Mr. Sellner, however, went farther than even I thought he would have dared.  After he tried to have the video pulled from YouTube, he sent me this e-mail: 

from: jack savage < jacksavagecsra@yahoo.com >
to: Phil Elmore
date: Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 10:28 PM
subject: Hikuta Lie Video
mailed-by: philelmore.com
signed-by: yahoo.com 

hide details 10:28 PM (25 minutes ago) 

I responded to your Hikuta Lie video but you had my response deleted and my account blocked from responses to your video channel. It was then I had it removed as it was apparent you not only had no problem stealing others intellectual property but would also do your best to stop any free flow of ideas and comments on the HIKUTA QUESTION. I will allow you to repost “the Hikuta Lie ” ONLY IF you allow ALL RESPONSES to be unedited and undeleted. 

JACK SAVAGE 

That’s right:   

Jack Sellner tried to extort me. 

He tried to grant me permission to repost the original video in exchange for the freedom to say whatever he wanted on the comments page for that video.  This means that, far from representing any sort of infringement or harm to Mr. Sellner’s business, the few seconds of fair-use video we included of Sellner is apparently just fine with him… as long as he can post whatever he likes to insult it and me. This is in contravention of both YouTube’s terms of service and any sort of legality or morality that could come into play. 

And just what was the “free exchange of ideas” I supposedly denied Mr. Sellner in removing his comment and blocking him?  Was it an attempt by him to stand up for the efficacy of Hikuta, or to complain about the supposed copyright infringement? 

No.  It was calling me fat. 

This is the type of comment Jack Sellner wanted free reign to post on my channel.  Well, nobody tells me what to write, frankly, and Jack “Savage” Sellner doesn’t get to “allow” The Martialist to do anything.  Here is the original, unedited martialmentary, “The Hikuta Lie,” for your consideration: 

 

A few years ago, you see, The Martialist had an ongoing debate with the surprisingly persistent devotees of the obscure martial art called “Hikuta.”  Purported to be a system descending from the bodyguards of the ancient Egyptian Pharaohs, Hikuta produced two exponents and at least one would-be journalist who made their presence known to varying degrees on Internet discussion boards in the first decade of the 21^st century.  In arguing with them, I learned over time just how persistent can be those who are mentally and emotionally invested in a shared delusion. 

In 1993, a man named Lee Crull, calling himself “DOK” Lee — D O K stands for Defender of Kings -- published, with Tim Dimoff, a book called Hikuta: The Art of Controlled Violence. Published by the Hanford Press, a division of Suarez Corporation, the book can still be found on occasion in conjunction with the VHS videotape that Lee produced to go with it. 

In the book, DOK Lee alleges, in his brief write-up on the origin of Hikuta, that an art called “Kuta” was developed “by the bodyguards of the pharaohs as the most efficient and effective way to defend their king.”  Passed on from ancient Egypt to other royal bodyguards in Asian countries, the secretive art of Kuta finally made its way to “a very elite group of professional soldiers” in the early 1900s.  Modifying the body movements of Kuta to a continuous system of body motion (which became, in turn, Hikuta), these “elite, commando soldiers became the most superior soldiers in the history of mankind.” 

In fact, in one paragraph on page xiii of the book, DOK Lee uses the word “elite” three times (four if you count “superelite”).  “These elite commandos were hired by a number of governments around the world to solve ‘impossible’ problems,” Lee writes.  “They were so superior they could even purposely get captured by enemy soldiers and be taken into their camps.  Once in the camp, using Hikuta, a handful of these superelite, professional soldiers would destroy the entire camp…  This elite, professional soldier group was kept top secret and eventually disbanded in the late 1940s.” 

Supposedly, one of the last surviving members of this secret, elite, superior, superelite commando group, one “Pappy Joe,” taught DOK Lee the martial art of  Hikuta.  In the book, Lee states that he has studied Hikuta for 43 years.  One presumes that at the time of his death he had spent roughly five decades as a practitioner of this (elite and superior) art. 

As described in the book and video package, Hikuta makes use of the “startle motion” — that speed that comes from reacting quickly and instinctively.  The startle motion is the method through which Hikuta practitioners are said to achieve the total body involvement that Lee believed was important.  That total body involvement is applied to continuous motion (fluidity — a positive and worthwhile concept). 

Students of Hikuta purportedly learn to distribute their weight forward first.  The hand or leg movements come after the body is placed forward first.  The body then supports the techniques and strikes.  This is, of course, the exact opposite of one of primary biomechanical methods of generating power. As students of Hikuta have no body structure to support rooted strikes (a Hikuta hand strike is usually a loose, flailing strike thrown without any sort of body rooting or alignment of the body’s gates), the only hope to develop power with Hikuta would be in a falling step or drop step to make use of body weight.  Obviously, if the body moves first and then the strike comes, this is impossible. 

The foundation of Hikuta is the “Hikuta Hand.”  The thumb is on top of the hand as pictured.  The fingers are deliberately held loosely on the theory that this relaxed hand absorbs the shock of impact in order to better impart force to the target.  The hand is snapped out loosely and very quickly from whatever position it happens to be in, with no telegraphing or chambering or tensing of muscles. 

This much is true:  snapping out a blow without telegraphing, with loose muscles to maximize speed, is a viable and advisable technique.  Using the Hikuta Hand to make the strike, however, is not something I can advocate.  In my opinion only, I can see no way a hand held in this manner would not result in broken fingers, relatively weak punches, and possibly a jammed thumb and/or fingers.  The stated purpose of the Hikuta Hand is to prevent damage to the hand itself, but if this is the desired goal, why would one not make use of the hand’s natural strikes?  Both the palm heel and the edge-of-hand blow are recommended combative tools that minimize the possibility of injury. 

There is also a primary kicking technique in Hikuta.  The basic Hikuta kick is simply a “forward or side-of-foot kick to the shin area.”  The Hikuta practitioner apparently jerks “both or one of [his or her] open hands down towards the striking leg’s thigh area…”  This is supposed to generate both speed and power.  Interestingly, the book seems to contradict itself here.  Bringing the arms up to the chest while executing the Hikuta kick is first described as a “simple exercise” for practice.  But the text then states, “When executing a Hikuta kick, the key element is to bring your hand(s) toward your chest as illustrated.  Remember — the faster your hands touch your chest area, the greater force you will generate in your Hikuta kick.”  Either way it is done, the Hikuta kickers depicted are shown leaning backward as they execute the kicks. 

A few other Hikuta techniques include a double-hand push to the chest, a low-line kick across the front of the attacker’s knees or shins, a simple variation on a common bear-hug defense, and a reinforced elbow strike. 

Hikuta’s complete lack of blocking techniques, coupled with its mechanically awkward and relatively weak punching and kicking methodology, make it the perfect storm of self-destructive recklessness.  This is a system guaranteed to get you injured, a system whose only justification for its inadvisable methods is its contrived, made-up, obviously fake history. 

From the unbelievable, unlikely, and impossible tales of the super-elite Kuta commandos, to the obvious ploy of a long-dead teacher whose existence cannot be verified in the form of Pappy Joe, it is obvious that the history of Hikuta cannot be literally true.  The system was most likely made up by Lee Crull in or before 1993.  It began with him, and no other explanation for Hikuta’s existence is credible or likely. 

DOK Lee was not a man in good health.  His deep voice at times verges on a croak, and it is immediately apparent that he’s either about to pass out or reading awkwardly from cue cards.  He died only a few years after making the 1993 Hikuta video package, and more than once in that video, he appears to be having trouble catching his breath.  The way he leans on tables and other objects around him would seem to indicate he’s using the furniture for support. 

When he Lee Crull died, the system that began with him didn’t end with him.  He has at least two students who have actively propagated Hikuta on the Internet and in some cases in person. 

The first is Al Abidin, who at last count was running his own Hikuta school.  I’ve never interacted much with Al, but he’s always struck me as a reasonably polite, professional individual. To the best of my knowledge he still runs his Hikuta business, which from all outward appearances at least doesn’t embarass Lee Crull’s surviving family members or tarnish whatever one might make of the man’s legacy. 

On his blog a couple of years ago, Abidin did have this to much to say: 

I encourage you to do your homework before jumping on the “everyone is raving about what a joke Hikuta is” bandwagon. 

Originally, it wasn’t ‘everyone’. 

It was a dispute between one of my past students, Jack Savage and Phil Elmore. 

Elmore likes to review martial arts on the internet and decided to get all his friends to join in his campaign to shut down and shut up Jack. 

From there, many others have jumped on the bandwagon without even realizing what started it. 

Elmore had asked Jack for a free video so that he could ‘evaluate’ Hikuta. 

Jack said no. 

Then Elmore asked me for a free video and I said no. 

I must commend Elmore. He did get his point across and many have joined him in trying to discredit something they have no knowledge about. 

I respect your service to our country, and I know many others who have served in Iraq. 

I’m glad the battle is over there instead of here. 

Thank you for your service. 

In regards to Hikuta, do your homework before jumping on the Phil Elmore bandwagon. 

Now, that’s not accurate at all, but this is the perspective supporters of Hikuta have to take in order to be able to look themselves in the mirror every morning.  They can’t admit that what they do is a joke, nor do they like to think about the fact that anyone with any real sense considers it a joke… so they blame me. 

Oh, and for the record, while I did extend to Jack Sellner the opportunity I extend to everyone I criticize (meaning I told him I would give him an objective review if he chose to submit his materials), the idea that I lied awake at night formulating an anti-Hikuta conspiracy because Sellner wouldn’t submit his poorly-made videotapes is pretty ridiculous.  I eventually got my hands on various Hikuta materials for review through other channels, and the reviews I did are fair and objective (as they would have been in any case).  You simply cannot expect me not to ridicule the ridiculous; I don’t play games with the truth. 

This brings us back to Jack Sellner, the person with whom I spent at least a couple of years arguing about the ridiculous, made-up mess that is Hikuta. 

Calling himself Jack “Savage,” Sellner  released his own video material and still has a website, although in the last couple of years, he seemed to have disappeared from the Internet for all intents and purposes.  At least, that’s what I thought… until he resurfaced on YouTube and tried to have the original “The Hikuta Lie” documentary pulled from the site 

We reposted the audio as “The Hikuta Problem” just before he sent the e-mail trying to extort The Martialist by saying he would “allow” us to repost “The Hikuta Lie” if we let him comment however he wished. 

www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z2BuI0LmuHA

It is this type of behavior that, sadly, characterizes those who have something to hide.  Specifically, practitioners of Hikuta don’t want you to know that what they do is absurd, unworkable, and ultimately a waste of time, effort, and money.  But in the continued activities of these students, the made-up, dangerously unsound martial art of Hikuta has achieved a kind of self-legitimacy.   A style that never really existed has become a second-generation fighting system which, if its practitioners continue to certify succeeding instructors, will have come into being from nothing… all because one wheezing old man apparently thought it would be fun to say so. 

Like other styles that attempt to assert a connection with long-dead ancient civilizations to which they cannot possibly be linked even tenuously, Hikuta exists only in the minds of those who share the delusion that they are training in the methods of the Egyptian pharaoh’s bodyguards.  If you have heard of Hikuta, it is very likely that you heard of it through The Martialist… and if so, at least you’ll know better the next time someone tries to recommend it to you.  You’re smarter than that, and everyone, even if they’re not as smart as you, deserves better than a fake self-defense system practiced by well-meaning but deluded dupes.  As for those dupes who are less than well-meaning, who’ll stoop so low as to attempt to blackmail us using legal fictions… well, they’re never going to silence us. 

Ever.

If this is true, it stands to reason that when a technology is not necessarily dangerous or worrisome to you, we should inform you of this. It was my conclusion, in the July 22, 2010, installment of Technocracy, that the fears commonly cited regarding fluoride are baseless. They are unfounded conspiracy theories whose propagation serves no one. I did not say this for any other reason than because it is true. To assess the purpose and place of technology in your life requires reasoned, rational thought. It requires judgment. It requires a dedication to what is true, regardless of wishful thinking and regardless of political affiliation.

Read the full column here at WorldNetDaily, and watch me read excerpts from the hate mail on the original fluoride column on my YouTube channel:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=xbkcFdZYYkU

www.youtube.com/watch?v=eEuCQRDPhmE

www.youtube.com/watch?v=xbkcFdZYYkU

www.youtube.com/watch?v=eEuCQRDPhmE

After reading an article entitled Is flouride part of globalist plot? by freelance author and technical writer Phil Elmore posted on the WorldNetDaily website, I was motivated to correct Mr. Elmore’s misconceptions. In order to do this, I have decided to present evidence concerning the health dangers of fluoride.

The irony is that of all the very important topics I have covered in Technocracy, involving very real threats to your freedom as a citizen of the United States, the subject that has gotten the most attention to date is… fucking fluoride.

During the segment of his show in which his new Best Friend Forever (BFF) Frank Dux answers listeners’ calls and e-mails, Carson oh-so-subtly segued into a discussion of the Internet and discussion about [mixed] martial arts on the Web.  If you ask me, it sounds like (and this is speculation only on my part) that Carson and Dux discussed how best to work the topic into Dux’s segment, because it doesn’t seem to flow naturally from the conversation that comes before it.

(Tangentially, I note with interest that Carson claims he stopped visiting online MMA forums “three years ago.” This is the same man who, in his arrogant e-mail to me, told me, “Go on any MMA forum and ask people who they think is the best interviewer of all time — it’s me, sir.”  This begs the question of just how Mr. Carson would know such a thing, and relate it with such conviction, if it has been years since (in his own words) since he last checked such forums.)

Now, put yourself in Bob’s position. If you wanted to take a shot at me and The Martialist, but you didn’t want people who don’t already know about the site to to visit it out of curiosity, thus giving me free publicity, what would you do?

Carson lobs Dux a softball about Internet discussion, and Dux runs with it, invoking the tag line for this site.  Our motto has been, since The Martialist‘s inception, “For Those Who Fight Unfairly.”  This is an important concept because it acknowledges that there is no such thing as a “fair fight” in self-defense.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=CP7okqpFd0A

Anyone who knows about The Martialist will make this connection. Anyone who has visited us before who heard Dux’s comments knew exactly to whom he was referring (especially given our recent interview with him).  Here’s a transcript of the discussion, which starts about ten seconds short of 23 minutes into Carson’s 21 July 2010 podcast:

Carson: Mmm-hmm.  Mmm-hmm.

Dux: You know?

Carson: Absolutely.  There is, and, uh, it gets worse when, when you go on forums, Internet forums, where everybody’s an Internet Tough Guy and everybody’s an expert.  I stopped, honestly, I stopped going on MMA forums about three years ago. I just, I, I don’t know how anybody can spend their time on an Internet forum.  But people do, unfortunately, you know, people do, and I think it’s, I think it’s to the detriment, but, by the same token, Frank, I mean, who am I to complain. And Carson’s Corner wouldn’t be a good show, or wouldn’t be, we wouldn’t get any listens if it weren’t for the Internet.  I mean, this is an online radio show so obviously we depend on the Internet, we depend on the forums to give us our listenership, but… I, I just think that it, it’s a double edged sword, it’s… you know.

Dux: Well, here, here’s the thing.  If you’re on a forum, here’s a real good tool.

Carson: Mmm-hmm.

Dux: Find out if the guy’s really using his real name or not. If a guy’s using his real name it means he’s not hiding something. Um, you know, I believe in accountability, and accountability… is equivalent to being honorable, you know? And what are you going to learn from somebody who isn’t honorable?

Uh, one of the worst things I see going out there, and I’m not going to mention any names, but there’s a guy out there, promoting, you know, uh, ‘You’re a fool if you don’t… if you fight fair,’ or something like that.  What he’s really saying in the subtext, if you really pay attention, is the ends justify the means philosophy.  And that’s just not the case.  There’s some things that you have to be willing to stand up for and sacrifice yourself for, and there are certain principles, um, you know, that, that we all hold dear in this country and this country was founded upon.  So to, to kind of push that philosophy, for me, is uh, totally, for one thing, totally against martial arts, because martial arts… training is all about self-discipline, respect for self, respect for others, and being a service to others. And you can’t be of service to others when you’re sitting there and operating under a philosophy of the ends justify the means.

Carson: Frank, well said, we’re going to leave it there. Thank you, once again, for answering listener e-mails…

I’m not sure exactly what principles of our Founding Fathers’ vision for America we’re violating here at The Martialist, where we believe strongly in the Bill of Rights (particularly the First and Second Amendments) and in strict construction of the United States Constitution.  Setting aside this, it’s offensive on many levels for Dux to stammer through his high-minded, altruistic vision of what the martial arts are supposed to mean while claiming that WE, of all the sites on the Internet, are “one of the worst things” he “sees going out there.”

What is a fair fight?  It’s a fight with rules — a duel in which both parties agree to obey those rules, mutually.  It’s an exchange in which either party, at least in theory, has an equal chance of winning the engagement.  This is the concept behind mixed martial arts bouts, boxing matches, and any other martial sport.

It is NOT self-defense.

A martial artist who forgets that his martial art is, first and foremost, a means of delivering force to an assailant has forgotten what he’s trying to accomplish. When you defend yourself and, more importantly, when you defend your family, you must NOT accept the assailant’s rules.  You must not play his game.  You must not engage in a sporting duel with him.  You must not, if you can help it, engage in an altercation whose outcome could go either way by equal probability.

No, in self-defense, you seek to stack the deck in your favor, to cheat, to fight as unfairly as possible.  You arm yourself with legal weapons, when possible, in order to be better prepared than is your attacker.  You train yourself to deal with situations with more skill and with a superior mindset than, you hope, your assailant brings to the exchange.  You learn and you practice with the goal of making the fight as unfair as possible — of making it as unequal an exchange as you can possibly contrive.

You hope, when that moment of self-defense comes, that you are much more likely to succeed than he is.  Your goal is different than his; you wish only to protect your family and avoid or escape the altercation.  He wishes to violate you and yours, materially or physically.

Note, also, that while in fighting unfairly you recognize that the attacker has no right to hurt you (and thus you have every right to take every legal, unfair advantage you can as the citizen defender), this is not an “ends justify the means” philosophy.  Over and over again on this site we have stressed legal issues such as parity of force.  We have analyzed cases like the Roderick Scott trial. We have warned you about leftist attempts to legislate into oblivion your right to self-defense.  We have told you countless times never to break the law in self-defense, for you will pay the price for doing so.

What we’ve said so many times is that there is a huge difference between pragmatic, reality-based self-defense and the stylized fantasies of not-so-martial artists who think fighting for your family’s lives (or your own) is some kind of game played according to mutually agreed guidelines.  That is not “the ends justifying the means,” but it most certainly is the recognition that there is no moral equivalence between the attacker and the attacked, between the assailant and the victim, between the rapist and the raped.

Spewing pseudo-spiritual garbage about the martial arts being about “service” or respect for your fellow man may make one feel wise or spiritually enlightened, but it’s nonsense.  It’s precisely the sort of thing that I would expect from someone who talks about “honor” from behind the dubious safety of weasel-words and thinly veiled references to his critics.  The fact that Bob Carson and Frank Dux felt they simply had to fire this little shot across the bow of The Martialist tells me simply that what we do here is worth doing.  If a man is judged in terms of the enemies he makes, I’d say we’re on the right track.

Now, if you don’t “tweet,” I’ll explain.  Twitter is a “microblogging” site where posts are limited to 140 characters or less.  An “@” symbol denotes somebody’s account.  When somebody types @Phil_Elmore, for example, they are writing a message that they specifically want me to see.  So when you see my name appear, that’s Bob writing to me, and when you see his name, “@Bobcarsonmma,” that’s me writing to him.  For clarity I’ve also put all of MY tweets in bold.  Bob’s are in blue.

It all started innocently enough.  I wrote,

@Bobcarsonmma, self-described “universally” lauded MMA radio interviewer, began a recent podcast w/ unfunny anti-Bush bit. How topical! #p2

Last weekend @Bobcarsonmma sent me hate mail, deeply offended that I don’t acknowledge his high opinion of him. http://tinyurl.com/bobcarson

And, seriously, the guy took the time to talk to a bunch of badly matched clips of George W. Bush while telling his audience that he now has a voicemail line where they can leave comments.  Not only did the bit take forever (no, scratch that, it went on so interminably that it took five-ever), but it just wasn’t funny. It was basically an excuse for the commie-lib-progressive Carson to tell the imaginary voice of George W. Bush how Carson stands for everything Bush doesn’t.

Well, that and a time machine will get you heard by people who care, Bob.  I don’t want to alarm you, but Dubya hasn’t been president for a while now.  And don’t go comparing your venomous hatred for Bush to conservatives’ disdain for Bill Clinton.  Clinton still interjects himself into the political debate in this country whenever it suits him.  George W. Bush, as far as I can tell, has been hiding under his bed in Crawford since he skipped merrily from the White House, relieved to be free at last from the dreadful burden of having to “run stuff.”

But I digress, a little.  Bob came back with this little gem:

@Phil_Elmore Stop trolling me and Mr. Dux, sir.

Given that I was responding to HIS nasty message, I thought this was kind of rich.  So I wrote,

@Bobcarsonmma: That’s funny, Bob; I could swear YOU sent ME unsolicited email. “Trolling” isn’t “any opinion with which you disagree.”

Bob also wrote,

@Phil_Elmore I sent you a respectful email in response to your attack agaisnt me on your website. From there, you step up your attack.

To which I responded,

@Bobcarsonmma: You sent me whiny, unsolicited email mischaracterizing my own work and demanding I recognize how great you are. Consequences.

Bob also had the audacity to say,

@Phil_Elmore Bashing ppl is not the same as disagreeing. I’m all for having a discussion, but will ignore ppl that just want to insult.

To this I responded,

@Bobcarsonmma: You don’t bash people, eh Bob? Then why is your Twitter account a litany of rabid insults against “teabaggers” and the Right?

And, seriously, you’ve got to look at this guy’s Twitter account to get the full effect of his opinions.  The fellow who doesn’t believe in “bashing,” the guy who just wants to have a “discussion,” is so ardently left wing that his posts become a high-pitched drone.  When I try to subvocalize his words I hear bees trapped in an aluminum bucket.  Here are some gems, all of them written by Carson at different times, all of them posted on his account:

How many people are going to have to die in order for Dick Cheney to receive a heart transplant? Cheney’s response: So what!

@michellemalkin Dissent doesn’t equal racism. The Tea Party= racism.

Patricia Harris Lacewell Sucks. Who can understand what she says.

Bristol Palin is going to preach abstinence while some other kid holds her baby.

Why is the White House allowing Fox News access when they are blatantly trying to stir racial fear?

Fox News is blatantly trying to start a race war. They should be taken off the air.

@EricBoehlert Good Job on GMA. I don’t know how you managed to sit next to that scumbag.

(Edited on 21 July 2010 t9 add the final tweet; ‘that scumbag’ is Andrew Breitbart.) If you’ve had enough, let me sum it all up for you.  Mind you, I’m paraphrasing:

“Teabag, teabag, teabagger, teabag, Bush, teabag, Fox News, teabag, the Right, teabag, teabag.”

I went on to clarify for poor Bob:

@Bobcarsonmma: Believing you’re a terrible interviewer isn’t an “attack,” incidentally. You leftists are always outraged by dissent. Cope!

Meanwhile, some other fellow chimed in that it was “weak” that I insulted Carson for not knowing what ninjitsu is (while interviewing Frank Dux, who claims to be a ninjitsu exponent).  I at first thought the guy, “@Sherslob,” was complaining about my YouTube video, “The Absurdity of Modern-Day Ninjitsu.”  Then I realized he was referring to Carson, so I corrected myself with…

@Sherslob: Oh, sorry. Just realized you re’d the Bob Carson thing. My point was that Bob isn’t informed. But his new BFF Frank Dux can help!

I mention Dux as Bob’s new best friend because — and I’m not making this up — of all the people in the world Bob could have answering his listener’s calls and e-mails for advice and assistance on the martial arts, the person he’s picked is, drumroll please, Frank Dux.

That’s a little like Michael Savage choosing to add a romantic advice segment to his talkshow featuring Clay Aiken dispensing wisdom to the lovelorn.  It’s that random and ill-conceived, driven purely by the fact that Carson got tremendous listener response to multiple (recent) Dux interviews.

Bob’s hand-wringing wasn’t over.  He wrote,

@Phil_Elmore You went beyond saying I’m a terrible interviewer into childish personal attacks. I responded politely, via private email.

Now, at this point, let me redirect you to Bob’s original, snide, arrogant e-mail, in which he takes me to task for “offending” him in not recognizing his “universally” acknowledged talent.  But we’re not done: Bob wants to have it both ways.  He wants to throw around the vulgar sexual epithet “teabagger” all day long and then claim that, why, he’s not making fun of people.  He’s making fun of a political movement.  We all know that there aren’t any actual human beings involved.  Perhaps in Bob’s eyes, those pesky “teabaggers,” those “violent” and racist right-wingers, aren’t human at all:

@Phil_Elmore There’s a difference between talking about a “political movement” on twitter and attacking a private citizen on a website.

Now, Bob, we both know you’re not merely a “private citizen.”  You just got done telling me how well-known a public figure you’re supposed to be.  Why, you’re not just, in your own words, the greatest MMA interviewer of all time; you’re also the host of your own progressive radio show in New Jersey.  That means when you go shooting your mouth off, people are going to take you to task for it, and you don’t get to hide behind your injured feelings.

Also, Bob, it’s pretty clear you’re a gigantic, throbbing hypocrite.  You can tweet that “Patricia Harris-Lacewell sucks,” call Breitbart a “scumbag,” and proclaim that a news network that isn’t left-leaning enough for you “should be taken off the air,” but if I dare to say you’re a lousy interviewer and a pinko commie-lib I’m making attacks on your poor, innocent, easily bruised little private citizen ego?

Oh, and Bob, that “political movement” you’re putting in air quotes comprises American citizens — what we’d loosely call “people,” almost all of them (really) private citizens.  Last I checked, Twitter was a website.  You can’t attack those private citizens all day long on a website, then send me a snotty email for exercising my right to free speech on my own dime, only to whine and cry about it when you get some grief back.

Let me sum up:

• I think you’re a terrible interviewer.
• I think your voice is annoying.
• I think your politics suck.

Every single one of those statements of opinion is a valid position on issues you raise with your public statements and public actions.  If you’ve got a problem with that, too bad.  Next time maybe you’ll stop to consider whom you’re picking on before you type another haughty hate-mail demanding to know why somebody’s not respecting your authority.

Bob, after seeing this article, did what every progressive does when confronted with dissent: He silenced the opposition, at least from his perspective, by blocking me on Twitter so he wouldn’t have to see my posts. He declared,

@Sherslob Yep! I blocked him. He’s a confirmed troll. He’s been smearing Frank and I on twitter and on his site. We’re prepared for war!

So… “prepared for war,” in this case, means sticking your fingers in your ears while humming loudly and chanting, “I can’t hear you, I can’t hear you, I can’t hear you…?”

But what would I know?  I’m just a “confirmed troll” — and one of those tea party conservatives Bob Carson hates so much.

Specifically, Bob comes from the “let the listener or reader decide” school of “journalism.”  By that I mean he applies a George Noory-like wide-eyed credulity to his interviewers, politely accepting anything and everything his guests have to say without ever really challenging them on it.  He’ll let someone like Frank Dux, Ashida Kim, or their contemporaries ramble on for an hour or more while lobbing softball questions and never actually trying to confront them with the factual errors or logical implausibilities of what those guests are saying — because, after all, we’re supposed to be letting the listener decide who’s right and whose wrong, aren’t we?

from Bob Carson < carsonscorner13@yahoo.com >
to Phil Elmore
date Sat, Jul 17, 2010 at 3:32 AM
subject Some Problems With Your Article.

One of my listeners forwarded me your article about my recent interview with Frank Dux. Although I respect a man’s right to have his opinion, your article was offensive to me.

First of all, to suggest that I threw softballs at Frank Dux is ridiculous. During the interview that you referenced in your article, Grandmaster Soto accused me of asking ” ferocious questions’ towards Mr. Dux. In fact, every person who took place in the interview- Harris, Benson, Kim, Soto, Dux- felt  I was working with Bullshido.

Furthermore, what you failed to note in your article, is that I had Harding and Browning on the show to talk about Dux. You see, sir, when it comes to interviews, I am a journalist. I don’t approach an interview with a bias like you had towards Mr. Dux. I let the audience decide. Judging by the fact that all the interviews I’ve had with Dux have received rave reviews and tens of thousands of downloads, I say I am doing a good job. Go on any MMa forum and ask people who they think is the best interviewer of all time- it’s me, sir. I’m universally recognized as the host who asks the questions no one will ask. Please review some of my work before making derogatory statements.

I did have an opportunity to hear some of your “interview” with Frank Dux. Aside from the audio problems, every “question” you asked towards Frank was an accusation. You asked no down the middle questions, which is what journalists do. Frank had to make numerous corrections and clarifications, which suggests you have a bias towards him.

Thank you for reading my response.   Good luck with what ever you are doing.

Remember, Bob is a guy whose hard-hitting, insightful interviewing technique includes comments like, “I’m not really familiar with what ninjitsu is” when interviewing Frank Dux.  Wow.  And here I thought when I said to Dux, “What’s wrong with your face?” I was asking the questions other people wouldn’t ask.  I guess Bob told me, dammit.

Now, for some perspective on this email: Bob Carson is awesome.  Just ask him; he’ll tell you.  Bob Carson is, in fact, “one of the most talked about MMA hosts on the planet.”  The only person I can find who seems to think this, however, is Bob himself, as that description — including references to his show’s “humor, sharp wit, controversial views and the best interviews on the web” — appears on his own podcast site and nowhere else I can see.  Bob is also the host of “New Jersey’s only FM progressive radio show,” in the course of which “some have compared Bob to Ed Schultz.”  Again, the only person I can find comparing Bob Carson to Ed Schultz is Bob Carson himself… but from this we can take away the fact that Mr. Oh-so-unbiased is, in fact, a pinko commie-lib progressive who probably throws darts at a picture of George Bush every night before bed.

I can’t reconcile the self-promotion in Bob’s description of his shows with actually listening to his interviews.  On air he’s bland, often less than informed (at least insofar as his interviews with Frank Dux, Ashida Kim, et al are concerned), and even has an annoying speaking voice (no asset to a radio host).  He doesn’t make much of an attempt, if any, to redirect or challenge his guests in order to keep them on topic, and he makes no judgments and raises no questions even when people like Dux and Kim say things that are flatly outrageous.  If this is “letting the listener decide,” it is also poor investigative journalism.

I also take issue with Carson’s snide comment about “audio problems.”  If you listen to the introduction to his Carson’s Corner MMA podcasts, you’ll probably find yourself turning down the volume during the garbled, almost inaudibly corrupted clips that he’s sewn together as the intro to the show.  That’s a serious audio problem right there, Bob.

Finally, I’m not sure how a “universally recognized” host like Bob Carson finds the time to care about the “offensive” opinions of someone like me.  While I think it’s likely that “one of my listeners forwarded me your article” translates to, “I found your article while Googling myself,” I just don’t understand why Mr. Carson, who is so incredibly successful and roundly lauded by an intergalactic community of radio listeners, needs to worry that a nobody like myself thinks his interviewing method, well, sucks.

Live and learn, I guess.

from Dan Litwin <dan@peacemakersrock.com>
to Dan Litwin <dan@peacemakersrock.com>
date Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 3:47 PM
subject A Republican Red Herring

Dear WND writers,

My latest article points out the mistaken and hollow promise Republicans have given us for 30 years.

The Reagan-Rush Red Herring
http://www.peacemakersrock.com/PeaceAndPolitics/Dan’sArticles/2010-07-12_Reagan_Rush_Red_Herring.htm

“Tax cuts don’t help people stuck in handcuffs.”

Thanks,

Dan Litwin
www.PeacemakersRock.com

I wrote back the following to Mr. Litwin:

Why am I receiving this mail?  Your article is amateurishly written and your site does not inspire confidence in your ideas.

Much to my irritation, the email I received in immediate response was not from Litwin at all, but from his spam-blocking program! The man has the audacity to spam all of WND’s authors and then screen any replies he receives… to prevent spam.

Mr. Litwin did eventually reply to my email, however, and his response was, as is typical for such novice authors, self-congratulatory:

from dan@peacemakersrock.com
to Phil Elmore
date Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 4:50 PM
subject Re: A Republican Red Herring

My prior article, which you also received, was discussed on Roger Hedgecock’s national radio show. (I have also been published in USA Today, LA Times, and San Diego Union-Tribune, to name a few.) Perhaps this article simply touched a different nerve.

Your email is in my list of WND writers, many of whom have liked my articles in the past. Your email address is publicly available on WND’s site. I’ll remove you from my list if you wish, but it’s odd that you did not complain to me previously.

Something’s wrong with this country. And even Reagan failed to correct it. There’s a reason for that. He aimed at the wrong target. A red herring. He didn’t shrink government. He only cut taxes. Not enough. This is a critical point that we must realize. A man in regulatory handcuffs cannot benefit from a tax cut.

Bye,

Dan

I wrote back only this:

You’re such a successful, talented author that you need to spam all of WND’s columnists for attention, and then take an attitude because I didn’t previously complain about unsolicited self-promotional mass emails from you?

Mr. Litwin, in the future, don’t expect your spam to be received with open arms by people who neither know you nor have any reason to care about what you think, feel, write, or do.

Oh, and he did finally remove me from his mailing list.

From: Dave Oslin
To: Phil Elmore
Date: Sat, Jun 19, 2010 at 9:48 AM
Subject: Re: homeless people

…I believe you could possibly contribute toward raising awareness when it comes to the issue of homelessness in America.

I have to admit that I knew nothing about your background in martialism until after I went to your web site and did a little research. As one who has used advertising, public relations, marketing and communication methods of all kinds for most of my professional life, I have to admit that I still don’t know anything about the “real” Phil Elmore. The content was interesting, plausible and believable, and you may be all those things you allude to.

But whether you or are not makes no difference, the only point I wish to make is that homeless people are just that … people, and my initial negative reaction to your column in WND was that I thought you broad brushed the issue, lumping all together as derelicts and bums and dangerous criminal types, which, of course, some are. And those deserve to be dealt with as such.

However, not all. Some need genuine help and that from other people, not the government, or some government funded nonprofit that uses them to inflate its own budget to build empires and power bases and … Those are the real criminals.

Some years ago, mostly as a result of my own mistakes and follies, I found myself destitute and homeless. And while I never lived on the street, I did spend some nights in my car, crashed on friends’ couches, and floors and wandered kind of aimlessly for a few weeks before the helping hand was extended. I’ll not bore you with all the details and fuzzy recollections, but I will say that but for the Grace of God, a few good friends and a caring community of fellow Bible believing followers of Jesus, I don’t know what would have happened to me.

Things are better now, and for the last several years I have extended a helping hand to some. And I’ve been burned. But I’ve also seen changed lives and some dramatic turnarounds.

I don’t do “missionary work” on a full time basis, only “as I go”. I do my best to provide for me and my family and in these perilous times, struggle like everyone else. But I persevere and press on … regardless.

Once a week I attend a “feeding” in a downtown Orlando park with a good friend, and we distribute iced tea in the hot weather, hot chocolate in the cold weather, and chocolate, as well as some other necessities, socks, underwear, bug spray, batteries, hygiene kits and the like. We circulate amongst the 1-200 people (mostly men) who come to be fed by another group, talk, listen and just hang out for a couple of hours. And we encourage them as best we can.

Some of the same people are there almost every week. And almost every week there are some newness. Some are drunk, and for the most part, the others make sure they stay under control. Some are dangerous, but aside from verbal challenges and posturing, I’ve not seen any physical violence.

Most know about all the “programs” and agencies and places they can go to get food, medical help and other needs met, but most are not quite ready to give up their “independence” to enter a “program: where they would be required to change or detox.

All that my buddy and I do every week is to show up and let the folks know that we care. And almost every week, one of the people there, male or female, will say to one or both of us, “thanks.”

Occasionally I will see one of them somewhere else, and on more than one occasion have learned that they did “come out” of homelessness and have a home, a job, and in some cases, restored relations with family or friends.

I don’t keep a scorecard and can’t say that is a frequent happening. All I know is that it does happen, and when it does, there is always someone or many someone’s who helped to make it happen.

It’s not about protecting my turf or anything else. It’s about giving a little something away … without expectations. God is in control and He will do whatever He purposes. All I do is show up.

And NO Phil, I don’t give money to bums at street corners (many are not homeless – just cons), And I don;t take stupid chances. I was once an MP (a long time ago) and know a little about self defense. But at 66 I’m not about to go pick a fight with anybody. However, if attacked, I still remember a few good moves that served me well in the past.

What my friend and I do is to look people in the eye, show a little repect and simply treat them as we ourselves would like to be treated. And we watch each other’s backs.

A gentle answer deflects anger,
but harsh words make tempers flare.
Proverbs 15:1 (New Living Translation)…

Blessing,

Dave

It is fascinating to me that the most “compassionate” people in the world spend most of their time trying to persuade you just how incredibly awesome they are.

Read around the publisher’s evasive ad copy and it sounds like the book is a lot of posturing by someone who claims to be, in his “About the Author” blurb, a “street soldier of repute.”

When I answered his call, Mr. Frazier identified himself and told me he was a “52 Blocks” instructor. “I got this number from a student of mine,” he claimed, “who said you requested a history lesson.”

“I think your student is pulling both your leg and mine,” I said, “because he’s probably upset about a YouTube video I did about ’52 Blocks.’”  Mr. Frazier demanded to know how I did my research on the topic, and I explained to him that I examined all of the available online sources as cited in my video.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=HMRr_4a937o

Mr. Frazier interrupted me several times when I tried to explain to him precisely why anyone would have given him my number.  Finally, he said angrily, “Do you know what Gambian wrestling is? And if you do, please explain it to me.”

At that point, chuckling to myself, I hit “end” on the call.  Never teach a pig to sing, the saying goes — and never try to argue with a true believer in the urban legend of “52 Blocks.”  Such people are so full of anger, so brimming with racially motivated hatred, that the fact that a single fat white guy somewhere in the Northeast dared to say their martial art is contrived and made-up just drives them absolutely nuts.

This morning, as every morning since I posted the video, I deleted more hateful, racist comments from the YouTube page for the video.  These “52 Blocks” thugs amaze me.  I suppose they shouldn’t.