Information on Dr. Gyi???

[Bester]

I've dealt with seniors who get offended when you ask them for ID when buying beer. (long time ago. Store policy was card everyone in the group.) Seniors are...special.

As to a witness, I can understand that requirement. Guess it depends on the quality and honesty of the witness. I would have done something like "Lets videotape a 10 question interview and post it" thing. Simplier, and less chance of any potential bias or poor character in the witnesses. Presubmitting questions too as it's a fact-finding mission, not a Geraldo special.

 

[Tgace]

I would have been open to considering any limitations. Like I told Mr. Hartman, "I was only interested in taking what was freely given". His characrerization of me being "demanding" is in error. I told him my plan and left the ball in his court.

BTW Bester, as you are the "zero tolerance for fraud in the MA poster child" Im suprised I didnt see you chime in here...opinion??

 

[Don Roley]

I've dealt with seniors who get offended when you ask them for ID when buying beer. (long time ago. Store policy was card everyone in the group.) Seniors are...special.

And people who make claims like Gyi are... special.

It seems a reasonable request. It is not like someone came out of the blue and demanded to see it. Gyi made claims, seeing his ID may help resolve the questions surrounding them. He should be glad to show it if the facts help to prove what he says.

If Gyi does not feel the need to prove his age to prove his claims, then why are all these defenders jumping up and down on those that question his claims?

TGace can show up to see the ID and report back. If Gyi does not care enough about how people think of him to refuse this request, then there is little need for anyone else to defend him.

 

[Tgace]

Im just wondering what he thought was going to happen. That I would show up and be so impressed by Mr. Gyi's martial skills that all the other stuff wouldnt matter? That I would show but be too chicken to ask the questions? Or that I would just ignore the offer entirely and then he could say A HA! Told you so???

What was the point?
:idunno:

 

[Bester]

I would have been open to considering any limitations. Like I told Mr. Hartman, "I was only interested in taking what was freely given". His characrerization of me being "demanding" is in error. I told him my plan and left the ball in his court.

BTW Bester, as you are the "zero tolerance for fraud in the MA poster child" Im suprised I didnt see you chime in here...opinion??

My opinion?
I have a strong opinion on who I would train with.
Sometimes, you have to decide just how much of your principals you will compromise to get the information you seek.
Training under a liar no more makes you a liar than training under a sex offender makes you a molester. It is your actions, not theirs that determines who you are.

On this site, we have had liars, frauds, scam artists and sexual predators mentioned.
- I would never train under a sexual predator, irregardless of what he can teach me martially. His spirt is bankrupt, his art tainted.
- I avoid scam artists and frauds. Their art is fiction, there is nothing to be gained but pain.
- Liars are different. It depends on the nature of the lie. I know of no one who is totally truthful. Everyone lies. The extent determines the inner character. As Bob said, if a person lies in one part of their life, so they will lie in others.

But, since the real question here is "Would you train with Gyi?" I will answer, in thought.
- Does his lie directly effect me? - No
- Does his lie bother me or offend me? - Yes
- Can I get the same knowledge elsewhere - Unknown.
- Weigh out cost of seminar, quality of information, need/want for information, convenience, and instructor.
= No.

In short, many here believe Gyi has lied about his military history. If he has, he's probably lied in other areas. I don't really like that, he's not teaching anything I "want/need", so I wouldn't.

But then again, I don't like mopeds and would never buy them but that doesn't mean they also aren't of value to someone else with different needs and criteria

 

[Bester]

Not disagreeing here Don.
I'm of the view that a "prepared" approach, filmed and posted is better than what I saw posted here. If other discussions went on between them, I'm not privy.

 

[Flatlander]

Not disagreeing here Don.
I'm of the view that a "prepared" approach, filmed and posted is better than what I saw posted here.

Rather than this vs. that, I think that both approaches may complement each other quite nicely. The information that has been shared in this thread might give the discerning skeptic context in which to view the suggested video interview, providing the grains of salt to take with the responses offered on camera. :asian:

 

[Bester]

Both parties are in the right here, I think.
- Hartman has the right to maintain a professional enviroment for his guests, as well as a responsibility as host. He appears to do a number of seminars both in house and abroad. It would shut many doors for him and his students if he allowed a guest to be grilled.
- Tom has the right to ask questions and ask for terms. Without setting parameters for a meeting, the meeting will wander and therefore be wasted. Also, without evidence, it becomes a "he said/he said" debate. Nothing solved. Tom's word may be good, but his word alone is not enough. As a law enforcement officer he knows that. Witnesses, evidence, dna, all these things are needed. (I learned that from watching CSI)

Heck, I'd be interested to just see some video of him moving, to see what the fuss is all about. Give me a reason to care, because right now, I really don't.

 

[RickRed]

Both parties are in the right here, I think.
- Hartman has the right to maintain a professional enviroment for his guests, as well as a responsibility as host. He appears to do a number of seminars both in house and abroad. It would shut many doors for him and his students if he allowed a guest to be grilled.
- Tom has the right to ask questions and ask for terms. Without setting parameters for a meeting, the meeting will wander and therefore be wasted. Also, without evidence, it becomes a "he said/he said" debate. Nothing solved. Tom's word may be good, but his word alone is not enough. As a law enforcement officer he knows that. Witnesses, evidence, dna, all these things are needed. (I learned that from watching CSI)

Heck, I'd be interested to just see some video of him moving, to see what the fuss is all about. Give me a reason to care, because right now, I really don't.

But it looks like Dr. Gyi didn't even get a chance to accept or decline.

Tim made the decision to refuse to set it up for Dr. Gyi, and it seems he backed out because of how it would damage his reputation and profit:

"I have no problem with TGace wanting to get to the bottom of things, but it won’t be done at my expense."

If Dr. Gyi is so sensitive about this topic, was Tim afraid that he would cancel the seminar if Tim actually talked about this?

Could Tom email Dr. Gyi direct and set it up for before or after the seminar at a different place?

The video idea sounds reasonable too. People could judge for themselves - as long as the video wasn't changed.

 

[Bester]

My understanding is that Gyi is not PC literate, so wouldn't have an email address. In fact, I wasn't able to find a central website for him either when I looked a while back.

As to the quality of the video, we're back to credibility. In all seriousness, does anyone think it would solve anything? If the video doesn't meet someones pre-determined opinion, they will simply claim it was edited or otherwise rigged. Sorry, I've read too many comments on forums from uninformed opinionated judges to think that most of them would ever be swayed by something as inconsequential as the truth.

Gyi could refute every claim, yet will still be seen as lying. So what does -he- have to gain by this? If I had to do a Q&A with my skeptics, with them controling how the responses are delivered, I might be leary of doing it too.

I still think a 10 question interview and video would be good, for ANY of these people. The issue for me would be ensuring that the ones involved were unbiased and hadn't already made a determination. Thats harder. I doubt there is anyone on this thread who is truely unbiased.

 

[Cebu West]

Tgace
Back in February the WMAA hosted a Sayoc seminar in Buffalo. Just prior to the start of that event we were informed that the SOP for the Sayoc Org. was to fingerprint all seminar participants. This created a huge problem, as many people felt this to be an invasion of their privacy and almost derailed the seminar.

This situation taught us a lesson, and that is that we will not allow our seminar participants, guests or instructors to be subjected to unnecessary distractions, personal agendas or political views that will make participating or teaching at one of our events uncomfortable.

I am aware that Datu Hartman invited you to attend this seminar and if you wished to speak to Dr Gyi you were welcomed to do so.
You declined this offer.
Later Datu Hartman informed me that in private correspondence you changed your mind and decided to attend with the purpose of interrogating Dr Gyi in the presence of your witness and an audio recorder.
As a member of the WMAA advisory board my personal advice to Datu Hartman was easy.

Not In Our House

For you to think that we would be part of your personal vendetta is unrealistic. If you wish to follow your beliefs that's fine, just do so on your time. If this is a burning issue with you then go to Gyi's school and try and take care of business there.
We really don't care about your personal issues or political views.

Do you realize that you have made 62 posts on this thread in 13 days.

Looking at all these posts shows two things, nothing that anybody says will satisfy you and innocent until proven guilty doesn't apply.
Get a life, and if that life requires you to discredit Dr Gyi, go ahead, knock your socks off.
Just don't make us a part of it.

Sal (Cebu West - WMAA)

 

[Tgace]

I didnt turn anything down. I asked some questions that went unanswered...

So in other words his supporters dodge the question. Or ignore it. "The military makes mistakes"? Thats a lame excuse. FOUR WARS worth of records gone? Yeah maybe they misplace a form or dont approve some benefits by accident, but entire military histories including POW status and top secret rescue missions? Heck Ive read claims he even participated in desert storm. Thats pretty darn recent. And a Generals rank doesnt just fall through the cracks. BTW How does meeting the person change anything? What will "seeing him" clear up? Im not debating his martial skills, just his military claims. Is he going to bring some military records to present? If he is I will attend (as long as its free cause hes getting NONE of my money) , as then I would owe an apology. But I doubt he will because this would have been cleard up a long time ago. As a Cop I also know that talk is cheap. Evidence is key. He has made the claims, let him back them up.

If Mr. Hartman was serious about "letting" me talk to Mr. Gyi, he could have addressed them. Would you have prefered that I accepted the initial offer, showed up and started asking Mr. Gyi questions he could take offense to out of the blue? I doubted the sincerety and intent of the offer from the get go. What exactly was the initial intent of the offer and why wasnt it made clear? Im starting to think that this was just damage control pure and simple.

As to my "getting a life".. thats just another pathetic attempt to divert attention from the issue of Mr. Gyi's alleged fabrications. You may not think they are important. If they are true I think they are offensive. Is that somehow not allowed?

If you reread my posts you will see that I am just presenting others information. Personally I believe they are pretty damning and if Mr. Gyi prefers to leave them unaddressed then he just has to live with them. I havent really posted any first hand information, and now it looks like I wont be getting any to help change my first impression. Apparently you went through the trouble of counting my individual posts on this thread...why dont you get a life?

 

[Tgace]

http://www.marauder.org/reun_98.htm

Guest Speaker: Dr. U Maung Gyi (aka Manbahadur Rai)
Served in the CBI Theater with the 3/10th Gurkha Rifles,37th Brigade,
23rd Infantry Division, British IV Corps. & 3/9 Gurka Rifles, 111th Chindit
Brigade.

BTW. The 23rd ID is an American Army Division. However it is also a British unit. (37th (Collingridge) (Part of 23rd Division) )

 

[Tgace]

Hmmmm....uses an AKA that is a deceased Capt. from 10th Princess Mary's Own Gurkha Rifles...interesting.
http://www.britain-at-war.org.uk/Roll_of_honour/Cemeteries/Kranji_War_Cemetery/Non_World_War_Casualties/html/m.htm

MANBAHADUR RAI, Captain, 388493. 10th Princess Mary's Own Gurkha Rifles. 15th August 1950. Plot 8 Row A Grave 5.

Although how common of a name that is isnt known to me, nor the tradition of taking AKA's in Burmese culture. Just a tidbit I found interesting as the name is from the exact unit Mr. Gyi claims affiliation with.

 

[tradrockrat]

There seem to be a few different points being made in the last several posts here, and it's leading to some confusion on my part. Here's what I have come to understand from these posts. All of this is clearly posted in the thread.

1. Tgace has NO desire to train with Gyi.
2. He also wants to question Gyi about his military career and the facts surounding tham - and only that.
3. He was invited to do so by Mr. Hartman.
4. He apparently recommended some specific strategies to record these questions - ie a witness.
5. Mr. Hartman has decided that it would be unwise to subject his invited guest to these questions.


Am I right so far?

If so, there is no problem (IMHO) with actions of either individual except that the offer never should have been made in the first place.

Now my questions are these:

1. What does Gyi's abilities as a martial artist have to do with any of this?

I have personally trained with the man several times. I've seen his teaching ability, and I've seen demonstrations of his skill with my own eyes. He's VERY GOOD. Far better than most others I've seen. Doesn't mean I'll train with him anymore though, because unlike most people here, I feel that he has been lying TO ME - PERSONALLY - for 25 years (and I'm only 33). That is too signifigant to ignore "in favor of learning Bando".

2. Why have there been personal attacks against the character of Tgace?

Is there a persoanl vendetta I don't know about? Well, that may not be my business, but I'd like to think that Martial Artists (and we are all martial artists, right?) can rise above the petty. After all, isn't this entire thread REALLY about a man who may have failed to live up to those standards we hold ourselves to? Doesn't behavior like this make us... well... a little bit hypocritical?


I guess what i'm saying is that we really don't need to let another persons (in this case, Gyi's) actions divide US.


BTW- Tgace, Rai is as common as Smith. Manbahadur is fairly common as well, but the coincidence is, well... quite a coincidence.

 

[Bester]

Who posted:
Tgace 64
OULobo 14
RickRed 11
Sapper6 11
Bob Hubbard 8
Don Roley 8
T Hartman 7
RRouuselot 5
Bester 5
tradrockrat 4
Flatlander 3
hardheadjarhead 2
arnisador 2
WMAA 1
shesulsa 1
Michael Billings 1
RichK 1
Kenpodoc 1
Brian R. VanCise 1
KenpoTess 1
Matt Stone 1
Cebu West 1

Theres a link that counts for you. Takes a second.

 

[Tgace]

1. Tgace has NO desire to train with Gyi.
2. He also wants to question Gyi about his military career and the facts surounding tham - and only that.
3. He was invited to do so by Mr. Hartman.
4. He apparently recommended some specific strategies to record these questions - ie a witness.
5. Mr. Hartman has decided that it would be unwise to subject his invited guest to these questions.


Am I right so far?

100%. And hey if Mr. Hartman decided that this offer is not in his best interests than hes free to do whatever he wants. I stated from the start that this was in "his house". Just be honest about it insted of turning the issue into my "attitude" over the subject. My stance has been crystalline for a long while on this thread. Im still wondering how Mr. Hartman envisioned this "meeting" in the first place. He never presented me with his conditions.....

BTW. I see my post count here as an indicator of my interest in the subject rather than a bias. If yall have some info that I havent been able to find, post it up. Change my mind.

Maybe we could put together some questions here and Mr. Hartman could see if Mr. Gyi would be interested in answering them and Tim could post the replies.....

 

[Flatlander]

Theres a link that counts for you. Takes a second.

I'm sorry AB, but you lost me. Apparently, I'm not terribly swift.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

I'm sorry AB, but you lost me. Apparently, I'm not terribly swift.

On the forum page that lists topic, replies and views, if you click on the number under replies, you'll see a list and count of who replied.

 

[RickRed]

Tgace
Looking at all these posts shows two things, nothing that anybody says will satisfy you and innocent until proven guilty doesn't apply.

Just don't make us a part of it.

Sal (Cebu West - WMAA)

THere is a lot of stuff here about Gyi.

I think innocence is hard to connect to Gyi with any reality until he proves it. Even in court Gyi would be in jail or on bail until the jury decided if there was this much stuff.....

Mr. Hartman made himself part of it when he offered to set up the meeting and said to call him. This is a challenge that he started, and now he backs out of it?

This misrepresentation of Tgace's posts and tone is as bad as the bs that Gyi is throwing around....

Do any reasonable readers see what Mr. Hartman is presenting as true? If you can 'prove it' with proof like Tgace has, then I might be swayed.