setansi...k-no

[yik-wah-tik]

whats up k-no!!!!!!!!! hey man, call me dude!

setansi, nice work man! hey but tell me about the global gathering. what was the choy lee fut like? who did you meet? did they call out my name? the reason why i ask was that they sent me a letter stating i was being made an honorary president and i was supposed to receive a certificate. did you see dave lavey there?

k-no, when is your sifu coming back? remind him for me, he was supposed to bring my certificate back with him and give it to me peronally? when we have lunch, come and meet with us!

setansi, did you happen to see sifu carey wong. he is my hero man. i have him performing some buk sing set when they were in
singapore and he did a tight ass set. oh man, you know who is still an asswhooper in his old age is poon sing. he is devestating. on this tape he performs ping kuen. i have mak fai, tat wong with daniel tamazaki, lee siu hung, chiu siu kai, and a few other from the singapore all on tape. with dave lavey and some of this students performing some incredible offensive techinques.

setansi, did you get anything on video tape?
email me at sifufrank@hotmail.com
shoot me a number and i can call.

frank

[k-no]

Hey Frank,

I'll try to hit you up soon...I'm leaving for a Buddhist retreat today and I won't be back till Tuesday. Maybe I'll call you on the way. Sifu Dave has your certificate. We'll make sure you get it one way or another. It's too bad you couldn't make it. Hell, it's too bad I couldn't make it!

k

[SETANSI]

ON THE LAST DAY OF CELEBRATIONS IN KL ME AND SIFU WERE SITE SEEING WITH SIFU'S INLAWS SO WE DID NOT ATTEND THE LAST BANQUET. BUT YOUR PLAQ WAS GIVEN TO SI MO NAN MARCIA ( SOCAL ) AND SHE GAVE IT TO SIFU PAUL ROBERTS (JAPAN) A VERY NICE GUY HE HAD MAD RESPECT FOR SIFU. SIFU PAUL IS FROM CANADA AND WE MAY TRY TO HOOK UP FOR SOME SNOW BOARDING IN WHISTLER. ANY WAY SIFU PAUL GAVE IT TO MY SIHINGS AND THEY GAVE IT TO ME AND I GAVE IT TO SIFU. HE STILL HAS IT UNLESS YOU PICKED IT UP ALREADY.
I GOT TO MEET SIGUNG IN HK FOR THE FIRST TIME, WHAT AN HONOR. ALSO I SHARED A CAB IN GOUNGZHOU WITH LUN TZE I WAS SO NERVOUS I DID NOT SAY ONE WORD THE ENTIRE RIDE. WENT TO THE GRAND OPENING OF THE BUK SING GWOON IN SIU BUK AND ALSO VISITED TARM SARM'S GRAVE SITE.
SEEMS THERE ARE SOME ON THIS FORUM WHO FIND MY POSTS OFFENSIVE:D BUT WHEN I WRITE THEM I AM USUALLY TRYNG TO OFFEND CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS. IT'S NICE TO KNOW THAT THEY READ THEM , EVEN THOUGH I AM TOLD I AM ON THEIR IGNORE LIST:p

[SETANSI]

I'VE BEEN TOLD JO JO HAD SOME THINGS TO SAY ABOUT SIFU'S DEMO IN KL. HE POSTED SO MUCH(TOO MUCH TO READ I JUST HECKLE HIM OUT OF HABIT) IFIND IT HARD TO BELIVE HE WAS IN MALASIA (AND WENT STRAIT TO THE KEY BOARD TO POST ON THIS FORUM EVERY DAY) I KNOW WHILE I WAS OVER SEAS I HAD NOT THE DESIRE OR THE TIME TO VISIT THESE PAGES.
HE (JO JO) SHOULD HAVE WENT TO THE BUCK SING MEET IN GOUNGZHOU SIFU DID A DEMO THERE THAT HAD THE CROWD ON THEIR FEET YELLING FOR MORE. AT THE YOUNG AGE OF 32 I WOULD NOT WANT TO FIGHT HIM AND SIFU IS TWICE MY AGE. SIFU WAS GREAT ,FAST ,POWERFUL GUESS I CANT BLAME JO JO FOR HIDING OUT IN KL. BUT I ASURE YOU SIFU WOULD NOT HAVE HARMED HIM (SIFU HAS HIS HANDSFULL KEEPING HIS STUDENTS FROM DOING THAT). HOWEVER SIFU HAS HAD SOME HEALTH PROBLEMS OF LATE (ARTHERITES AND SUCH) I THINK I TOOK A BIT OUT OF HIM AND BY THE TIME WE GOT TO KL SIFU WAS NOT PLANING ON DOING A DEMO JUST WANTED TO PRESENT A BANNER BUT WHEN THE ANOUNCER CALLED HIM UP AND SAID HE WAS DOING JIT FU OR PING KUEN OR SOMTHEING SIFU ABLIGED AND MADE UP SOME STUFF.
HMM MITE GO AND TRAIN TO NIGHT JO JO AND FOOL POW GIVE ME SUCH INSPERATION (TOO HIT A FOCUS PAD ANY WAY)

SO PEICE OUT LOOKING FORWARD TO READING YOUR POSTS

[Fu-Pow]

SEEMS THERE ARE SOME ON THIS FORUM WHO FIND MY POSTS OFFENSIVE BUT WHEN I WRITE THEM I AM USUALLY TRYNG TO OFFEND CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS. IT'S NICE TO KNOW THAT THEY READ THEM , EVEN THOUGH I AM TOLD I AM ON THEIR IGNORE LIST

The policy has changed. Its nice to know you think so highly of us that you purposefully try to offend us.

[extrajoseph]

Next time you write, please try pressing the “caps lock” button first. It strains my eyes trying to read your capitals.

After doing Kung Fu for as long as I have, you will realize physical force is not the most effective weapon. At 64, your Sifu needs to slow down a bit and learn to be more Zen about life. He can’t keep on talking about fighting with his increasing age and disabilities. He would liook ridiculous.

I couldn’t work out what set he was doing on stage either ,but it was definitely CLF so he is one of us, pity he is so rigid in his mind set and so offensive, just like you! Why is your Sifu doing what he is doing? Just to get even with the Chan Family because he is so proud of his Futsan Hung Sing heritage?

No matter what he thinks of Chan Heung and his family, there are many CLF practitioners out there like myself who can trace their lineage back to him, and no matter how you look at it, Chan Heung was Jeurng Yim’s teacher at one stage and he and his family deserve some respects from your Sifu.

If your Sifu don’t have any respect for the Chan Family, then at least you should have enough mental flexibility not to push his barrow for me without thinking.

I am honoured to make an appearance on your focus pad, hope you know what you are looking at. It might just hit you back when you are least expecting, the guy holding it could be me or one of my students!

Yours always,

Jo-seph :D

[extrajoseph]

ALSO I SHARED A CAB IN GOUNGZHOU WITH LUN TZE I WAS SO NERVOUS I DID NOT SAY ONE WORD THE ENTIRE RIDE.


Hi Setansi,

Do you think he can still get up and do a few fancy moves?

Yours always,

Jo seph :D

[SETANSI]

"Do you think he can still get up and do a few fancy moves?"-JOJO

At 93 years his charp choi is still fast as ever. In Ho Ping provence I was honered to be one of the people to help him down the hill from Tarm Sarms' grave. Using a chair strapped to a hastily constucted bamboo frame we desended the dirt path back to the road. Upon puting him down I was about to oferer him a hand to help him up, but before i could put my hand out he just about leaped from his seat and stepped over the bamboo poles about a half meter from the ground. I am sure he could have made the trip down with out our help. He seems to enjoy his independence and does not like to be treated as an invalid. He walks with a straight back and with long fast strides. I hope to be doing as well if I make it to 60, hard to do here in Cali dodging bullets and all.

ps- I tuned off my caps and being Friday I am in too good of a mood to be offensive(yet). but it is still early and reading your pending responce may change my attitude :D

pps did not train last night as I was a bit lazy and chose to stay home and cook sinagong instead. looking foward to seeing you there tonight though.;)

[extrajoseph]

Originally posted by SETANSI
"Do you think he can still get up and do a few fancy moves?"-JOJO

At 93 years his charp choi is still fast as ever. In Ho Ping provence I was honered to be one of the people to help him down the hill from Tarm Sarms' grave. Using a chair strapped to a hastily constucted bamboo frame we desended the dirt path back to the road. Upon puting him down I was about to oferer him a hand to help him up, but before i could put my hand out he just about leaped from his seat and stepped over the bamboo poles about a half meter from the ground. I am sure he could have made the trip down with out our help. He seems to enjoy his independence and does not like to be treated as an invalid. He walks with a straight back and with long fast strides. I hope to be doing as well if I make it to 60, hard to do here in Cali dodging bullets and all.

ps

Hi Setansi,

You have answered my question too well and helped demolish your Sifu''s argument that Choy Fook could not have taught Chan Heung in his 90s. Please read my previous posting:

A case for an active vegetarian old man

¡§Fourth generation grandmaster Lun Chee is the most revered elder in Choy Lay Fut martial arts today and even at 92 years old his vivid memory has enabled him to recall events that happened as far back as his childhood days when he first started his martial arts training at age 14 (1924) under his master Tarm Sarm.¡¨

¡§Being a devout Shaolin Buddhist monk meant that Choy Fook had to be a vegetarian (no meat). At age 96, how could he possibly have the strength, energy, stamina, patience and the inclination to practice martial arts let alone teach (forms, weapons, wooden dummy, fighting skills, chi kung etc.)?!¡¨

These are Sifu Dave Lacey¡¦s words on his webpage. http://www.pantherfist.com/NEWCONTROVERSY3.html

He dismissed the validity of the Chen Family history by focusing on Choy Fook¡¦s age as an exaggeration, yet he is quite happy to praise his own Sigung being alive and active with sound mind at the age of 92 - 4 years difference! He has no appreciation that the Chinese of olden days tended to exaggerate their age and none of them have a birth certificate! If Choy Fook tells Chan Heung he is 96, he is not going to dispute him.

Also Sifu Dave has no appreciation of the different societies and environment they lived in. Choy Fook was a monk living outside of normal society and he meditated and practiced Kung Fu and Qigong all his life with no family, no children, no worldly worries and no sex, of course he will live a longer life and be more active than we would imagine. If Lun Chee lived to 92 and still going strong in hectic places like Hong Kong and Canada, there was a good chance that Choy Fook can lived even longer in the clean and fresh environment of Law Fo Shan Mountain.

Being a vegetarian was a bonus and not some kind of excuse for weak strength and early death made out by Sifu Dave. Obvious, he has not met any healthy vegetarians before and he is a meat eater himself, no wonder he dose not looked so healthy the last time I met him.

JosephX

[bean curd]

joe sephs says = " He dismissed the validity of the Chen Family history by focusing on Choy Fook¡¦s age as an exaggeration, "

come now joe seph one statement does not a story make. it is way more than this that is in question and you know this. come face to face show your proofs with your sibuk etc and it will all come to an end.

you asked for a debate, then ran away as fast as you could, the only time you want to debate is when you want to ask the questions - lol - very sum yau faht of you !!

why so elusive, but then you don't speak for the chan family do you ?? as you have said before or will you change this like you have changed so many other things - so what weight do you carry - none, if you do speak for the chan family all well and good, then the meeting can take place.

if you reply, i am a clf player and have an interest in our history, then i agree 100% but the way to do this is for the elders to talk like they have done in that past not to have it talked about like this on a forum, which really serves no purpose - or is this also what you want.

[extrajoseph]

BC: come now joe seph one statement does not a story make. it is way more than this that is in question and you know this. come face to face show your proofs with your sibuk etc and it will all come to an end.

JX: Dave Lacey has made many statement on his website and most of them were not true and that is the story and you know it, so don’t pretend you have no idea of what is going on. You asked for a face to face, yet you have no face yourself, why don’t you tell us your details and let us have a face to face meeting with you?

BC: you asked for a debate, then ran away as fast as you could, the only time you want to debate is when you want to ask the questions - lol - very sum yau faht of you !!

JX: I have already given you my answers if you bother to read my postings. There is no proof that the GGM ever existed and there is no proof that Jeurng Yim created CLF. If there are proofs then let us see them. No one talked about the GGM until the 70s and no one talked about him being the founder until a few years ago. You know the answers yet pretended you don’t, who is being SYF now?

BC: why so elusive, but then you don't speak for the chan family do you ?? as you have said before or will you change this like you have changed so many other things - so what weight do you carry - none, if you do speak for the chan family all well and good, then the meeting can take place.

JX: I have been very forth right with you and patiently playing your game of pretend, so don’t say I am being elusive. Also how many times do I have to tell you I don’t speak for anyone except myself? Do you speak for Hung Sing? Buck Sing? Dave Lacey? Do you think anyone of us carry weights here? Don't be naive!

BC: if you reply, i am a clf player and have an interest in our history, then i agree 100% but the way to do this is for the elders to talk like they have done in that past not to have it talked about like this on a forum, which really serves no purpose - or is this also what you want.

JX: Then why the hell Dave Lacey wrote all that rubbish on his website? Why not just call the Chan family members or elders or who ever and sort them out in private in the first place? Why not do what they have done in the past in the first place? Ever right now, he can just pick up the phone and just call them to resolve these issues. There is no need to have a face to face with me, I am a nobody. Have you had a chance to read his words? Do you think what he said befits a representative of Hung Sing or Buck Sing or the CLF International Union of HK? If he is so strong in his conviction and claim to be courageous, why is he reluctant to reply to my open letter? If you are interested in the future of CLF, then you should hold your tongue and let Dave Lacey speaks for himself. The way you are carrying on serves only to put fuel on fire. Why are you doing this? What is your purpose here?

JosephX

[bean curd]

come now joe seph, i read your reply and it is rubbish it is plain to see all you have is a vendeta against david nothing more nothing less. with the pretence of history as your excuse.

you started the slander and when david replied you cry because you get back what you gave. if you where interested in clf history and getting it fixed, you wouldn't continue this rediculous campaign.

as to a face i can assure you many know who i am , it is you that is the one hidden in the dark, and if you think that people of authority are not given permission to speak on forums like this then you are sadley mistaken. as to who i speak for, at this point i will keep that to myself, you are clearly not worthy to be given such information, you are just a willow in the wind, you bring no cause to such discussions only a saddness due to your continual egotistical attitude - who are you to ask for someone to clarify on things they say?? which elder are you addressing in the incorrect information on david site ?? where is your standing in such matters?? what generation are you ?? show prove of such standing and then things will fall your way.

since when, does one place in public, sensitive materials or cherished family belongings.
these are for meetings face to face, and don't bring up yong fa's postings on his site what he shows is nothing to what is in the transcripts, partial proofs are nothing more than listening to only part of a conversation, you only take away what you have heard not what should be seen.

it is like the time, not so long ago actually, i said the elders do not read such things on english sites etc , and like always you come back and agree then twist it, the real truth is that the elders do know what is going on due the fact senior pupils read them such things, but of coarse in their native language - how strange you disparage david on saying " of coarse the elders don't read such things written in english " when they actually do!! if you are as close as you say you are, then you would have corrected me and told me what actually is happening not agree with me and then use it to suit your own means.

as to reading your posts i can assure you i do, and in most cases all fall short of any coherent content, let alone actual evidence all you do is bring in assumption, which has no weight by anyones standards.

on ching cho, the only reason you say there is no proof is because you opened your mouth very early in this saga and said he did not exist, you where actually abhorent in your assurmations on this matter, and yet you also say you uphold the teachings of the chan family historical records and now they say ching cho did exist, how disappointing for you, obviously you cannot retract such a statement or you will look foolish, you are clearly caught between the camel and the well, and don't know which way to turn.

all this bantering serves no purpose, why do you persist?? it brings no closure to the clf situation, what purpose are you continuing this venture, is your own ego so driven that all common sensabilty is being discarded.


david speaks clearly for the hung sing and buk sing gwoons and this is so, if you have a problem with that then bring it up personally with the appropriate people not continue this childish behaviour which is now becoming an embarassment on how you are handling yourself.

[extrajoseph]

You are playing your double standard game again.

Dave Lacey is allowed to get back at us but we are not allowed to return the serve.

Many know whom you are but I am not going to tell you.

You are not going to tell us whom you are speaking for but you expect everyone here to be speaking for someone else.

Dave Lacey is allowed to air ¡§sensitive material and cherished family belongings¡¨, but no one else should be allowed to do the same.

First you said elders don¡¦t read English then you said their students will tell them what is going on in this forum and Dave Lacey website. So they know what Dave is doing and they are condoning his action, is this what you are saying?

You said Ching Cho existed the same as Chen Family said he existed, except he was the same person as Choy Fook. So the question is: did he exist or did he not as a separate individual? May be that is too difficult a question for you to answer.

Why am I persisting? Because you guys are keep persisting and keep tampering. I try to return Dave Lacey¡¦s serve but I can¡¦t because he will not answer me here nor he wants to do any emailing, so I just keep on telling him what I think of him here since I know his students will keep him informed. It is a kind of one-way conversation with you guys keeps interrupting.

If I am so embarrassing, why are you guys keep attacking me? Just let me embarrass myself to death, you and your friends can just stand aside and watch.

Yours always,

Jo Seph:D

[extrajoseph]

Originally posted by bean curd
david speaks clearly for the hung sing and buk sing gwoons and this is so,

This is a very good example of the exagerated and unqualified statements you made all the time.

What makes you think that Dave speaks "clearly for the Hung Sing and Buck Sing Gwoons"? His views are in stark contrast to many others of the same lineage, take his brother Vince for example. He has no qualification from any organisation to speak of yet you keep saying he speaks for everybody.

I have yet to see any evidence of support for what he is going from any of the elders.

I think Dave just speak for himself, so please stop making these exagerated and unqualified statements.

Yours always,

Jo Seph

[Serpent]

Not that I'm getting involved, but.....

bean curd, you are never any clearer in your postings than Joseph. You never answer a direct question any more than Joseph does.

As for Ching Cho, I believed him to be a fictional character. The Ching Cho that is told in histories like Lacey's still is a fictional character as far as I am concerned. However, I can now see that the character was born from another nickname for Choy Fook, as told in the recently released Chan Family manuscript. I am prepared to take on new evidence when it is presented rather than think I know it all. Therefore, Ching Cho did exist in as much as he was Choy Fook. The great teacher of Chi Cho Wo Seurng (sp?) that Lacey and others speak of is a fictional character confused by history. I think you'll find Joseph may have taken the same historical update on board. You'll have to ask him to be sure.

And as for Dave Lacey speaking clearing for the Hung Sing and Buk Sing Gwoons, you have got to be joking! Lacey never speaks clearly by any stretch of the imagination and he certainly doesn't speak for all of Hung and Buk Sing. As Joseph pointed out, even his own brother doesn't agree with him! As for using the internet, I think Dave Lacey's hypocrisy has already been very well pointed out.

[bean curd]

serpent - you don't need to say anything all you have to do is get joe seph to put your name at the end of his post, why waste your time writting, so there is no need for me to address you anymore, talking to joe seph is talking to you.

[bean curd]

joe seph, i read what you wrote and i have to say it has to be one of the most incoherent replies you have done, actually most of what you write these days has no substance.


you speculate only from the window you look through, you don't really know anything, your history idealogy has changed as has many of your other believes from the start, you jump and changed like a tick jumping from one camel to the other.

you have no idea who david speaks on behalf off, like i have said, the way you carry yourself, you do not deserve such names given to you, i have seen how you treat such information and it is disgusting, if you want the names, again it is so easy, give the name/date/time in HK to meet and all your answers will be forth coming, for one who is so strong in his convictions your actions do not live up to your words.

in this alone your words are empty vessels only filled with your large ego. like everything you say,it is pure speculation, assumption and exaggeration you have no idea in any of these matters and no matter how much you try and persist you will not see things that are not for your eyes, ears or mouth to speak off.

you ask me about ching cho what a laugh you are, you don't even know what you believe in, you jump continually from one thing to another and never actually bring up anything that one cannot find in a book or magazine , well actually you did but only once, and that was the great tiger skin saga, but what you wrote was so incorrect and so out of line with all the chan family records on this matter, you showed your depth of knowledge in historical matters lol.


so as we talk you call it attacking - you speak of your own thoughts joe seph. the embarresment is not on you, but on CLF, how you have continued to carry yourself shows this, even in your reply you thoght of yourself only not of the family - a trait that has become quite apparent.

the fact also you state you are 5th generation clearly dictates who must repond to you in the standing and postion of things, do you even understand what this means ?? if you did then you would not bring your attention to david but actully to the elders of the buk sing gwoon especially and hung sing gwoon also, so even in this one has to question your authentisity of standing.

you wanted a debate i bring up two questions and you come up with a rediculous excuse not to discuss - which in fact is what debating is all about. you bring up the issue on the photo of chan heung and bring some assumption on why it did not show itself due to the 1949 situation when i ask you questions on pre 1949, you run away and give no answer.

answer my first two questions - why are you so afraid too.

finaly when will you get over the contrast of history between the two brothers, you regurgitate so much it is laughable, unlike you i will not mention names as it is not my intention to try and bring dispertion nor embarress people but how many chan elders does one have to mention that shows no correlation to the chan historical documents. these not only include third and fourth generation chan players from the chan family but actually first and second, so soon after the event.

the point of all this is to look at the information given and not attack the messenger, you clearly wish to attack the messenger only because you have no conviction to address the documentation on a personal level, which again since you are not the keeper of the documentation your words are mute, although in a childish way amusing