[Vision2020] Jury awards $11.3M over defamatory Internet posts --reply to Gary Crabtree

Thu Oct 12 17:46:17 PDT 2006

Mike, a rather cursory glance at my sent items file reveals that I inquired (or mentioned in such a way as to beg a response) as to your assertions regarding the FBI and CIA in two separate E-mails on 060219 and, again in two different posts on 060415. Last time I checked, this met the requirements for repeatedly. Seems hardly worth mentioning your failure to cover the topic in my most recent post. Regarding your "out of context" remark, one only has to follow the link that you, yourself provided to see what it is that I'm referring to and the original context in which it was presented. It would seem to me a rather simple, straight forward question that I'm putting squarely in front of you. I readily admit that in my phrasing, I was a tad fanciful and perhaps, churlish. In my desire for a straight answer, I was serious as a stroke. It seems clear that despite your supposed willingness to provide answers, ones health would be jeopardized by holding their breath waiting for them. I can only surmise from your inability or unwillingness to respond that your claims are lacking in merit. This being the case, you'll have to forgive me if I take your accusations and allegations regarding your former church and its leadership with a shaker full of salt. If this comes across as "unhappiness", "antagonism" and "unbalanced support" for your sworn enemy, I hope that the "mystery" is now revealed. Does this mean that I'm on my own now for those first two beers?

gc
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Michael 
  To: vision2020 at moscow.com 
  Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2006 12:35 PM
  Subject: [Vision2020] Jury awards $11.3M over defamatory Internet posts --reply to Gary Crabtree

  Gary,

  Thanks for the note. I've decided not to take your curious responses to me with a significant level of seriousness, which is perhaps how you intend them to be taken in the first place (you seem to be having a fun time here on V2020). If you would like to edit my posts, I would be happy to run them by you; but given the substantive issues currently debated, I doubt the general public is all that interested in your public commentary about my grammar. If you ever chose to clearly demonstrate how my argumentative writing is "inchoate" I would be happy to take a look at your work.

  I do not recollect ever failing to address a serious question to me from you; in fact, I recall asking at one point that folks resend any questions posed to me that I failed to address in case they slipped through the cracks. So if I have done this even once I offer you my sincere apology.  But I seriously doubt I have failed to answer a question from you "repeatedly." This provides a helpful illustration of why I find dialog with you unhealthy to my reputation on the internet and to how I spend my time generally. Last time I attempted dialoging with you, I was ridiculed by you for incessantly demanding what religion you are of; you did this even though you knew that I had asked this question one time (followed up with one reminder) and that it was clearly directed to an argument of yours. I am hoping not to have to undergo this kind of treatment, and therefore hope that there will be no further reason for us to discuss anything in a public context. 

  But there is more in this reply from you that further evidences this kind of malicious dishonesty.  You here yank a very old statement of mine out of context (in multiple ways) and claim that I was speaking about the FBI's "interest in the trials and travails of poor Michael and his never ending dramas." Yet, you would know full well that my comment about the FBI had nothing to do with me or my life story.  This seems to be intentional libel, and I really don't know of anyone else on Vision 2020 that practices such a thing.  There are many disagreements and many wrong and hateful things said here on Vision 2020; but they almost always appear to be said with a level of sincerity; i.e., they are not the sorts of statements that would provide material for a successful libel law suit. Given the post you are here critiquing, this is certainly ironic; I even wonder if this suggests that your level of seriousness in posting here on V2020 is far less than many of us have ever suspected.

  From here, I will likely refuse to publicly dialog with you - partly for the reasons listed above. If you continue to intentionally misquote me I will likely just respond by posting my quote in full. I doubt I will ever make comment to your statements on my blog. Since most folks reading Vision 2020 are familiar with my writing over the last year, and given my general reputation in the community (outside of certain circles within Christ Church) I am not worried about your continued claims about my mental health.  

  You strike me as a very unhappy man Gary, and your antagonism against me and your unbalanced support of Doug Wilson is simply a mystery to me - outside of my hypothesis that it is really a game for your own amusement. I would be happy to meet with you privately any time; I enjoyed meeting you the first time. Feel free to send me a private note if you ever get the inclination to meet me for a beer at Bucers-the first two beers are on me. But I do not see anything productive coming from anymore dialog with you on Vision 2020.

  Yours

  Michael Metzler 

  www.poohsthink.com

  PO Box 8282

  Moscow, Idaho

  Cell: 509-330-1503

  Mike, After reading your "essay" and following all of the links, I've come to the following conclusions. You seem to be a major fan of the run on, disjointed sentence and have but a fleeting and casual acquaintance with the comma. (I know, black pots and kettles club, here I come.) I also note that you have yet to back away from, or explain in any manner, a remark I have questioned you about repeatedly. This would have to do with you assertion that federal law enforcement and intelligence gathering organizations would have even a glimmering of interest in the trials and travails of poor Michael and his never ending dramas. You said at one of the afore mentions links...

                          "I'd imagine that some interested parties will soon be the FBI and the CIA."

    ...with regard to your former associates. Your silence in explaining this far fetched assertion has been notable. When someone hyperventilates to the point of imagining so much greater a public involvement then their private molehill warrants, it's easy to see where the mental disorder remarks might start to filter in. Incohesive essays in which you simultaneously argue the propriety of a law suit being brought against the Right Mind sites owner and threaten to defend it in the same breath doesn't help much either. I assume that since you post this nonsense to the Vision, you are looking for some kind of positive feedback. I'm sorry if, once again, I do not adequately meet your expectations.

          gc

  " I prefer rogues to imbeciles because they sometimes take a rest."  A. Dumas 

    ----- Original Message ----- 

    From: Michael 

    To: vision2020 at moscow.com 

    Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2006 9:20 PM

    Subject: [Vision2020] Jury awards $11.3M over defamatory Internet posts.

    Should Someone Sue Dale Courtney For Libel?

    I wrote a short essay motivated by this thread. I think some of you will find it of interest:

    http://poohsthink.com/?p=869

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  =======================================================
   List services made available by First Step Internet, 
   serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.   
                 http://www.fsr.net                       
            mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
  =======================================================
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20061012/98b7f473/attachment-0001.htm 