How was I harrasing you? And what motive would I have had?

 

g

 

In a message dated 8/20/2004 11:50:23 AM Eastern Standard Time, SAndrews@wfla.com writes:

Mr. Watts;

 

  I remember specifically, because you were harassing me.  Consider yourself warned.

 

Steve Andrews

News Channel 8

-----Original Message-----
From: Gww1210@aol.com [mailto:Gww1210@aol.com]
Sent: Friday, August 20, 2004 12:44 PM
To: Andrews, Stephen R.; WFLA News; Read, Kirk; Howard, Peter; Gww12102002@yahoo.com
Cc: Bernard, Peter; Wilson, April K.; Outlaw, Paulette M.; Schaible, Stacie J.; Challenger, Rodney B.; Strang, John R.; Pyle, Morris V.; DBradley@wfla.com; Gww1210@aol.com
Subject: Re: Peter Bernard

Mr. Andrews:

** Cc: Dan Bradley **

 

First off, I do not know Dan Bradley, and I do not recall speaking with him or vice verca, although over the years I cannot recall all the people with whom I've spoken. It seems to me that if I were asked to not call or visit a place or tresspassed I would certainly remember it. Your claim that there was some request for me to not "harrass" you, whatever that may mean, therefore does not seem substantitave or valid. (I've Cc'ed Dan - let's just see if HE verifies your tall tale, OK? I seriously doubt it; Don't play games with me, Mr. Andrews.)

 

However, you speak of harrasment. Now, how many times have I ever spoken with your new reporter, Peter Bernard? Once? And, I was speaking to him for what purpose?

 

As I recall, my purpose in speaking with him was to ascertain if a press release was received and understood to have originated from a large number of people, not a single individual, which would be more news worthy -and more useful to your community.

 

You need help: I do not think anyone in his or her right mind would say that an occasional press release constitutes harassment.

 

Now, onto a more apprope' subject: You drag legal action into the discussion, although that is not needed. Do you threaten legal action with *every* viewer who does not think your television station is fair in its reporting? (If so, you have problems; if not, you are out of line and biased, because you should not fold under such a small pressure as an occasional criticism" How often have I *ever* written to your news agency and criticized -or even "harrased" it? Zero - not counting the email I sent you and shown below, yet you have "snapped."You have deep problems.)

 

I **will** take legal action against you, first off in the publishing of this letter in the free press, in the same way that:

 

http://hometown.aol.com/gww1210/myhomepage/WFLA.html and

 

http://www.oocities.org/Gordon_Watts32313/WFLA.html were published, not to mention a proposed press release with the likes of OpenPress.com or PRWeb.com, accusing you of painting my paper -and me -in false light, a legal tems which is the same as slander or liberl or defamation of character, except that the statement you make about me do not need to be false: false light definition – false light is a claim that publicity invades a person's privacy by a false statement OR representation that places the person in a false light that would be highly offensive to a reasonable person, EVEN IF such statement is not factually false. You are treading on thin ground, Mr. Andrews.

 

I do not intend to sue you in legal court at this time; for now, I will stick to the "court of public opinion," but I reserve that right. (This is the "legal action" I choose at this time.)

 

Now, let me see if I can get this straight: I contact your reporter one (1) time, and disagree with the way he sees it, and offer constructive (and polite) criticism, giving him high praises for apparent contributions and study, and then upon receipt of said "feedback," your news agency, I'm sorry, I mean "you personally" as representing your news agency -flips out and says this constitutes harrasment. (I do not accuse your TV station - I accuse you for flipping out over one single "objectinable" email, criticizing your agency -NOT threatening you news colleagues at at all.)

 

My analysis is no different than what *any other* person would say: I have rarely contacted your news agency, except by occasional emailed press releases and very rare phone calls, probably not more than one every several months, on average, yet you flip out: The bottom line is that you can't handle criticism.

 

While it is your right to ask me to not contact your news agency, it is my right to find out who your superiours are and see if they approve of your knee jerk reaction.

 

I understand that you may run whatever news you choose -even if it is biased and "Eight NOT on your side," -or you may choose to not run any news at all on "taboo" topics, such as the efforts of myself and the other twenty-two (22) signers of the recent press release, criticizing Bush's handling of the Terri's Law situation.

 

Likewise, I may run this news item becasue when you wrote me, there was no expectation of privacy. The Tampa Tribune has already gotten news conerage far and wide in that self-same press release that the 23 of us published, in which we accuse the Tribune of being racially bised and provide case examples.

 

Would you like to be responsible for bringing down the same public eye on WFLA.

 

It is your choice: If you choose to whig out and snap and flip out over one single email critical of your news slants, then that is your choice, but I will be left with no choice but to publish this potentially embarrasing letter to me here, as I have on other occasions.

 

Now, what have you gained by blowing a fuse in response to my polite (but firm) letter below?

 

Tell me that. The true answer is "nothing" constructive or positive has been accomplished by your reaction, but I predict that you will be too "proud" to admit that you overreacted unnecessarily and that this "pride" will prevent you from trying to make amends for your offense, and, as much as I wish to avoid a conflict (and I do wish to seek more peaceful resoultions), I predict that I will be forced to run forcable news coverage on you, in personum, for this "afraid of your shadow" knee jerk reaction.

 

However when and if I am forced to expose your bullying ways, I will do so with a clean conscience, becasue I would not like to see you think you can push around other neighbors whose only crime in your sight is that they are "smaller and weaker."

 

How many other people will you attempt to push around? And what will you hope to accomplishs? Maybe I should calm down and thank God that I am not given to a violent temper.

 

However, will the next person be so controlled as to only react in "legal" means such as I have promised? I hope, but that is not a guarentee.
 
I will keep my promise, God willing, and post far and wide your reaction to me and let the chips fall where they may.

 

PS: Regarding "contact" with your news agency, I gather the "Eight is NOT on my side," but I will comply with and request made by *your boss* regarding whether or not I should continue updating you on my various legal court cases and other potentially newsworthy actions via press releases.

 

So, Steve, have your boss, whomever that may be, contact today me regarding what he or she wishes I do with regard to my obligations to keep you updated via press releases, and, if I can ascertain he or she is authorized to speak as your boss, then he or she can choose to ask me to not keep your station on my press release Cc list -or to do the opposite, if he or she so chooses. (Careful, Mr. Andrews: Pride is not a good attribute in the long haul.)

 

Gordon W. Watts

 

In a message dated 8/20/2004 9:24:10 AM Eastern Standard Time, SAndrews@wfla.com writes:

Mr. Watts;

 

  You were warned some time ago to stop harassing employees of WFLA-TV or you might face legal action.  I am reminding you of that discussion you had with then news director Dan Bradley and am advising you that it would be in your best legal interests to heed that warning.

Sincerely,

 

Steve Andrews

News Channel 8

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Gww1210@aol.com [mailto:Gww1210@aol.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 19, 2004 9:57 PM
To: WFLA News; Read, Kirk; Howard, Peter; Gww1210@aol.com; Gww12102002@yahoo.com
Cc: Bernard, Peter; Wilson, April K.; Outlaw, Paulette M.; Andrews, Stephen R.; Schaible, Stacie J.; Challenger, Rodney B.; Strang, John R.; Pyle, Morris V.
Subject: Peter Bernard

Dear WFLA news dept:

Cc: TBO news dept, Peter Bernard; John Strang; Marvin Pyle, Rod Challenger, April Wilson, etc.

Cc: File at Gww1210@aol.com ; Gww12102002@Yahoo.com

 

I am writing you regarding comments one of your staff made.

 

Myself AND twenty-two (22) other citizens issued a press release recently criticizing Jeb Bush's handling of the Terri Schiavo matter. (We accused him of being too liberal, not too conservative, because loopholes in the law allow a future governor to pull the plug. The "Terri's Law" is not unconstitutional, but the problem WE ALL were having with Bush is the he enforced this law TO THE EXCLUSION of other, more applicable felony laws. The FDLE was called in to see to "Terri's Law," but ignores stronger, less controversial law.)

 

Now, I know that you there at NBC's channel 08 worship Jeb because NBC is "FOX, Junior," but please understand this press release was from MANY people, not just one single nut job.

 

Furthermore, please understand that there has been some serious litigation, as posted on the court's website:

 

http://www.flcourts.org/pubinfo/summaries/briefs/04/04-925/index.html (see the "Watts" motion, appendix, brief, and requisite court order, but do not ASSUME that simply because the brief was dismissed, I must have been wrong to file it; Don't jump to conclusions before comparing OUR brief with those of the out-of-state bozos whose legal standing is FAR LESS than are "we Florida" citizens.)

 

Enter Peter Bernard.

 

Now, a quick check on your site http://www.wfla.com/personalities/bernard.htm has this profile here:

 

"Peter Bernard

Peter Bernard joined News Channel 8 in August of 2002. Prior to coming aboard at WFLA-TV, Bernard worked at WFTS-TV in Tampa, where he was a reporter and fill-in weatherman. Bernard has more than 20 years of experience in television news and has worked in St. Louis, MO, Albany, NY, and Pocatello, ID. In the past, he has split his duties between reporting and weathercasting.

 

Bernard's hobby is flying. You might see him buzzing over Pinellas County, where he lives with his wife and two children. He enjoys traveling, eating out, and our Florida lifestyle.

 

Bernard is currently taking courses to become a meteorologist, with a goal of doing weather again. He enjoys doing stories that make a difference, or cause people to stop and reflect."

 

I am glad to see the ranks of reporters like myself (I'm editor-in-chief of The Register, as shown below in my signature), are also desirous of having scientific training. (Peter has studies meteorology, I hold a degree in Biological and Chemical Sciences from the Florida State University, I graduated with this double major with honors: Lifelong member of Golden Key National Honor Society. I was valedictorian at what was then called "United Electronics Institute" and on 3924 Coconut Palm Drive in Tampa's Sable Park.)

 

PS: If you go to http://gordonwatts.com/, you can see some of my research, but that is "another story."

 

However, this is where the critical analysis by a trained scientist ends.

 

The other day, I called WFLA to inform you of the fact that the press release, which was issued, was NOT an online petition, because it was signed with FULL contact information by most of the participants, and SOME contact info by all of us, to verify that the names weren't forged, sigh.

 

Now, when I broached the subject of news coverage on these two issues:

 

(1- The joint press release: OFFICIAL: http://www.prweb.com/releases/2004/8/prweb146899.php ON-SITE and UNABRIGED: http://hometown.aol.com/Gww1210/myhomepage/TerrisLawPressRelease.html with mirror at: http://www.oocities.org/Gordon_Watts32313/TerrisLawPressRelease.html

 

and

 

2. The pending court actions),

 

Peter said that #1, WFLA would not give play-by-play coverage of every little nuance in this case, and that #2, WFLA had covered this in detail in the past.

 

First, point two: False. Covered? Yes. In detail? No: The actions of myself and the other 22 citizens have most certainly not seen the light of day.

 

Now, on to point one:

 

He told me that only "major" developments were newsworthy, and I think that was his exact term.

 

OK?

 

So, I know it is your right, as a private business to snub the "little guy," and NOT illegal. (Unless you want to use as legal precedent the set by the UN in prosecution of that editor in the Nuremberg trials, whose actions were seen to endanger Jewish citizens in World War 2: "Defendant Julius Streicher, Editor-in-Chief of the venomous antisemitic paper, Der Stürmer, on the stand during the Nuremberg Trials. Streicher was sentenced to death by hanging." http://fcit.coedu.usf.edu/holocaust/resource/gallery/N1945.htm)

 

Alright, now I'm not looking to press charges in court over this, so you can put your minds at ease, but I DO have good reasons to believe you are guilty, and this is why:

 

From: http://wfla.com/8onyourside/reportaproblem.htm, I find this jewel:

"View some of Stacie Schaible's recent 8 On Your Side Problem Solver reports.
• Renters' Rights
• Hidden Charges On Cell Phone Bills
• Free Make-Up
• Regal Cruises
• Sebring Convertible
• Elderly Woman Almost Loses Home To Loan Agent
• Cashing In Company Stock Of Deceased Spouse
• Identity Theft
• Father Struggles To Get Help For Son Tommy"

 

ANALYSIS:

 

WFLA is in agreement with me in your assertion that "one person" is important, both in the moral sense -and in the "practical" sense (the latter because it is a good story, and the former for those religious among you who believe "Jesus" wasn't joking when He told some people to "go to hell" for refusing denying food and water, in Matthew 25:41-46, which would apply to Theresa Schiavo, because she was denied feeding tubes -marginally legal and court ordered AND food, not court-ordered, not legal according to Fla. Law 825.102(3), as I quote in my briefs, and not "moral" as outlined in the "religious passage -- rest assured: I quoted no bible verses in my court brief, so I am not a "religious nut," OK?)

 

Now, looking at the above, we see WFLA addresses such **minor** problems as cell phone mischarging, featuring a single individual, Michael Tyre (or maybe spelled 'Tire'?)

 

To your credit, you waited until the cosmetic overcharging situation went "class action" for monopoly conspiring before you reported on it. But ... uh... MAKEUP PRICING is more important than:

1) Life and death matter involving

2) felony violations of chapter 825

3) NOT being investigated by local authorities and

4) involving LOTS MORE people who don't want to receive substandard medical treatment in medical situations (think: a young 40-year old Theresa Schiavo gets FIVE TEETH yanked out, denied basic antibiotics and paps smears, and is in a facility where state laws -I cite them in briefs -*require* you to be terminally ill and expected to die within six (6) months - she's been there for 2-3 years...)

5) The phone mischarging incident involved a *single* individual over a *non-life-threatening* and relatively non-newsworthy incident, not being followed by the public as is the Schiavo issue

 

ITEM

 

"Father Struggles To Get Help For Son Tommy
Published: Feb. 25, 2004

TAMPA - The waiting list for placing developmentally disabled adults in Florida is long. Only about 30 get placed each month, based on their level of crisis. Greg Smith's son Tommy, 23, is blind, autistic and epileptic and is awaiting his turn to get good foster care."

ANALYSIS

 

Good - but what about "care" for Theresa? Her parents, Bob and Mary Schindler would take offense at your thoughts that she is less important.

 

Now, some have said "If you're right, then why don't the Schindlers do this?"

 

Answer #1: They HAVE. I asked Schindler family attorney, Pat Anderson, to copy my legal moves, because she has more "gravitas" within the "establishment" and stands a better chance of getting a "fair day" in court.

 

Result: After I filed MY petition for writ of Quo Warranto, Pat followed. (Now, don't "assume" that I don't have legal standing just because I am not a very close blood relative or something. That issue is covered in my briefs, and don't "assume" that the fact I've been squashed is proof I am wrong. Stacy Schaible's actions all the TIME come to the aid of people who are victimized by the system.)

 

Also, you might ask (as many have), why others aren't support me. Did you even read that joint press release? If that is not support, then I don't know what is, but they don't have a news station.

 

Answer #2 as to why the Schindlers aren't doing ALL that I am: They are limited, and it is unfair to expect them to carry the full load.

 

Peter seems like a bright young man, but he is not only wrong, but also very representative of many in the "paparazzi liberal" news media, shying away from "personal responsibility," by only going after "celebrity" glitz, and the "big-name" photo-op and sound-byte, afraid to actually dig deeper and explore the facts.

 

Wrong, you say? No one likes to be told they're wrong, but:

 

1) WFLA contradicts known fact. (Read the law, as I cite in my court briefs, and compare it to the known facts in this case.)

 

2) WFLA contradicts itself. (By reporting on smaller items, while ignoring bigger, more serious ones, WFLA is self-contradictory.)

 

3) WFLA contradicts gut intuition. (OK, I have not had to "get religious" to make my point, so this last item should be seen as "additional," not my main argument to you - I'll translate: I'm putting it as a single authority at the end, not the full argument, to show any potential critics that I am not a "religious nut," OK?)

 

said Authority:

 

Matthew 25 (from the Holy Bible, Authorized King James Version)
⁴¹   Then shall he [Jesus is speaking here] say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:
⁴²   For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink:
⁴³   I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not.
⁴⁴   Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee?
⁴⁵   Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me.
⁴⁶   And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.

 

Source: http://bible.gospelcom.net/cgi-bin/bible?passage=matt+25%3A41-46&version=KJV&showfn=yes&showxref=yes&language=english (or, pull out that old dusty Bible there on the shelf, lol)

I'll translate: If you believe the Bible, you will view this as meaning "Jesus was upset at people picking on his younger brothers and sisters, and told them to 'Go to Hell'!"

 

If you don't believe in the Bible, this passage will make no sense, but about 60-70 years from now, we will both find out who was right here, correct?

 

Forget about this, as I don't detect any religious heartbeat, and I don't want to leave an overload on your senses. You can address this as a private matter between you and your "God," Whomever that might be, at a later date.

 

But, now that I've impressed upon you that all indicators show that Peter was wrong in his handling of the matter, might I trouble you to assign this aspiring young reporter (I'm 38, so he's probably young in comparison to me) to this story?

 

Therefore, we would want to know "what harm would incur were WFLA to simply report on this matter and leave the editorializing to the newspapers?"

 

We await your answer here.

 

Thank you,

 

Gordon Wayne Watts
BS, The Florida State University, Biological and Chemical Sciences
AS, United Electronics Institute
821 Alicia Road
Lakeland, FL 33801-2113http://HomeTown.AOL.com/Gww1210 or http://www.GeoCities.com/Gordon_Watts32313
Home: (863) 688-9880 Work: (863) 686-3411 Voice&FAX: (863) 687-6141
Gww1210@aol.com ; Gww12102002@Yahoo.com
Truth is the strongest, most stable force in the Universe.
TRUTH doesn't bend to the will of tyrants.
Gordon Wayne Watts
Get Truth.

"First, they [Nazis] came for the Jews. I was silent. I was not a Jew. Then they came for the Communists. I was silent. I was not a Communist. Then they came for the trade unionists. I was silent. I was not a trade unionist. Then they came for me. There was no one left to speak for me." (Martin Niemoller, given credit for a quotation in The Harper Religious and Inspirational Quotation Companion, ed. Margaret Pepper (New York: Harper &Row, 1989), 429 -as cited on page 44, note 17, of Religious Cleansing in the American Republic, by Keith A. Fornier, Copyright 1993, by Liberty, Life, and Family Publications.

(Actually, they may not have come for the Jews first, as it's far more likely they came for the prisoners, mentally handicapped, and other so-called "inferiors" first -as historians tell us -so they could get "practiced up;" But, they did come for them -due to the silence of their neighbors -and due, in part, to their own silence. So the general idea is correct: "Speak up now, or forever hold your peace." --gordon)
*
*

 

Gordon Wayne Watts http://gordonwatts.com/
BS, The Florida State University, Biological and Chemical Sciences
AS, United Electronics Institute
821 Alicia Road
Lakeland, FL 33801-2113http://HomeTown.AOL.com/Gww1210 or http://www.GeoCities.com/Gordon_Watts32313
Home: (863) 688-9880 Work: (863) 686-3411 Voice&FAX: (863) 687-6141
Gww1210@aol.com ; Gww12102002@Yahoo.com
Truth is the strongest, most stable force in the Universe.
TRUTH doesn't bend to the will of tyrants.
Gordon Wayne Watts
Get Truth.

"First, they [Nazis] came for the Jews. I was silent. I was not a Jew. Then they came for the Communists. I was silent. I was not a Communist. Then they came for the trade unionists. I was silent. I was not a trade unionist. Then they came for me. There was no one left to speak for me." (Martin Niemoller, given credit for a quotation in The Harper Religious and Inspirational Quotation Companion, ed. Margaret Pepper (New York: Harper &Row, 1989), 429 -as cited on page 44, note 17, of Religious Cleansing in the American Republic, by Keith A. Fornier, Copyright 1993, by Liberty, Life, and Family Publications.

(Actually, they may not have come for the Jews first, as it's far more likely they came for the prisoners, mentally handicapped, and other so-called "inferiors" first -as historians tell us -so they could get "practiced up;" But, they did come for them -due to the silence of their neighbors -and due, in part, to their own silence. So the general idea is correct: "Speak up now, or forever hold your peace." --gordon)
*
*

 

Gordon Wayne Watts http://gordonwatts.com/
BS, The Florida State University, Biological and Chemical Sciences
AS, United Electronics Institute
821 Alicia Road
Lakeland, FL 33801-2113http://HomeTown.AOL.com/Gww1210 or http://www.GeoCities.com/Gordon_Watts32313
Home: (863) 688-9880 Work: (863) 686-3411 Voice&FAX: (863) 687-6141
Gww1210@aol.com ; Gww12102002@Yahoo.com
Truth is the strongest, most stable force in the Universe.
TRUTH doesn't bend to the will of tyrants.
Gordon Wayne Watts
Get Truth.

"First, they [Nazis] came for the Jews. I was silent. I was not a Jew. Then they came for the Communists. I was silent. I was not a Communist. Then they came for the trade unionists. I was silent. I was not a trade unionist. Then they came for me. There was no one left to speak for me." (Martin Niemoller, given credit for a quotation in The Harper Religious and Inspirational Quotation Companion, ed. Margaret Pepper (New York: Harper &Row, 1989), 429 -as cited on page 44, note 17, of Religious Cleansing in the American Republic, by Keith A. Fornier, Copyright 1993, by Liberty, Life, and Family Publications.

(Actually, they may not have come for the Jews first, as it's far more likely they came for the prisoners, mentally handicapped, and other so-called "inferiors" first -as historians tell us -so they could get "practiced up;" But, they did come for them -due to the silence of their neighbors -and due, in part, to their own silence. So the general idea is correct: "Speak up now, or forever hold your peace." --gordon)
*
*