Kingsley Brown? Isn't this the same Kingsley Brown who very recently made the fallacious and reputation damaging claim that I "dishonoured his father as a liar."? I spent several days asking him to show just where I did that. He did not because he could not. I never said it and he knew that. Still, he clung to the lie with his vicarious responses through ed. But this came as no surprise to me because he has a long history of posting falsehoods and simply not responding to them, whether it was me or anyone else who called him on it.
A few posting here in this thread seem to think that behavior is perfectly OK and even defensible. Not one noted that King repeatedly called me a liar last week, doubled down, and ignored my request that he show proof. I am no saint. Not even close. But I recently pointed out that no small number of us, myself included, have made sometimes incorrect remarks or posted erroneous information. Almost invariably, we either acknowledge the error or apologize when the matter is brought to the attention of the forum. We have no problems being civil and even contrite... when warranted.
This would never describe King. Never.
Last year, I made the egregious error of accusing a couple guys here of being supporters of the Anti-Gunner Barack Obama while claiming to be supporters of the 2nd Amendment... something which is just impossible. I was wrong about them. It was a case of mistaken identity. I mixed up the handles they use here with someone else. I felt ashamed and edited my posts, not to erase my mistake, but to acknowledge it while leaving my error in the public domain, and to take complete ownership. Then I made several subsequent posts again making public apologies to these men. I wanted the whole forum to see and I felt a real need to make things right. I also PM'd the gentlemen and apologized and asked for forgiveness. Both graciously accepted although one gave me another well deserved tongue lashing. I felt stupid and have strived to not again make such an error.
My opinions of King Brown began with simple observations that he was, in my opinion, frequently telling lies to support his extreme liberal positions. I noticed also, he was able to make hypocritical personal attacks and thought that if they were not ad hominum... not naming names, but unmistakenly directed... that was somehow acceptable and civil. Again, a few here seem to agree, and even support such behavior. I don't and won't. I frequently reminded him that dishonesty and hypocrisy is not civility.
Numerous other posters also called him out and his response was typically to ignore them and change the subject by dancing away from it or covering it with another lie. Frankly, I got sick of it and decided to share my opinion of that disgusting behavior every time it arose. I knew some would not like that, but to me, it was no different than those of us who do not like being lied to, especially when the lies are frequently told to advance a Socialistic and anti-Constitutional agenda. GLS happily quotes excerpts from me, but I can't help noticing that he does not give equal time to unequivocal lies, exaggerations, and potentially damaging advice from King, a foreign luller who advised us to allow the anti-gunners to have their way with us in the aftermath of Newtown. It makes me question GLS's true motives here.
The ANONYMOUS GLS also criticized my internet anonymity as he dispensed his mostly incorrect legal advice. I expect he'll be posting his full name and address for all to see now that he has criticized all anonymity. In fact, I"ll be asking for it. I have posted my well founded reasons for maintaining my privacy, as have many others who also do not wish to advertise being gun collectors to thieves on the internet. It's believeable that he has filed silly suits which he subsequently lost, likely for being mostly fivilous and without standing. His admitted intent was to cause financial damage to the defendant. Damage! Hurt! Suffering! Revenge! It appears to me that he is saying it's fine to cause financial hardship and loss of time, while he finds it egregious to hurt someones feelings even when there is cause and provocation. In other words, it's fine for him to do damage or get revenge, but not fine for someone else. That tells me a lot about him. Is it any wonder that good lawyers reputations suffer from the bad behavior of the bad ones. That smacks of hypocrisy too... if you think about it. But I'm not accusing him of being a thinking man or a good lawyer.
I'd like to thank craigd for being astute enough to remember that my request for a face-to-face with nca225 stemmed from his remarks that he got VD from my daughter. I'd still like to discuss that personally with him just to see where it might go. If Geo Newbern has daughters, I'll bet he would pay to watch. I bet he'd get his money's worth. Maybe we would all just talk and enjoy a few beers. Or not.
King Brown, who has three daughters of his own, remarked that I ought to make peace with nca225 after his filthy remark about my daughter. Really? Really! My opinion of King dropped several more notches after that! I have not forgotten nca225's vile remark, or King's equally vile suggestion to forgive him. Does anyone here think King would feel the same if nca225 said he got VD from his daughters? I often wonder how Kings daughters would have viewed their Dad's response to nca225's remarks about mine. I'll just bet they'd be proud.
Note here as well that GLS read and watched that exchange, and did not make a long drawn out post advising lawsuits or harrassing and financially damaging litigation by me, my daughter, or anyone else who nca225 insulted. GLS even goes so far as to assert that I "called out my opponent for satisfaction". That is an obvious lie. I won't call him a liar... others can make that call themselves. I also wouldn't be that dumb as to publicly make a physical threat. I wonder what GLS might say if nca225 said he contracted VD from his daughter? Numerous guys either posted their disgust for nca225's attack on my daughter, or PM'd me personally to voice their support or remark what they'd like to do to him if he ever had the balls to reveal his identity. GLS had nothing to say and the evidence would suggest that he supports nca225's behavior more than mine. He seemed to take particular umbrage at the term "low life white trash". I've heard that sometimes that can happen when a comment hits close to home. I just don't know. Suffice to say that I think GLS, in my opinion, is nothing but a disgusting hypocritical puke. The barrister has given me abundant proof.
I did note with some satisfaction that in his story about the man who insulted his opponent as a liar, when the two men faced each other in a duel... it was the liar who died from his injuries. I like a story with a happy ending.
