to the great website...


I would but I'm not a hundred percent certain what "kudos" means.

[qarnos]

It seems to me that Ryan's whole approach to this was based on the troofer method - make a claim and alter it as need be to counter the repeated debunkings. In his case, he was trying to shoehorn his claims to fit existing laws.

I guess the US courts don't have much patience for these types of games. :)

[~enigma~]

I would but I'm not a hundred percent certain what "kudos" means.
Pretty much it means congatulations.

[Apollo20]

Last time I posted about my legal battles, the post was taken down.

I guess that was because I posted personal information.. about myself! Ha!

It's funny to watch you all gloat over the fate of Mr. Ryan when you all post anonymously!

What a bunch....

[~enigma~]

Last time I posted about my legal battles, the post was taken down.

I guess that was because I posted personal information.. about myself! Ha!

It's funny to watch you all gloat over the fate of Mr. Ryan when you all post anonymously!

What a bunch....
So give me the PDFs and I will start a website to you. Instead of calling it the trials of Aquaman I will call it the folly of a failed scientist...get over yourself Apollo

[Mr. Skinny]

(snip)
It's funny to watch you all gloat over the fate of Mr. Ryan when you all post anonymously!

What a bunch....
Hehe. You're right, Apollo20.

And what, exactly, does our anonimity have to do with Mr. Ryan's law suit?

[Apollo20]

Mr. Skinny:

Thanks for saying I'm right!

Way to agree....

[~enigma~]

Mr. Skinny:

Thanks for saying I'm right!

Way to agree....
He wasn't agreeing. Is there some reason why you think he was? Where are those PDFs Mr. Failed Scientist Sir?

[Mr. Skinny]

Mr. Skinny:

Thanks for saying I'm right!

Way to agree....
No problem, my friend.

You are so, so.......something. Don't know how to describe it exactly....

[Apollo20]

Cowardly dogs hide their names

But bark the loudest!

[LashL]

It seems to me that Ryan's whole approach to this was based on the troofer method - make a claim and alter it as need be to counter the repeated debunkings.

I agree. He followed the troofer method of making wholly bogus claims without any basis in facts or evidence and then altering them repeatedly to try to counter repeated debunkings.

In his case, he was trying to shoehorn his claims to fit existing laws.

And even with a complete roadmap provided by the judge at various stages throughout the proceedings, he still couldn't manage to make it work.

I guess the US courts don't have much patience for these types of games. :)

He certainly received some serious smackdowns, and then the ultimate smackdown, during the course of this shortlived litigation. It is good to see that the court didn't roll over and let him proceed with his frivolous, transparent and ill-founded claims.

[~enigma~]

Cowardly dogs hide their names

But bark the loudest!
So you call everone who uses a screenname a cowardly dog yet you use one so hello Mr. Cowardly Failed Scientist...

Seems to me you just slung a personal insult to ALL the users here. That wasn't nice of you. Do you see why almost nobody here likes you?

[Mr. Skinny]

Cowardly dogs hide their names

But bark the loudest!
I'd give you my name in a PM if you didn't occasionally act like you had decided to visit your own personal Disneyland, Apollo.

I actually had some resources to offer you at one time, but I decided not to offer them given your odd behavior at times. Perhaps I'll change my mind in future.

[LashL]

Last time I posted about my legal battles, the post was taken down.

I guess that was because I posted personal information.. about myself! Ha!

It's funny to watch you all gloat over the fate of Mr. Ryan when you all post anonymously!

What a bunch....

Your transparent attempts to derail this thread are duly noted, Apollo. Your posts about your own litigation were not taken down because you posted your own personal information. They were moved because you were derailing a thread. Your posts in which you posted my personal information were edited because they breached the rules, obviously. If you want to start a thread about your litigation in an appropriate sub-forum, and post the documents, I will be happy to discuss it with you, and I'm sure other would as well. Just start the thread in the appropriate location, and drop me a PM to let me know where it is.

Your comments about people not publicizing their real names while posting on an internet forum are just silly, and are merely another attempt to derail on your part.

Now, do you have anything to add to the discussion about Ryan's frivolous lawsuit and its dismissal with prejudice - which is the subject matter of this thread - or are you just trolling and derailing again?

[Apollo20]

"Yes, you have ravished justice;
Forced her to do your pleasure."

"The White Devil" Act 3, Scene 2.

John Webster

[~enigma~]

"Yes, you have ravished justice;
Forced her to do your pleasure."

"The White Devil" Act 3, Scene 2.

John Webster
Are you determined to prove you are senile? Can you let this thread remain on topic or are you jealous?

[Loss Leader]

It's funny to watch you all gloat over the fate of Mr. Ryan when you all post anonymously!



I'd just like to say that I'm not here to gloat over the fate of Kevin Ryan. I'm here because I think bad lawyering is funny.

[A W Smith]

Last time I posted about my legal battles, the post was taken down.

I guess that was because I posted personal information.. about myself! Ha!

It's funny to watch you all gloat over the fate of Mr. Ryan when you all post anonymously!

What a bunch....


Is it of your opinion his case had merit and was not frivolous? I post with my real name. How about you Apollo? You are not worried about any client or employer Google searches or anything are you?

[Viper Daimao]

I never understood your whole thing with anonymity Dr. Greening. Shouldn't an argument stand on it's own without knowing who said it, unless they are arguing from a point of authority? Certainly you can understand the need to not parade one's identity in front of such a large group of irrational, fevered opponents? I mean, Gravy has had his life threatened on more than one occasion has he not?

[Apollo20]

A. W. Smith:

Everyone knows I'm Frank Greening. I revealed that long ago... keep up!

As for Mr. Ryan's case, please enjoy your lawyer love-fest, though I fail to see any connection to a conspiracy debate. Did Mr. Ryan conspire with someone?

[LashL]

"Yes, you have ravished justice;
Forced her to do your pleasure."

"The White Devil" Act 3, Scene 2.

John Webster

Care to explain your post, Apollo, or is this just another example of the twoofer tendencies you exhibit when you cherry pick, quote mine and attempt to derail?

And I will ask again, do you have anything to contribute to the topic of this thread?

[Apollo20]

Viper Daimao:

Only a coward is afraid of death....

[~enigma~]

A. W. Smith:

Everyone knows I'm Frank Greening. I revealed that long ago... keep up!

As for Mr. Ryan's case, please enjoy your lawyer love-fest, though I fail to see any connection to a conspiracy debate. Did Mr. Ryan conspire with someone?
Read the PDFs if you want and you'll find out. You know where they are at...

Now please stop being a jealous old failed scientist and just stop wasting time in this thread until you have read the PDFs and can answer your own question.

Keep in mind the Membership Agreement and do not use personal attacks or insults to argue your point.

[~enigma~]

Viper Daimao:

Only a coward is afraid of death....
So now you insult Viper? Post has been reported.

[A W Smith]

A. W. Smith:

Everyone knows I'm Frank Greening. I revealed that long ago... keep up!

As for Mr. Ryan's case, please enjoy your lawyer love-fest, though I fail to see any connection to a conspiracy debate. Did Mr. Ryan conspire with someone?

I already knew that from the first thread you posted. But thats not what I asled.

[LashL]

A. W. Smith:

Everyone knows I'm Frank Greening. I revealed that long ago... keep up!

Obviously, you are not as important as you think you are. Not everybody knows and even fewer people care to know your real name.

As for Mr. Ryan's case, please enjoy your lawyer love-fest, though I fail to see any connection to a conspiracy debate. Did Mr. Ryan conspire with someone?

Clearly, you haven't read the documents, Apollo. The entire lawsuit is based on tinhat conspiracy theories about the events of September 11, 2001. Do keep up.

Once again, do you have anything to add to the discussion of the subject matter of this thread, or are you just derailing and trolling again?

[Apollo20]

"Tinhat conspiracy theories"?

Are you talking about the NIST Report again?

Oh that's right, I forgot you're a NISTIAN...

[~enigma~]

"Tinhat conspiracy theories"?

Are you talking about the NIST Report again?

Oh that's right, I forgot you're a NISTIAN...
Once again...read the pDFs because frankly you are making yourself look like a really stupid failed scientist.

[A W Smith]

I completely forgot its Friday night. Party on Dr FrankenHyde.

[LashL]

"Tinhat conspiracy theories"?

Are you talking about the NIST Report again?

Oh that's right, I forgot you're a NISTIAN...

There you go spouting neologisms again, Apollo. How utterly unsurprising.

Obviously, you aren't up to speed on the subject matter of this thread. I would suggest that you read the documents that have been pointed out to you, or, alternatively, that you read the thread and the prior threads on the subject of the Ryan litigation if you would prefer the Coles Notes version.

That would be a far more productive use of your time than simply trolling and attempting to derail the thread.

I'll make it easy for you. The threads are here:

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=81508
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=90210
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=91879

[Viper Daimao]

So now you insult Viper? Post has been reported.

I didn't really take that as an personal insult, more of a false general claim.

[~enigma~]

I didn't really take that as an personal insult, more of a false general claim.
Well I enjoyed reporting him for it anyway :)

[SpitfireIX]

And we'll be there to watch. With popcorn, no less!


:popcorn1 :popcorn1 :popcorn1

[Rika]

Apollo20, if you were to say, file a lawsuit that said "The WTC were brought down by feral tiger plushies to force the US governmen to cede land to them" We are probably in our rights to start a thread in Conspiracy Theories about it, as it's a conspiracy theory...

While not as outrageous as my example, Ryan's lawsuit falls into that category

[Sabrina]

Not to stress a point or anything, but Sabrina is my real name. I just choose not to post my last name or any personal details of my life, as I've been burned in that respect before. I just didn't want to use my usual screen name here as it didn't seem appropriate at the time. *shrugs*

[jhunter1163]

My real name and city of residence appear in my forum profile. I'm not afraid of people on the Internet; in fact, I met my wife in a news chat room on 9/11. I don't think that I'm a big enough fish in the debunking pond for someone to come and stalk me. Someone like Gravy may feel differently, and understandably so.

To return to the topic, I think the judge saw through Ryan's scam and acted entirely appropriately. That helps to restore my faith in the legal system.

[OldSchool]

My real name and city of residence appear in my forum profile. I'm not afraid of people on the Internet; in fact, I met my wife in a news chat room on 9/11. I don't think that I'm a big enough fish in the debunking pond for someone to come and stalk me. Someone like Gravy may feel differently, and understandably so.

To return to the topic, I think the judge saw through Ryan's scam and acted entirely appropriately. That helps to restore my faith in the legal system.

The court case didn't have anything to do with 911 or the NIST report. The case had to do with the breaking his employers rules. The courts decision isn't relevant to the NIST report or the views of UL professionals.

[~enigma~]

The court case didn't have anything to do with 911 or the NIST report. The case had to do with the breaking his employers rules. The courts decision isn't relevant to the NIST report or the views of UL professionals.
Read the PDFs and your tune will change. Funny that when the case started last year it was being hailed as truthdoms saving grace.

[Drudgewire]

Read the PDFs and your tune will change. Funny that when the case started last year it was being hailed as truthdoms saving grace.
Well it would have been if courts of law just had the same rules of evidence youtube does. The NWO are jerks!! http://www.lethalwrestling.com/upload/colbert.gif

[Civilized Worm]

Frank is having legal troubles? I must have been away for that, what happened?

[Jonnyclueless]

The court case didn't have anything to do with 911 or the NIST report. The case had to do with the breaking his employers rules. The courts decision isn't relevant to the NIST report or the views of UL professionals.

Actually it had everything to do with it since the guy tried to defraud people by making them believe that NIST reports were fraudulent by lying about his position and his companies position. He was then fired for lying and defacing the company's name and then brought up a lawsuit trying to claim he was unfairly fired under the whistleblowers clause.

It's relevant in that it shows NIST was behind honest the whole time despite the claims of the woo movement. It shows this wasn't some coverup as Ryan and his fellow wooers wanted everyone to believe.

[Firestone]

The court case didn't have anything to do with 911 or the NIST report. The case had to do with the breaking his employers rules. The courts decision isn't relevant to the NIST report or the views of UL professionals.So, Kevin Ryan lied when he wrote his appeal for funds?

Message from Kevin

By all accounts, the unprecedented events of September 11th, 2001 “changed everything”. It is therefore critical that conscientious Americans, as well as all good people around the world, understand these events in detail. Unfortunately the official reports, including The 9/11 Commission Report and the NIST WTC Report, written by those working under the direction of the Bush Administration, fall far short of providing the explanations needed.

Both the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and my former employer, Underwriters Laboratories (UL), seem to have taken the stance that the public does not have a right to know what fire resistance tests were performed on the steel component assemblies used to build the World Trade Center (WTC) towers. But since NIST’s latest story for collapse of the WTC towers depends on the fire-induced failure of these steel components, there is little information that could be more important at this time.

When I worked there, top management at UL made clear to me that UL performed these required tests. They have since stated that there is “no evidence” that any firm tested the steel. Being tax-exempt, due to their status as a public safety-testing organization, UL should be held accountable for being honest and open with the public about the history of their testing.

To help ensure this accountability, I've filed a lawsuit against UL for wrongful termination. My attorneys and I hope to gain more information about UL’s role in the testing of the WTC steel assemblies, and any other involvement UL has had with the WTC towers or the NIST investigation. Since this lawsuit represents a critical need for information about public safety, we invite the public to contribute to our legal defense fund.

Thanks for your help. Kevin Ryan

Source (http://ultruth.com/)

[~enigma~]

Frank is having legal troubles? I must have been away for that, what happened?
Had...past tense :)

[OldSchool]

Actually it had everything to do with it since the guy tried to defraud people by making them believe that NIST reports were fraudulent by lying about his position and his companies position. He was then fired for lying and defacing the company's name and then brought up a lawsuit trying to claim he was unfairly fired under the whistleblowers clause.

It's relevant in that it shows NIST was behind honest the whole time despite the claims of the woo movement. It shows this wasn't some coverup as Ryan and his fellow wooers wanted everyone to believe.

You say this even though a leading member of NIST has called for Independent peer review of there report. Even though he has noted government lawyers impeded the investigation. Even though the NIST chose one hypothesis considered no other hypothesis and altered controls within there experiment to receive the results they were looking for. From an acedemic standpoint not considering alternate possiblities and altering controls discredits the entire research project.

[Jonnyclueless]

A leading member? The guy is not part of NIST. He quit NIST over 17 years ago. How very dishonest of you, but not surprising.

Please show us how the government lawyers have impeded the investigation. Go ahead and point that out because it requires more than taking a quote of someones suspicion.

NIST considered all the plausible hypothesis. If the same results could have ocured regardless of the fireproofing, then it just further proves their conclusions.

And no it in no way discredits the entire project, it just shows that you have little to no understanding of the project. And of course you think a single person disagreeing with someone overrules the majority. Of course if th majority said it should be reviewed and a single person said it shouldn't, would you then side with that single person? Of course not. Because the issue here has nothing to do with NIST, but has to do with you trying to use anything you can to conclude a pre-determined conclusion.

Hence the need for you to be dishonest and misleading about the facts.

[Loss Leader]

The court case didn't have anything to do with 911 or the NIST report. The case had to do with the breaking his employers rules. The courts decision isn't relevant to the NIST report or the views of UL professionals.


Um ...

Kevin Ryan believes he was fired in furtherance of the conspiracy to cover up the government's involvement in 9/11. Doesn't it say something about the validity of the conspiracy theory that the entire weight of western law does not recognize any wrongdoing by Ryan's employer whatsoever? I mean, the judge didn't have to depart from the law or make any special excuses for UL - based on decades of case law in all sorts of empoyment areas, Ryan could not convince a court that there was any possibility, however remote, that anyone acted unfairly in terminating his employment.

The so-called "official story" can't be attacked head-on and now it can't be attacked on the fringes. At what point does utter failure of conspiracy theorists to break into mainstream consciousness indicate that they have no bit of truth on their side?

[Civilized Worm]

Had...past tense :)


What happened?

[~enigma~]

What happened?
Ask Apollo.

[Cl1mh4224rd]

Cowardly dogs hide their names

But bark the loudest!


That's quite amusing considering your real name isn't your screen name, isn't attached to any of your posts, and isn't even to be found in your forum profile.

Everyone knows I'm Frank Greening. I revealed that long ago... keep up!


Everyone who was around when you announced it. To a newbie, you'd be just as anonymous as the rest of us. Way to go...

[Civilized Worm]

Ask Apollo.


I'm not sure that would be a fruitfull exercise.

[~enigma~]

I'm not sure that would be a fruitfull exercise.
And wouldn't me answering be gossip?

[Cl1mh4224rd]

And wouldn't me answering be gossip?


If you don't know, you could've just said so...

Besides, I doubt CW's response above was meant to shift the burden of answering back onto you.

[~enigma~]

If you don't know, you could've just said so...

Besides, I doubt CW's response above was meant to shift the burden of answering back onto you.
Huh? Ok. How does my not wanting to gossip about Apollo equate to me not knowing what happened? It was even spoken about on the forum.

[Cl1mh4224rd]

Huh? Ok. How does my not wanting to gossip about Apollo equate to me not knowing what happened? It was even spoken about on the forum.


Then it's not really gossip, is it?

[Civilized Worm]

Huh? Ok. How does my not wanting to gossip about Apollo equate to me not knowing what happened? It was even spoken about on the forum.


Why don't you just give me a link then? (I'm starting to think it would have been easier asking Frank)

[~enigma~]

Then it's not really gossip, is it?
Answer the question I asked you...

[~enigma~]

Why don't you just give me a link then? (I'm starting to think it would have been easier asking Frank)
good move...hope you enjoy your stay on ignore.

[Gravy]

Even though the NIST chose one hypothesis considered no other hypothesis and altered controls within there experiment to receive the results they were looking for. From an acedemic standpoint not considering alternate possiblities and altering controls discredits the entire research project.Your pants! They're on fire!

Don't just make crap up. It's a waste of everyone's time. Do you agree to not make things up? If you make a claim about the NIST report, do you agree to have a source for that claim, and do you agree to first check to see if NIST explains their reasoning and methodology?

This is what rational adults are prepared to do. Agreed, OldSchool?

[SpitfireIX]

Not to stress a point or anything, but Sabrina is my real name. I just choose not to post my last name or any personal details of my life, as I've been burned in that respect before. I just didn't want to use my usual screen name here as it didn't seem appropriate at the time. *shrugs*


At the moment I choose to remain semi-anonymous for two reasons; first, because I live with my parents (having gone back to school full-time a couple of years ago), and giving out my contact information would also be giving out their contact information. I don't want any truthers (especially deranged ones, e.g. Jachchit) harrassing them, either now, or after I move out. Second, I have from time to time, here and on BAUT, discussed some rather personal subjects about my life and the lives of people I know (such as the two lawsuits I mentioned up-thread). If I reveal my identity to all and sundry, there is a chance that someone who knows me could figure out whom I've been talking about, and I'd prefer that that didn't happen.

[Loss Leader]

At the moment I choose to remain semi-anonymous for two reasons; first, because I live with my parents (having gone back to school full-time a couple of years ago), and giving out my contact information would also be giving out their contact information. I don't want any truthers (especially deranged ones, e.g. Jachchit) harrassing them, either now, or after I move out. Second, I have from time to time, here and on BAUT, discussed some rather personal subjects about my life and the lives of people I know (such as the two lawsuits I mentioned up-thread). If I reveal my identity to all and sundry, there is a chance that someone who knows me could figure out who I've been talking about, and I'd prefer that that didn't happen.



I guess I'll just come out and say it: I am Mark Linn-Baker from Perfect Strangers.

[Gravy]

I guess I'll just come out and say it: I am Mark Linn-Baker from Perfect Strangers.That was my second guess. My first was Anson Williams.

[Hokulele]

I am Spartacus.

[Unsecured Coins]

Call me Ishmael

[boloboffin]

I should prefer not to.

[~enigma~]

Then it's not really gossip, is it?
I know you were online earlier and I really would have appreciated an answer to my question can I have one or should i just chalk up your post as one trying to cause trouble?

ETA - Here is my original question if you intend to answer..


Huh? Ok. How does my not wanting to gossip about Apollo equate to me not knowing what happened? It was even spoken about on the forum.

[Drudgewire]

I am really a 13 year old girl whose parents are never home. If any other truthers want to chat with me about controlled demolitions (or anything else) my screen name is "notchrishansenfromdateline" and pix are a plus. ;)

[Cl1mh4224rd]

I know you were online earlier and I really would have appreciated an answer to my question can I have one or should i just chalk up your post as one trying to cause trouble?


You can do both if you wish. I'll admit that I mistook your response to CW as, "I don't know."

I'd suggest clarifying your position at the outset in the future: "I'd rather not comment about it. You should ask Apollo20."

"Ask Apollo" is irritatingly blunt and actually sounds like a dodge, rather than an civil expression of your desire not to "gossip" about his legal issues.

[~enigma~]

You can do both if you wish. I'll admit that I mistook your response to CW as, "I don't know."

I'd suggest clarifying your position at the outset in the future: "I'd rather not comment about it. You should ask Apollo20."

"Ask Apollo" is irritatingly blunt and actually sounds like a dodge, rather than an civil expression of your desire not to "gossip" about his legal issues.
Ask Apollo is precisely what I meant so if you took it as a dodge that was your hang up not mine. So Instead of simply saying you were mistaken and apologizing for basing your words on a mistaken assumption you decide to go off half cocked and make your opening statement? You know where you just put yourself or do I have to tell you?

[LashL]

The court case didn't have anything to do with 911 or the NIST report. The case had to do with the breaking his employers rules. The courts decision isn't relevant to the NIST report or the views of UL professionals.

Actually, Ryan's case was entirely founded upon the events of 9/11, the NIST report, and Ryan's irrational belief in tinhat conspiracy theories. You should read the documents at the links provided and educate yourself before making such unfounded statements.

[LashL]

So, Kevin Ryan lied when he wrote his appeal for funds?

The phrase, "hoist upon his own petard" leaps to mind. But then it often does when I read posts by OldSchool. :)

Um ...

Kevin Ryan believes he was fired in furtherance of the conspiracy to cover up the government's involvement in 9/11. Doesn't it say something about the validity of the conspiracy theory that the entire weight of western law does not recognize any wrongdoing by Ryan's employer whatsoever? I mean, the judge didn't have to depart from the law or make any special excuses for UL - based on decades of case law in all sorts of empoyment areas, Ryan could not convince a court that there was any possibility, however remote, that anyone acted unfairly in terminating his employment.

The so-called "official story" can't be attacked head-on and now it can't be attacked on the fringes. At what point does utter failure of conspiracy theorists to break into mainstream consciousness indicate that they have no bit of truth on their side?

I suspect that OldSchool will not have any meaningful response to your reply to his post, any more than he will have any meaningful response to Firestone's, linked above.

[Civilized Worm]

good move...hope you enjoy your stay on ignore.


Overreact much?

[Unsecured Coins]

I should prefer not to.


wuss :D

[Loss Leader]

In related news: Vote for me in the Pith Poll here (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=92011).

[jhunter1163]

Voted. And, at 9:37 am EST Monday, my vote put Loss Leader in the lead. Yay me!

[Loss Leader]

Voted. And, at 9:37 am EST Monday, my vote put Loss Leader in the lead. Yay me!


Damn right, yay you. I'm thinking of having a flag made that just says, "Yay you!"

[Alferd_Packer]

Overreact much?


Welcom to the "ignored by ~enigma~" club.

One of the fastest growing clubs on the internet.

[Checkmite]

Time to pull out the USS Fail again!

http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c159/jk_mellifera/104545.jpg

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

Damn right, yay you. I'm thinking of having a flag made that just says, "Yay you!"
How could I not vote for someone that has the Earth Stargate symbol as their avatar.

[LashL]

Voted, and put LossLeader back in the lead again...yay me!







(Now, about that flag...)

[Civilized Worm]

Welcom to the "ignored by ~enigma~" club.

One of the fastest growing clubs on the internet.


And I wasn't even ignored by Revolutionary91!

[Loss Leader]

How could I not vote for someone that has the Earth Stargate symbol as their avatar.


That's the symbol for Earth? No wonder I can't get this damn chappa'ai to work.

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

That's the symbol for Earth? No wonder I can't get this damn chappa'ai to work.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stargate_%28device%29#symbols_at_giza

[Loss Leader]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stargate_%28device%29#symbols_at_giza



Yeah, thanks. That was good information. You don't even want to know what I had been using the chappa'ai for. Suffice it to say that there are very few unshelled walnuts around my house.

[PhantomWolf]

Welcom to the "ignored by ~enigma~" club.

One of the fastest growing clubs on the internet.

Does this mean we have to set another place at the poker table on party night?

[Panoply_Prefect]

This is sort of a discount thread - you get three threads at the price of one...

[LashL]

This is sort of a discount thread - you get three threads at the price of one...

Yes, it puts me in mind of an advertisement for Doublemint Gum, but in this case, it would be Triplemint, as in "Triple your pleasure, triple your fun." :D

[Loss Leader]

This is sort of a discount thread - you get three threads at the price of one...


Well, to be perfectly fair there's not really much more for anybody to say. Ryan's an idiot, he lost, yipee. I might as well get some help learning how to dial the Abados gate with my walnut crusher.

[Panoply_Prefect]

Well, to be perfectly fair there's not really much more for anybody to say. Ryan's an idiot, he lost, yipee. I might as well get some help learning how to dial the Abados gate with my walnut crusher.

I think you will find that hard (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abydos_%28Stargate%29). Try the alpha site instead.

[Loss Leader]

I think you will find that hard (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abydos_%28Stargate%29). Try the alpha site instead.


Yeah, that's exactly what I want to do. I want to gate in to a heavily defended Air Force base with an iris when I don't have a valid IDC. Genius. Absolutely genius.

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

Yes, it puts me in mind of an advertisement for Doublemint Gum, but in this case, it would be Triplemint, as in "Triple your pleasure, triple your fun." :D
I have. It is.
Well, to be perfectly fair there's not really much more for anybody to say. Ryan's an idiot, he lost, yipee. I might as well get some help learning how to dial the Abados gate with my walnut crusher.
Abydos got blowed up. :(

[Panoply_Prefect]

Yeah, that's exactly what I want to do. I want to gate in to a heavily defended Air Force base with an iris when I don't have a valid IDC. Genius. Absolutely genius.

You need to go to an alternate timeline, go to Tollana, and steal the Tollan iris defeating technology.

I thought an NWO-enabled person like you would know this.