Strider Knives, Game Over!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Just to set it straight and bring everyone up to speed so to speak.



He (Michael Eugene Bottoms) has reincarnated himself here:

http://www.mercworxknives.com/

AND then again here: http://www.graymanknives.com/

and NOW it looks legit this time.


BTW, I NEVER doubted his MERX WORX in AFRiCA, ONLY his BOGUS RSAS story after conferring w/ 22nd RSAS Squadron personally.


BTW, Mike Bottoms IS the MYSTERY man in the NOMEX BALACLAVA for MANY years on Striders' website. He has now been redacted/deleted off of the site.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BalaclavaBALACLAVA =


Remember keep FOCUSED .....
 
if all this is going to litigation it could be years before anyone knows anything. certainly wont be anytime soon i wouldnt think. i do think it will eventually all come out if it goes to court though, if its all a bunch of BS i hope he sues someones ass off, if he is full of BS shame shame shame on him.

i checked out lances links to mercworx and grayman i didnt see anything connected with this FWIW, WTF is he talking about?? anyone know??
 
Sharky375,

I appreciate your service. I also respect your integrity, as shown in your post explaining about the Lakis incident; and I appreciate the efforts you are offering, here.

That said, you displayed poor manners toward me, and did so with neither justification, knowledge, nor need. Your post to me was erroneous and disrespectful. I'll thank you to cease with the presumptions about my intentions, judgments, competence, what lane I belong in, etc.

Also, you could've gained your wish simply by asking politely, instead of resorting to conceit, commandments to stay out of it, and ultimatums.

Nonetheless, I'll be glad to stay out of it, and let the pros work... with one proviso: Give me a length of time for how long to stay out of it, before I call him back.

If you have anything further you would like to discuss with me, please feel welcome to call me: (831) 325 6917.

Mike



Yeah that's me. Always making friends and influencing people. Sorry I hurt your feelings. I have a tendency to do that at times. But, the fact is that you getting involved in this does nothing positive towards ending it and you should know better. I wont try to be an expert in nature photography either. But now I know who to ask if I have a question.


Cougar-

Thanks for correcting him but dont sweat it. He knew exactly what he was typing when he typed it. Calling me "Sparky" is his passive aggressive way of putting me in my place I guess. :jerkit: Reminds me of a chihuahua. Thanks anyway.


I'll be at SOCNET practicing breaking things and hurting feelings. :rolleyes:
 

In the POWNET link above......
Does anyone else find the manner in which much of what is contained there is presented... confusing at best ?

........very confusing ? :confused:

OR... is it just me ?

Nothing against POWNET ...... but to me there are quotes from different forums, different years, different people..... some with dates ... some without.... some taken seemingly out of context...... some from who knows who or where ????

And much of it seems to be all jumbled together into a BIG confusing mess... at least to me.

POWNET... can this not be put together into a more consise and organized way ??

IF I am the only one that is having trouble with understanding & sorting through this..... PLEASE disregard.

And accept my apologies for being stupid.
 
Issues involving litigation, POWNET, hidden agendas or whether or not Mr. Dwyer "owes" anyone or anything an explanation aside for a moment, doesn't the question remain as to why no credentialed individual or party from SOCNET or anywhere else will come forward and vouch for the veteran in question? Seems like a simple enough proposition.

(I apologize in advance to Mr. Dwyer if it turns out he is/was, in fact, telling the truth)
 
Issues involving litigation, POWNET, hidden agendas or whether or not Mr. Dwyer "owes" anyone or anything an explanation aside for a moment, doesn't the question remain as to why no credentialed individual or party from SOCNET or anywhere else will come forward and vouch for the veteran in question? Seems like a simple enough proposition.

(I apologize in advance to Mr. Dwyer if it turns out he is/was, in fact, telling the truth)

That is an excellent point & question....... it does seem like it would be fairly simple.

If I told you I was quarterback of the Alabama Crimson Tide back in 1972 -1974..... I'd be SOL, cause nobody would vouch for me. However, if I told you I went to school there from August 1974 - December 1975...... no problem.... anybody could verify it and a large number could vouch to it.

Maybe this is different...... :confused:

This whole thing is somewhat like a large pile of "Turkey Turds" ..... :confused:

I'm going to the beach for a few days myself and go Tuna fishing if the weather is good..... ;)

You all have a good one.......
:thumbup:
 
Yeah that's me. Always making friends and influencing people. Sorry I hurt your feelings. I have a tendency to do that at times. But, the fact is that you getting involved in this does nothing positive towards ending it and you should know better. I wont try to be an expert in nature photography either. But now I know who to ask if I have a question.


Cougar-

Thanks for correcting him but dont sweat it. He knew exactly what he was typing when he typed it. Calling me "Sparky" is his passive aggressive way of putting me in my place I guess. :jerkit: Reminds me of a chihuahua. Thanks anyway.


I'll be at SOCNET practicing breaking things and hurting feelings. :rolleyes:

Sharky, the Sparky thing was just me making a mistake and not taking good note of your name, nothing more. I know you have been attacked in this thread, sometimes by people with hair triggers, but my saying 'sparky' was simply a mistake on my part. I apologize for my mistake.

I am officially out of this topic.

Signed,

The Aggressive Chihuahua
 
A successful lawsuit would require three steps:

1) If the DD241 posted at pownetwork.org is not his he can prove that in five minutes.

2) He would have to show by a preponderance of evidence that the defendant released the wrong DD214 maliciously or negligently. Whoever he chooses to sue (the Pentagon? Someone at pownetwork.org?) he would have to show malice or negligence. That might be difficult or easy....

3) He would have to show damages. He can say the allegations hurt his business and cost him money, but the first question the judge is going to ask him will be, "Why didn't you take five minutes to prove the allegations false and mitigate the damage done as soon as you became aware of the allegations?"

The law requires an injured party to take reasonable steps to mitigate the damages. If you throw a rock and break my window I can sue you for the cost of repairing the window, but if for some reason I refuse to even put some cardboard over the broken window or move my piano away from the rain blowing in and while the case is awaiting trial my piano gets ruined -- that's my problem. I can't sue you for ruining my piano because it was my negligence that ruined the piano; I didn't take reasonable steps to mitigate the damage you caused.

Standard Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice. I am a dork with an internet connection and this is dork advice.
 
He is ALSO a PUBLIC FIGURE and the CRITERIA/STANDARD is different and harder to PROVE MALICE for a PUBLIC FIGURE than a Private person.


MALICE IS NOT provable if it's TRUE...
 
Last Confederate writes:


"Suing would mean having to officially ANSWER questions as well as asking them...."

Yes, EXACTLY ...
 
Suing would mean having to officially ANSWER questions as well as asking them....

After the Mick Strider thread there were mutterings about how legal action was in the works... So far nothing there. :rolleyes: I suspect this will happen in this case as well. Talk of legal action provides a convenient excuse for not answering questions.
 
From BADLANDS forum UNREDACTED:

Originally Posted by Michelle
The dude who is always on his period has gone mysteriously silent today.....(that's ME BTW, LANCE HARRIS FTR.)


Now that the word "litigation" has been uttered and confirmed.....

.......Spark is back peddling and saying "Woes me... I never wanted this drama on my forum.... I am SO UNHAPPY that this latest round of drama has turned up here...."

Laughing. Out. Loud.

Hmmmmm. So, all those mods who asked Spark to PLEASE lock that thread days ago, that he wouldn't listen to..... was due to him being unhappy about the latest drama being on his forum.....

And the people that disagreed with him, some to the point of getting de-modded.... yeah, that was also because he felt victimized by being a "conduit" for the lastest chapter......

....And the fact he refused to put the thread where it belonged because by doing so, the anonymous public would not be able to read it.... YEP... that is a direct result of his "chagrin" for having his forum "used" to air the laundry.

Poor Spark. Such an uncomfortable situation he and his forum has been put in.

Thanks for trying to insult our intelligence on top of everything else Spark!

Idiot.
 
Short version? What a tall order. First we get a guy trying to tell everyone to shut up which is akin to attempting to halt a train wreck immediately while its barreling down the tracks at break neck speed, :D then we get some name mix ups and now this very tall request to summarize it all? Wow!

Apparently Duane is claiming he is not the Poland individual listed on POWnetwork.org contrary to all the documents found that state otherwise. He has said this to the Marine that contacted him from SOCNET forums.

His statement does not explain how the public information search for readily available information matches for all past residence addresses on up to the current one, or how his wives, both past and present trace to both names, Poland or Dwyer, or how the x and present wives last names change with his going back and forth from Dwyer to Poland in places, or how phone numbers past and I believe present (but would have to look), trace to both names and this is just what was found in public information not something private. You can find most of this without much work or typing. This is what I found that all indicated to me they are indeed one and th same person. This information is easily found by anyone that can use a search engine and should have been in the hands of anyone calling him in my opinion.

And although I have not seen his SS# myself even though that is very possible if I wanted to pay for it to be found by a place like http://secret-info.com/ it has been confirmed by at least two others that have looked and that are credible as well as a third that is not as credible that did apparently pay for the retrieval and the social security numbers match up for both names, Duane Poland and/or Duane Dwyer and all other derivitive alias names listed.

What is interesting is that the wives for either name whether it be Poland or Dwyer or even for "Thomas" as the last name in at least one instance for leave blank ( wife) have SS numbers that apparently follow either name used and match in all the other areas mentioned also which once again includes residence addresses past and previous, and phone numbers past and previous. This is obvious since the woman in Duane's life show up in any search done on Duane. Its been confirmed that the FOIA records posted on the POWnetwork.org website were retrieved by using the service number AKA social security number and they confirm all this also.

So in short if this is a case of stolen ID its a multiple case including all his life, all his wives, all his addresses, and socials for both.

The the short answer is that nothing has been solved or answered and that those asking were as ill prepared as someone that was not a 'pro' based on what I've seen here. Its probably true that the fact that SOCNET got involved just scared him more quickly into silence than someone not 'in the know' would have which was apparent by the other calls made earlier by Duane when he seemed more than willing to talk. So for someone that is not talking now it was readily apparent before yeseterday that he was indeed talking and calling people to discuss it because we all know for a fact he did.

My opinion matters very little here but if Mr. Dwyer is not Duane T. Poland or any of the other listed Alias names it does not explain the fact taht the name Poland is also found in his mother's name or any of the other information above. If he is not that individual I hope he presents as solid a case proving it as has been presented disputing it.

Thats the short story so far to the best of my knowledge.

STR
 
yikes

You guys are getting info about his mother and ex/current wifes? I'd think if that happened to me i'd take it kinda personal. I mean, at what point does Duane cease being a person and becomes some target to ruthelessly tear down?

Didn't some guys even post the address where Mick's kids lived a while back? If so, that's some banged up stuff. Much worse than someone claiming to be a war hero (and my gramps was KIA in WWII if that counts) in my opinion. I'm not trying to distract, just trying to gain perspective.
 
and while anyone may question anything STR has stated, an important point is that it is all anyone has to go off of. Despite all the training and experience claimed, no proof of it has been presented by anyone.

So, claims of 'liar, liar' can be made, but claims of 'here is information proving the truth' have not.
 
yikes

You guys are getting info about his mother and ex/current wifes? I'd think if that happened to me i'd take it kinda personal. I mean, at what point does Duane cease being a person and becomes some target to ruthelessly tear down?

Didn't some guys even post the address where Mick's kids lived a while back? If so, that's some banged up stuff. Much worse than someone claiming to be a war hero (and my gramps was KIA in WWII if that counts) in my opinion. I'm not trying to distract, just trying to gain perspective.

I cannot speak for or accept responsiblity for what anyone else does or will do. I am referring to public information regarding myself and what I was able to find. For example there are people that know me that know my mothers name for example, or my sisters, brothers, etc. My mother owns propery, files taxes, my sisters and brothers, x wife all own property. These are public records folks! Get that clear right now!

Make it clear here ok> At no time have I seen anything that was personal private information or invaded Duane's or anyone elses privacy and although it may be true I've seen names for folks I don't know anything else other than what you could find looking up their phone number! First off all, I don't think that is any of my business to see private information. You can find it all on public records readily available via the internet through any site listed that is a reputable site that tries to find buddies of yours that you served with when active duty or anything else and its legal searches. If anyone says otherwise they are not telling you the truth. Its not rocket science. Trust me, my IQ is normal middle of the road. If I could do it anyone could.

You don't have to see any personal or private information or even know how it was obtained by the search engine used or the investigator used. Keep in mind that these folks work for you and are well versed in this. They do it everyday. I specifically told them if I could not see what was needed to get some answers legally and without invading privacy that I was not interested in doing it. Any private information if it came up was not given to me. Thats bad karma there and I would not do that. People have found me using these search engines should I be angry at them for tracking me down via using this site and talking to one of my family members first?

Lets not make this anything that it isn't.

STR
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top