From: Jan Drew on
On Mar 19, 9:36�am, Mark Probert <mark.prob...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mar 18, 9:51�pm, Mike <M...(a)localhost.localdomain> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Mark Probert wrote:
> > >>> Ms. WRONG has a serious reading comprehension problem. This yarn is
> > >>> taken from a Readers Digest article by Arthur Allen, who is certainly
> > >>> diametrically the opposite of Mr. Allen on the issue of vaccines. Mr.
> > >>> Allen quotes:
> > >>> "We have reached out to media outlets to try to get them to not give
> > >>> the views of these people equal weight in their reporting to what
> > >>> science has shown and continues to show about the safety of vaccines."
> > >>>http://www.rd.com/health-slideshows/h1n1-the-report-card/article17474...
> > >>> These is NO call for censorship or anything else Katie WRONG whines
> > >>> about. Madame Secretary is correctly pointing out that the views of
> > >>> the anti-vaxxers arenot supported by sceince or facts. Thus, they
> > >>> should not be given equal weight.
> > >> No Sir, this IS censorship when it comes from the government.
> > >> Saying "they should not be given equal weight" is one thing,
> > >> saying the same thing from a position of a Cabinet Secretary is quite
> > >> different. Reaching out to the media and asking them for preferential
> > >> treatment for yourself and limiting opposing views IS censorship.
> > >> Even if you believe that you are censoring the bad guys (and even if
> > >> they were bad guys) it is censorship.
>
> > >>> I see nothing wrong with that. It is akin to having to give equal
> > >>> weight to flat-earthers, moon-landing hoaxers, Holocausr deniers and
> > >>> 9/11 truthers.
> > >> If a NASA official would ask the media not to give equal weight to
> > >> moon-landing hoaxers it would indicate that NASA has a credibility
> > >> problem.
>
> > > What you are doing is censoring the knowledgeable experts, because you
> > > do not agree with them, simply because they work for the government.
>
> > No, Sir, I am not calling for censorship. You do. The government will
> > never have any difficulty expressing its points. But when it wants to
> > create such hurdles to those with opposing views - this is called
> > censorship.
>
> > By the way, your last sentence can be turned on you: what you are doing
> > is censoring the knowledgeable experts, because you do not agree with
> > them.-
>
> Censorship is the control of what people read, write, see, or hear.
> The key word being CONTROL. Regardless of her position in government,
> she has the absolute right to express herself. Period. End of
> discussion. What you seem to be proposing is that because she is in
> government, she cannot fully express herself.
>
> As for agreeing with experts, you are quite right. I agree with the
> experts who have facts, science and logic. The anti-vac "experts" have
> none of these factors. Like moon landing hoaxers.

Look who remained silent when disbarred.

In the Matter of Mark Probert (Admitted as Mark S. Probert), a
Suspended Attorney, Respondent.
Grievance Committee for the Tenth Judicial District, Petitioner.


92-02731


SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, SECOND DEPARTMENT


183 A.D.2d 282; 590 N.Y.S.2d 747


November 9, 1992, Decided


PRIOR HISTORY: [***1]


Disciplinary proceedings instituted by the Grievance Committee for
the
Tenth Judicial District. Respondent was admitted to the Bar on
February 15, 1978, at a term of the Appellate Division of the Supreme
Court in the Second Judicial Department, under the name Mark S.
Probert.


DISPOSITION: Ordered that the petitioner's motion to impose
discipline
upon the respondent based upon his failure to appear or answer is
granted; and it is further,


HEADNOTES: Attorney and Client - Disciplinary Proceedings


Respondent attorney, who is charged with 22 counts of failing to
cooperate with investigations of alleged misconduct by the Grievance
Committee, and who has failed to answer or appear, is disbarred.


COUNSEL:


Frank A. Finnerty, Jr., Westbury (Muriel L. Gennosa of counsel), for
petitioner.


JUDGES: Mangano, P. J., Thompson, Bracken, Sullivan and Harwood, JJ.,
concur.


Ordered that the petitioner's motion to impose discipline upon the
respondent based upon his failure to appear or answer is granted; and
it is further,


Ordered that pursuant to Judiciary Law 90, effective immediately,
the respondent, Mark Probert, is disbarred and his name is stricken
from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law; and it is further,


Ordered that the respondent shall continue to comply with this
Court's
rules governing the conduct of disbarred, suspended and resigned
attorneys (22 NYCRR 691.10); and it is further,


Ordered that pursuant to Judiciary [***2] Law 90, the respondent,
Mark Probert, is commanded to continue to desist and refrain (1) from
practicing law in any form, either as principal or as agent, clerk or
employee of another, (2) from appearing as an attorney or
counselor-at-law before any court, Judge, Justice, board, commission
or other public authority, (3) from giving to another an opinion as
to
the law or its application or any advice in relation thereto, and (4)
from holding himself out in any way as an attorney and
counselor-at-law.


OPINIONBY: Per Curiam.


OPINION: [*282]


[**747] By decision and order of this Court dated September 29,
1989, the respondent was suspended from the practice of law until the
further order of this Court based upon his failure to cooperate with
the Grievance Committee. By further order of this Court dated June 4,
1992, the Grievance Committee was authorized to institute and
prosecute a disciplinary proceeding [*283] against the respondent
and the Honorable Moses M. Weinstein was appointed as Special
Referee.


[**748] A notice of petition and petition was personally served
upon
the respondent on July 2, 1992. No answer was forthcoming. The
petitioner now moves to hold the [***3] respondent in default. The
motion was personally served upon the respondent on August 14, 1992.
The respondent has failed to submit any papers in response to the
default motion.


The charges involve 22 counts of the respondent's failure to
cooperate
with the Grievance Committee in its investigations into complaints of
professional misconduct.


The charges, if established, would require the imposition of a
disciplinary sanction against the respondent. Since the respondent
has
chosen not to appear or answer in these proceedings, the charges must
be deemed established. The petitioner's motion to hold the respondent
in default and impose discipline is, therefore, granted. Accordingly,
the respondent is disbarred and his name is stricken from the roll of
attorneys and counselors-at-law, effective immediately


Source:


NY UNIFIED COURT SYSTEM, ATTORNEY REGIST. UNIT


Currency Status:


ARCHIVE RECORD


NAME & PROFESSIONAL INFORMATION


Name:


MARK PROBERT


Date Of Birth:


11/XX/1946


Gender:


MALE


Address:


1698 WEBSTER AVE


MERRICK, NY 11566


County:


NASSAU


Phone:


516-968-5572


EMPLOYER INFORMATION


Employer:


MARK S PROBERT ESQ


Organization:


PERSON


LICENSING INFORMATION


Licensing Agency:


NY STATE OFFICE OF COURT ADMINISTRATION


License/Certification Type:


ATTORNEY


License Number:


1253889


Issue Date:


00/00/1978


License Status:


DISBARRED


License State:


NY



From: Jan Drew on
On Mar 20, 10:03�pm, Mark Probert <mark.prob...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> So much for your medical knowledge. No mention of lactose
> intolerance.
>
> �and subsequent

Mark cannot post without insulting. Thus, making himself a lying when
he posted *I read Torah everyday*.

From: Happy Oyster on
On Sun, 21 Mar 2010 00:40:21 -0700 (PDT), Jan Drew <jdrew63929(a)aol.com> wrote:

>On Mar 19, 8:27�am, Bob Officer <boboffic...(a)127.0.0.7> wrote:
> >
>> The best way to protect the majority of the people is for everyone to
>> be vaccinated unless there is a prior indication.
>
>
>
>http://linkme4ever.com/video/?p=10387
>
>Swine flu shot or seasonal shot, its the same thing, both have the
>same chemicals, mercury, diseases. A girl got a flu shot and ended up
>with a disease that crippled her and is unable to walk forward nor is
>she able to talk. Refuse any shots, no matter what they say.


That is bullshit.

Hundreds of Americans die each year because of ball pens.

Ban ball pens!

--
Die volle H�rte: http://www.kindersprechstunde.at
***************************************************************
Die Medienmafia � Die Regividerm-Verschw�rung
http://www.transgallaxys.com/~kanzlerzwo/showtopic.php?threadid=5710
From: Happy Oyster on
On Sat, 20 Mar 2010 22:10:30 -0400, Mike <Mike(a)localhost.localdomain> wrote:

>Happy Oyster wrote:
>> On Thu, 18 Mar 2010 21:42:19 -0400, Mike <Mike(a)localhost.localdomain> wrote:
>>
>>> Bob Officer wrote:
>>>> There is no coupling mechanism between Autism and Vaccines.
>>> There is no coupling mechanism between autism and anything,
>>> for that matter. The mechanisms are not known - yet.
>>
>> That is a damned lie.
>>
>> .
>If you know the mechanism please share it with humanity,
>there may be a Nobel prize waiting for you.

That is a trick to duck out. As I wrote: the trap is the word "yet". The
homeopaths use it to fake medical study results.


..
--
Die volle H�rte: http://www.kindersprechstunde.at
***************************************************************
Die Medienmafia � Die Regividerm-Verschw�rung
http://www.transgallaxys.com/~kanzlerzwo/showtopic.php?threadid=5710
From: Mark Probert-Drew on
On Mar 21, 3:43 am, COUSIN Jan Drew-PROBERT <jdrew63...(a)aol.com>
wrote:
> On Mar 19, 9:36 am, Mark Probert <mark.prob...(a)gmail.com> wrote:


Nothing worth quoting.