Knowledge vs. Experience, Higher vs. Lower Level, Etc.

[Michael Udel]

Motives

Dear Sifu Anthony,

Thanks for being my spell-checker. That may have been the first time that I typed ad hominem and my fingers were unsure of the sequence.

Sifu Stier's knowledge and experience are, in my opinion, questionable.

I think it is high time you stated your feeling on this. It has been obvious to me that you felt this way since the Zen/Tao thread. True propriety and respect require you to conceal such feelings in public better than you have, but better late than never.

Without substantiation in the form of pictures, videos, publication, or a face-to-face meeting -- how can you be so sure about his experience?

I have formed my opinion from reading his posts, and I have never attempted to partially conceal my opinion about him in my posts to Sifu Stier. I don't believe there is in fact a universally accepted way to determine truth, although in the martial arts world there are attempts.

For example, I read books written by dead guys whom I'll never meet and who never lived during a period of history when they could make pictures or movies. Do I know these authors? Do I know if they know what they're talking about? Not the best example because the time period allowed for movies, but I just read a 1903 sea-faring novel by Jack London called The Sea Wolf. Do I really know if Jack London himself learned everything about sailing a turn-of-the century seal-hunting schooner, or if he just read someone else's accounts? That particular fact I don't know, but I do know that Jack London knows about the theme of that book. The setting of the novel is secondary to the content of the writing and the author's expression of the theme. I have formed the opinion that Sifu Stier knows what he's talking about from reading his posts, which to me are roughly equivalent to a book, in the same way I formed the opinion that Jack London knows what he's talking about.

Sifu Stier has invited you, and everyone who wishes, to a face-to-face meeting. His posts on this forum are a form of publication. As far as the pictures, videos, and books, the two former items are relatively recent inventions. Do you mean to say that prior to the invention of the camera it was not possible to verify kungfu skill? Please allow me to answer, because I'm pretty sure you didn't mean that, but feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

While you in particular, and Shaolin Wahnam in general, provide ample photos and videos, it does not obligate anyone else to do so. I believe that your insistence about the videos over such a long period of time is just a method of harassing Sifu Stier since you should know by now that he doesn't have any videos for you or anyone else, which he has stated repeatedly. Your insistence on the videos is a way to control the rules of the game, often while ignoring the purpose and enjoyment of the game, one of your most common tactics. You recently spoke about the written tactics you use on this forum and invited everyone to spot them. I hit the bullseye, so where's my stuffed animal?

Basically, I'm just questioning his credentials.

Videos, books, and publications having been dealt with above. The credentials Sifu Stier has presented are similar or identical to the martial arts credentials often provided on this forum. He has named his lineage, teacher, and styles, as well as length of experience, and more. You have not factaully disputed any aspect of his credentials, you have just setup a preferred scenario in which you have attempted to obligate him to perform to your satisfaction, primarily by focusing steadfastly and stubbornly on the rules of the game that you continually try and turn to your advantage, all the while missing the content of the discussion, IMHO.

We have challenged his concepts from the beginning. Just look at the Zen and Tao thread.

Yes, I concede this point. I was in error in my original statement about this.

Why did we change tactics after 1.5 years?

I consider this to be an admission of the fact that you and several Shaolin Wahnam Instructors have given each other the green light to simultaneously attack Sifu Stier and break the rules of the forum in multiple ad hominem attacks. An open admission of this fact is made even clearer in your first post on the Unexpected Lessons thread. What you (plural) are doing now is a conscious effort that differs only a little from the previous efforts of ganging upon Sifu Stier.

Personally, I don't think that "humiliate" is the right word. In my opinion, "humble" (as a verb) would be a better word.

Doesn't Sifu Santer get tired of you sticking your hand into his back and operating his mouth for him?

And Kevin made considerable progress in a short amount of time. He apologized for his shortcomings, and improved on them admirably. As far as I'm concerned, the lesson that Kevin learned made all of the posts I've ever written in response to Sifu Stier worthwhile. You cannot put a price on such lessons.

Agreed. I also applaud Kevin for expressing himself in a way that is more appropriate. The point I wish to make is the pattern of: Shaolin Wahnam Instructor criticizing Sifu Stier and then Kevin stepping in to heap on the abuse. After congratulating Kevin for his progress, perhaps suggest to him that he post in a non-Sifu Stier thread, or at a time that it doesn't look so blatantly like he's just jumping in for a cheap shot.

In retrospect, maybe that was a wrong decision. Maybe we should have handled him decisively from the beginning. But then, all those unexpected lessons might have been missed, which would have been a real loss.

I would like to restate something from a previous post: "I am not his [Sifu Stier's] advocate, but I wish to be an advocate for the continued excellence and harmonious operation of this forum." The current situation is a symptom of an underlying problem that exists without Sifu Stier. I take it on face value that you had a virtual meeting and decided to cut Sifu Stier some slack for the reasons you stated. I don't know when this meeting occurred.

I contend the reason you are more tolerant of people like Kin Tama, Tom L., and Alberto (no offense intended to any of the three just mentioned) is that they have relatively less experience than several (probably most, perhaps all) of the Shaolin Wahnam Instructors who post regularly on the forum.

Your contention that Sifu Stier is not knowledgable is a complete farce! Are you instigating a coordinated personal attack on Sifu Stier because of his alleged rude behavior or because he is not knowledgeable? Pick a story and stick to it! Ostensibly it is because so many people have complained about him and you're all fed up with it, and this is at least a partially valid premise for censuring him. I reject the general platitude given that nothing should be taken on faith and so you are just attempting to validate what he says. This is a discussion forum, and generally, validation of words is done with words alone. You have asked for videos and Sifu Stier has suggested face-to-face meetings. Stalemate. BTW, how many experienced martial artists outside Shaolin Wahnam have considered your videos able to validate your written words? Don't misunderstand me, I am not implying something, but simply examining the validity of your continued request for videos and pictures.

So why question his knowledge? Because you (plural) are obviously threatened by his knowledge and experience for reasons that I do not know and don't care to guess at during this post. The fact you question his knowledge is an obvious 'tell' about your real motives.

Best wishes,
Michael

[shaolin_mike]

In response to beusimon pasting the whole interview I would say that you could have put that in another thread and pasted a link here as its a rather large chunk of information. A lot of this information is not related to the current discussion.

To summarise (for those who dont feel like reading the whole thing) this Tai Chi teacher spoke out against Yang style Tai Chi and was then challenged by a Chinese 'master'. The chinese 'master's' student lost and so did he and he made quite a fuss about it. Thats the gist of it anyway.
Now thats established what did you mean by posting it in this thread is this your way of alluding that Sifu Stier will be uncovered as a fake master in the same way?

Also the interview ends with this master speaking about how chi is all nonsense.

But why do so many people Believe in Chi energy?

Maybe they've been reading too many 'Fantastic Four' comic books. Also it gives the promise of an easier way than actually training or striving. The thing is some teachers of the Chinese martial arts deliberately use jargon like `chi energy' in the wrong context to mislead students into thinking that there is some mystical key which one day they will somehow acquire and then they too will become Taoist sages.

Are we to take it that he beat the Chinese 'master' by simply pushing him over with external force since chi is all nonsense? That makes me question what kind of a master the interviewee is in the first place.

Hmm we seem to have gone off at a tangent from the ongoing discussion if the moderators want to move them or start a new thread do as you see fit.

Peace to all
Mike

Edit: Michael Udel beat me to it this was meant to go after beausimons post

[Michael Udel]

fair treatment

Michael,

You have obviously spent much time to compose your post. I will not add more comments here as I have already partially addressed part of your comments elsewhere (regarding why I made the comments I did). I would just ask you to consider whether or not you are making double-standards here --- one "all-forgiving" and one "other". You have seen an aggressor -- but have you seen the aggressor?

Andrew

Dear Sifu Andrew,

I'm disappointed in the brevity of your reply. I believe I understand your statement about double standards, and I will admit bias in favor of Sifu Stier for the reason that I believe Sifu Stier gives a great deal to this forum, much more than the vast majority of its members, and this fact deserves due consideration in the current situation. You can not be grateful for someone sharing their knowledge and then require them to suit your standards in all other and less important and trivial ways. Sifu Stier brings a real-life personality to this forum as well as variety, not to mention the subtstantial material contributions he makes. I believe Shaolin Wahnam Instructors were correct to give him VIP status, although from my perspective, he does not require any special treatment. To me, he is a regular guy. I enjoy his presence on the forum, and I leave it to others to sort out why they do not.

Because of the benefits this forum has given to me, I believe everyone here deserves fair treatment. I do not think Sifu Stier is receiving fair treatment and I wrote extensively on the reasons in my earlier post.

Best wishes,
Michael

[Michael Udel]

already answered

michael,

Don't you agree that the one who states he has the most tools show the real state of grandmastership of self?

I shan't go any further but peace and goodwill to all!

Dear Yeniseri,

I believe I answered your questions in my replies to Sifus Korahais and Barnett.

Why shan't you go any further? No need to tell us what your're not going to do.

Best wishes,
Michael

[Michael Udel]

a good laugh

Interesting idiom, but like them all, it's very open to interpretation

And you wonder why I find this amusing?

Dear Sifu Darryl,

The way you summed it up is indeed quite funny. Thanks for the giggle.

Best wishes,
Michael

[Michael Udel]

Best wishes to all and always

I just wanted to make a few quick replies to Michael Udel's last post.

Best wishes to all,

Kevin

Dear Kevin,

Thanks for the good wishes. I greatly appreciate your change in tone in regards to posting in these recent threads.

Best wishes from me to you,
Michael

[shaolin_mike]

And now for our feature presentation

I think Michael Udel does a good job of showing us another side to the story. We need someone to offer a different view this is essential in life, in this forum, in the media (which is what I study at university). It's bad to have a one sided view of the world however nice that view may be. Basically if we tell everyone with a different view to buggar off then we will be worse off. As many of you said you are learning from this whole situation.

For all those people who read my posts and wonder hmm what side is he on? Is he a Wahnam arse kisser? Is he a Sifu Stier back rubber? All I can say is I agree with Mr Udel when he says

"I am not his [Sifu Stier's] advocate, but I wish to be an advocate for the continued excellence and harmonious operation of this forum."

I really like this forum. I come here a lot (nearly every day) and its my only form of contact with the greater Wahnam community. I also see nothing wrong with respectful diversity of opinion. So really I'm not taking sides on this, rather trying to see both sides. I hope I'm not one of the people you were referring to when you said

It is sad, though, that others here seem incapable of learning at all.

I am capable of and trying to learn, this does not mean we will see things identically tho right?


I think the Instructers have every right to question the authenticity of what Sifu Stier says. Go ahead by all means, do it respectfully. I can kind of get his reluctance so send a video when even a short post by him is met with lots of disagreement. If you smooth things over who knows he might be more willing to send something.

Also while I think solidarity is a good thing, it should be solidarity based on your own understanding of things. Dont just go with the crowd, even if they are good friends. Let it swirl around in your head first. You might get things wrong due to poor understanding but hey then it will just be an honest mistake.
Thats my little speech in favour of pluralism for what its worth.
Much respect to all the Wahnam and non Wahnam members on this board for making it what it is

Peace

[Michael Udel]

What goes out must come back

Dear Michael,

I think you are bias here. I remember my first impression of Sifu Stier's statement that you quoted sound more like a threat and not an invitation to demonstrate his martial ability. Just to be double sure I go through his statement again and it is still more a threat to me. May be you have missed the last sentence that clearly stated that it is NOT going to be a friendly sparring match to compare notes.

Dear Qingqui,

Nice to "meet" you! I have admitted a certain bias in a post to Sifu Andrew just a few minutes ago. This bias may indeed influence how I interpreted Sifu Stier's statements. I understood what he was overtly telling Sifu Santer was that Sifu Stier's current interpretation of Sifu Santer's comments were not friendly. In Tai-Chi Chuan, we generally remain neutral and allow the attacker to dictate the energy and intention of the exchange.

If Sifu Stier were to "Cross Hands" with Sifu Santer, it would be with the expectation that the negative energy Sifu Santer had been expressing to Sifu Stier would be the basis for the exchange, and said negative energy would be redirected back upon Sifu Santer, manifesting physically according to the physical, emotional, and mental attitude of Sifu Santer himself, likely resulting in a small bruise to Sifu Santer's gluteous maximus (buttocks), which is the extent of what Sifu Stier's words meant to me, all within the normal range of kungfu learning, and not an actual challenge to a fight or a threat.

Best wishes,
Michael

[Mark Blohm]

If Sifu Stier were to "Cross Hands" with Sifu Santer, it would be with the expectation that the negative energy Sifu Santer had been expressing to Sifu Stier would be the basis for the exchange, and said negative energy would be redirected back upon Sifu Santer, manifesting physically according to the physical, emotional, and mental attitude of Sifu Santer himself, likely resulting in a small bruise to Sifu Santer's gluteous maximus (buttocks), which is the extent of what Sifu Stier's words meant to me, all within the normal range of kungfu learning, and not an actual challenge to a fight or a threat.

You really lost me there, Michael.

Mark

[Michael Udel]

Sleepy time

You really lost me there, Michael.

Mark

Perhaps I need some sleep. —Michael

[Antonius]

Dear Michael,

Thank you for the detailed explanation. As Shaolin_Mike has said -- it's good to have the other side of the story. Nevertheless, here goes...

True propriety and respect require you to conceal such feelings in public better than you have, but better late than never.

Conceal my feelings? These are opinions, not "feelings." I have always been courteous to Sifu Stier. I have also disagreed with him. I don't see a contradiction in these two statements. It would seem that you do.

Sifu Stier has invited you, and everyone who wishes, to a face-to-face meeting.

Invited? Is that what you call an invitation? A threat of a bloody, unfriendly sparring match? And let's be clear. I accepted this "invitation", but offered a few stipulations. For example, I insisted that the affair be recorded on video, and that the video be made public. I also stipulated that it be a friendly sparring match instead of a bloody affair.

. Do you mean to say that prior to the invention of the camera it was not possible to verify kungfu skill?

Prior to the invention of the Internet, these discussions never happened among people spread out all over the world. Never before in the history of Kung Fu has anonymity been an option.

I believe that your insistence about the videos over such a long period of time is just a method of harassing Sifu Stier since you should know by now that he doesn't have any videos for you or anyone else, which he has stated repeatedly.

Are you sure? This post here makes the question of videos less clear. As I see it, there are two possibilities: 1) That Sifu Stier does not have any videos; 2) that Sifu Stier does not wish to share any videos. Honestly, I'm not sure which is true.

If Sifu Stier doesn't have any videos, then I find that a bit odd. This could be easily remedied by one of his students with a digicam. If Sifu Stier doesn't has some videos but doesn't want to share -- then I think that's a different matter entirely.

Also, forgetting about videos, what about images? In this day and age, I find it difficult to believe that anyone with 30+ years experience in the martial arts has no images. Even if they are print photos, it would take 10 minutes to have them scanned at the local Staples or Office Max and emailed.

So basically, Michael, I don't consider it to be harrassment. I consider it to be a perfectly reasonable request.

I consider this to be an admission of the fact that you and several Shaolin Wahnam Instructors have given each other the green light to simultaneously attack Sifu Stier and break the rules of the forum in multiple ad hominem attacks.

Absolutely not. First of all, I already addressed the issue of ad hominem attacks. We are not breaking the rules. If anything, we have been breaking the rules in Sifu Stier's favor for a long time.

Doesn't Sifu Santer get tired of you sticking your hand into his back and operating his mouth for him?

Wow. Okay. Not even going to dignify this one with a response.

Your contention that Sifu Stier is not knowledgable is a complete farce!

I don't question his knowledge. He's obviously a walking encyclopedia of information. I question his experience of the things that he speaks. For example, when speaks of "sufficient meditation training to insure ample mental and emotional calmness," I question whether he actually has experience of this.

This is a discussion forum, and generally, validation of words is done with words alone.

No, it's not. Maybe on other forums, but not this one. This is a family forum, which means that many of the members have actually met and trained with each other. The common denominator is that all of us are in one way or another connected to Sifu Wong.

Those not connected to Sifu are welcome, but if they are going to be treated as a VIP and and thereby given tacit authority on our forum, then we require validation with more than just words. That is our prerogative as hosts of this forum. If you prefer a forum that relies only on words, there are plenty out there.

BTW, how many experienced martial artists outside Shaolin Wahnam have considered your videos able to validate your written words?

My videos? Plenty.

So why question his knowledge? Because you (plural) are obviously threatened by his knowledge and experience for reasons that I do not know and don't care to guess at during this post. The fact you question his knowledge is an obvious 'tell' about your real motives.

Again, I don't question his knowledge. I question his experience. As to why -- because it is one thing to talk about such things. It is another thing to walk what you talk.

You have asked for videos and Sifu Stier has suggested face-to-face meetings. Stalemate.

No. It is not a stalemate. I asked for videos. He threw out a physical challenge. Then I accepted the challenge. Then Sifu Stier denied making a challenge. That is not a stalemate.

Best,

[Marcus]

Quote by Sifu Michael Udel in Post 39 of this thread:

“Sifu Santer invalidated this logic in a very childish way when he made public the fact that he and other Shaolin Wahnam Instructors had been criticizing Sifu Stier. It is one thing to discuss a person's statements on a relevant topic in a private setting, but it is improper to make this fact public.”

Sifu Udel,

How you confuse the false from the real, and mis-construct my good intension for something “very childish” is really beyond my comprehension.

You also made the mistake of not relating your statement to the background situation. My post you referred to was a direct response to Sifu Stier questioning my credentials as a sifu, calling me a arse-kisser and challenging me to show him something refreshing and original.

The way you wrote implied that we were gossiping behind Sifu Stier’s back. You were grossly mistaken, Sifu Udel. Discussing what other masters as well as so-called masters say is nothing remarkable. We do this often as part of our teaching and training to keep abreast with others’ opinions. As Sifu Stier writes so profusely in our forum (for which we were thankful) it would be a surprise indeed if we did not discuss his concepts and techniques.

But to avoid embarrassing Sifu Stier, we kept the discussion to ourselves. We think this is being courteous, but you find it being childish. Later when it was proper to do so, we announced our stand publicly. We think this is being honest and courageous, but you think this is improper. We certainly have different standards, Sifu Udel.

As my kungfu brother, Anthony, has mentioned, we have found Sifu Stier’s knowledge and experience questionable right at the beginning. Different people have different standards. You may find his concepts and techniques high level, Sifu Udel. But in my opinion they are not. In fact I find Sifu Stier’s concepts shallow and his techniques low level.

“Shallow” and “low-level” were the terms I used initially, and I still stand by them, and have substantiated my opinion with adequate examples. I also have invited Sifu Stier to debate with me to show me wrong to say that his concepts are shallow and his techniques low-level, but until today Sifu Stier has not replied to the debate.

To tone down, I have changed the use of the terms to “different”, which honestly does not express the meaning I want to convey as precisely as “shallow” and “low-level”.

You also accused me of being “Hypocritical with a capital H.” I really wonder whether you understand the meaning of “hypocritical”.

If something is low-level, but you think it is high level because you have not been exposed to or experienced that of a higher level, you are ignorant, or you have different standards, which seems to be the case here.
If something is low-level, and you know it, but you still say that it is high-level, you are being hypocritical.
If something is low-level, and you know it, and say it publicly with substantiation, it is being honest and courageous – two of the qualities we value in Shaolin Wahnam.

My opinion of Sifu Stier’s concepts being shallow and his techniques being low-level, or to put it mildly, "different from ours", is certainly not based on “yielding” alone. There are simply so many instances in his posts that it would be “hypocritical” not to form this opinion. .

I shall briefly give one or two more examples here so that you can know what my kungfu brothers and sisters discussed were not “childish” gossips behind Sifu Stier’s back, but fundamental issues related to our own teaching and training. Please remember that these examples were posted in our forum, and could be mistaken by our students as authoritative. Normally we would express our difference immediately for our students’ benefits. But as Anthony has said, in Sifu Stier’s case we bend the rules. We regard this as being tolerant and courteous.

Now the examples below are released for clarification. We consider this as being honest and courageous.

Soon after the example on “yielding” I mentioned earlier, Sifu Stier said that his

“Initiate Instructor Level Practitioners … have the have the opportunity to learn Sun Style Tai-Chi Chuan, and the Wu Yi-Hsiang Style Tai-Chi Chuan from which it came, after achieving expertise in the Old Large Frame Yang Long Imperial Form Set, the Yang Pa-Hou Small Frame Form Set, and the related Weapon Form Sets for Straight Sword, Sabre or Broadsword, Staff, Spear, and Halberd or Long Handled Broadsword. Most students never get this far.”

As it has been mentioned many times, it is a matter of perspective. Maybe you and certainly many other people may consider this high level. It requires the practitioners to learn a lot of forms -- and often little or nothing else.

This may be a reason why Sifu Stier could not perform the yielding technique shown in my picture series and Anthony’s video in less than three seconds. This may be a reason why he could not tell that the technique shown by Anthony is the same technique shown in my pictures. This may also be a reason why Sifu Stier could not answer Andrew’s questions regarding differences in Tai Chi Chuan philosophy.

To us it is very clear that Sifu Stier’s concept above is low-level, because our own sifu, Sifu Wong, has repeatedly told us that a big mistake made by many kungfu practitioners, including masters, and also a major reason for the degrading of kungfu today, is that they mistake kungfu form as all of kungfu.

You may be interested to know that many instructors in Shaolin Wahnam did not learn classical kungfu forms or sets until much later. Yet, Shaolin Wahnam instructors can pick up almost any classical kungfu sets and usually understand their functions, combat as well as non-combat, better than those who merely perform the forms for years. Moreover, the Shaolin Wahnam instructors can compose their own sets if they want.

This ability is not limited to just Shaolin Wahnam instructors. Even students to Sifu’s intensive courses or the UK Summer Camp have this knowledge and ability. You can see such students composing meaningful kungfu sets in a series of videos of the Special Shaolin Kungfu Course at <http://www.shaolin.org/general/videos.html>.

Here is another example.

Quote by Sifu Stier.

“An energetic web connects all, and that the energy is dynamic, active and alive. In fact, without it present within you, your body would be lifeless! So, what is the nature of Nature? Does this connecting energy function according to known principles or does it just randomly express itself?

The ONLY way to know for certain is to study and observe Nature. And not by only watching an occasional nature program on the television. Let such programs motivate you to hike outdoors, wade and swim in rivers and lakes, go on a wilderness camping trip, buy a telescope and study the sky at night.....anything that will get you outside in all kinds of weather, both day and night, to see and smell Nature, and hear Her words of wisdom!”

It is obvious that Sifu Stier does not know that by Nature the Taoists mean the Original State or God. The Taoists do not mean rivers and lakes, and stars at night. There are many ways to experience Nature, including chi kung, Shaolin Kungfu and Tai Chi Chuan. Indeed many Shaolin Wahnam students have had glimpses of Nature, and some of their experiences are recorded in this forum.

Hence, Sifu Stier’s first paragraph quoted above is based on reading, and he does not have direct experience. If he had, he would not have written what he wrote.

It is predictable that when Sifu Stier reads my honest post here, he would go into a rage again. But hopefully this time it may be different. Hopefully this time he can post something refreshing, such as proving me wrong or agreeing to what I have said.

Kind regards

Marcus


Namo Amitabha Buddha Namo Amitabha Buddha Namo Amitabha Buddha

[Marcus]

Originally posted by Sifu Stier:

it will NOT be a friendly sparring match to compare notes

Originally posted by Sifu Udel:

likely resulting in a small bruise to Sifu Santer's gluteous maximus (buttocks), which is the extent of what Sifu Stier's words meant to me, all within the normal range of kungfu learning, and not an actual challenge to a fight or a threat.

Sifu Udel, that you come to such a conclusion gives me cause for concern. What is the opinion of the other readers of this thread? Imagine Sifu Stiers words were addressed to you, would you interpret them as the kind of action that could result in just a "small bruise" to your buttocks? Really, I'd like know.

Kind regards

Marcus

Namo Amitabha Buddha Namo Amitabha Buddha Namo Amitabha Buddha

[Darryl]

"Paying back a man in his own coin."

Dear Sifu Stier,

Thank you for your kind words. I am happy to hear that you still respect my opinions and actions and yes, I do still offer you the same respect and courtesy. I see no reason to lose that respect, even when we disagree so strongly.

Please do me the honour of accepting that my words are my own and that I have written them for my own reasons. I am not being swayed or enforced by political bias, nor am I motivated to respond out of sympathy or misplaced loyalty.

I was very saddenned when you didn't offer an apology to my school, regardless of whether or not you felt it was warranted. As the days went on, I was dismayed by your continued discourtesy. It was not my intention to insult, but to highlight the absurdity of your response. If I have dissapointed you, then that is an ironic co-incidence.

Sifu Santer is a good man and a good friend. I don't choose my friends by the value others place on them, but by who and how they are. I wasn't surprised when he stepped up to the plate and accepted your previous challenge to "say something of worth". I'm sure he was surprised by the hostility with which he was met, but he is continuing to support his original decision. I am supporting the man, the mission and his message, nothing more.

On to lighter matters, my prior invitation to visit me still stands. We can drink tea, swap stories and tell bad jokes. If you want to cross hands, then we can and if not, then we won't. Either way, I'm sure we would both enjoy your visit and the sharing of opinions and ideas.

[shaolin_mike]

Some comic relief

If Sifu Stier were to "Cross Hands" with Sifu Santer, it would be with the expectation that the negative energy Sifu Santer had been expressing to Sifu Stier would be the basis for the exchange, and said negative energy would be redirected back upon Sifu Santer, manifesting physically according to the physical, emotional, and mental attitude of Sifu Santer himself, likely resulting in a small bruise to Sifu Santer's gluteous maximus (buttocks), which is the extent of what Sifu Stier's words meant to me, all within the normal range of kungfu learning, and not an actual challenge to a fight or a threat.

You've made some good points in this thread but this aint one of them mate

If Sifu Stier doesn't has some videos but doesn't want to share -- then I think that's a different matter entirely.

Sorry Anthony I'd let anyone else off the hook for this but since your such a stickler for grammar I couldn't resist pointing this one out.

Unoffensive, light hearted family fun Try it with your friends! Buy one get one free!
Ok im done clowning, back to your battle stations.

Peace
Mike