If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#81
|
|||
|
|||
On 11/11/04 7:38 AM, in article , "Tom
Cooper" wrote: SNIP You state that the Iraqi pilot and the Iranian ace had a fight that occurred "in full view" of Navy surface ships. What does that mean? Were USN crews witnesses to the fight? If so, why did the Iraqi pilot spend so many days in his raft? Yep; the USN witnessed the fight. Unclear is only if they actually saw it or tracked it on their radars. AFAIK, they did not notice ejection. Two days later the pilot was found deeper inside the Hormuz Straits by other group of USN vessels. I can nearly guarantee that nobody "eye-witnessed" it. The altitude and ranges that these things occur at--especially in the daytime--make them difficult to keep track of visually. SNIP From what I've learned so far on this and the previous two days there was a small SAG centered around USS Guam (LPH-9) in the area between Khark Island and Bahrain. What I'm sure of is that crews of these ships have withnessed the Iraqi three-wave strike against Khark, flown in the early morning, morning and afternoon of 18 March 1988, then after the success of the first Iraqi strike specific skipper of one of USN warships declared the Iraqi attack for, "deplorable by nature", and subsequently the whole SAG turned around. When the next Iraqi wave (flown around 09:00hr AM local time) appeared the IRIAF interceptors were airborne and the USN warships recorded - I don't know yet by which means (if I would know this I would not need any documents from ONI) - firings of five AIM-54s. You're assuming. Based on the SPEAR message, SOME Navy/intel platform detected those firings. We don't know how or from what. --Woody |
#82
|
|||
|
|||
On 11/11/04 9:33 AM, in article , "Tom
Cooper" wrote: Pechs, do I understand your post correctly: not even people at Topgun have ever got documents of this kind? In the introduction it stands it was supplied to following authorities: - COMOPTEVFOR NORFOLK VA - HAWTS ONE YUMA AZ - AIRTEVRON FOUR - AIRTEVRON FIVE - CJTFME - USCINCCENT MACDILL AFB FL - USCINCCENT INTELCEN MACDILL AFB FL - CINCPACFLT PEARL HARBOUR HI - COMSEVENTHFLT - CTF SEVEN ZERO - CTG EIGHT ZERO ZERO PT ONE - USS ENTERPRISE - COMCARAIRWING ELEVEN - INFO FTD WRIGHT PATTERSON AFB OH - DIRNSA FT GEORGE G MEADE MD - CIA WASHINGTON DC - NAVSTRKWARCEN FALLON NV - NAVFITWEPSCOL SAN DIEGO CA Security clearance: S E C R E T NOFORN WNINTEL If you think I'm constructing anything I can easily e-mail you a scan of the document mentioned above so you can check if it's real or not. Do you know what these PLAD's mean, Tom? --Woody |
#83
|
|||
|
|||
Could you do us all a favour and finally get yourself a copy? I know you
wouldn't ever admit it, but your message is a clear-cut try to get one... If you would like to have one, why don't you simply ask? I'll gladly send you a copy. I had an opportunity to buy, and I didn't. For the hundreth time, I told you I don't buy crap for my library. You said you wanted a full critique and I offered. You think I've gone through all this trouble just for a ****ing handout? Now you've proved again that you haven't read the book. You're commenting "about it" nevertheless: strangely, you don't do so by criticising the book, it's contents or whatever else - but all the time by offending my person. You asshole. I have said I have seen your book and read it. Although whether it was comprehensible to any human with a minimum of an average intellect is in serious question. I am a very well read person, and I can spot **** from a mile away. You don't raise a several thousand volume library without gaining an insight for quality. I'm going to do a side-by-side comparison of that chapter(s) and the uncited material from Gillcrist's "Tomcat!" So, can you provide evidence for what you're talking about or not? I've spent the last week posting evidence, you just refuse to budge. You're going to get nailed good, and you know it. Just because I do not own your book does not mean I have not read it! There are bookstores, where one can examine and read, and public libraries out there you idiot! I can't wait to prove your Dr. Ambrose-style plagerism. You are in very deep ****. I'm going to purchase that book post it myself. And you are going to be one very embarrased person. Then I'm going to forward it to Admiral Gillcrist and Schiffer. Then they're going to spank you ass for being what you are. I can see you won't post what I have asked. I will purchase this book and do the comparison myself. I need the book to hone the fine details, but the outcome will be the same. Another lie. Two days ago your critique was there, just like it was there one, three, four and regardless how many days lapsed since you posted it there. Shut the **** up about my review. Amazon accepted it after review and it stayed there for awhile. When I checked on it, it was gone. Now you say its back. I haven't checked but I said I'll take your word for it. Don't try to pick nits and change the topic Herr Cooper...we're talking about plagerism here. That's a very very serious crime. However, I can perfectly understand that you'll deny this. Must've been there is a conspiracy between amazon.com and me - against you, of course... Can you provide evidence that any kind of critique for that book was ever removed from amazon.com? Can you provide evidence it was never removed? Do you check that page every minute for the last 3 months? I think not. So it is you that's misinformed and possibly lying. You were the man who said people were after you. It was very amusing indeed to discover you have a fan club out there. You have a talent of making enemies, Mr. Tom Cooper. That's not very smart, when you're so vulnerable on the "Tomcat!"-"Iran-Iraq air war 80-88" plagerism. My issue here is with the "Iran-Iraq 80-88 air war" book and how you plagerized "Tomcat!" by Gillcrist. I was very kind and offered you several opportunities to avoid my now-inevitable side-by-side comparison of both texts. Now everyone will see it and you're going to have some explaining to do to your Publisher. However, Pechs and me have never discussed tactics with even a single word in any of our exchanges (all of which can still be found under google.google.com/groups). You don't have to believe me: ask him. Well, sigh, this would mean that you're lying again - and there is evidence for this as well. You had better watch who you call a liar. I don't relish being defamed, and although I'm a very lenient man, I have my limits. You're oppening another vulnerability here, by attacking my person. It's a fact that you plagerized "Tomcat!" and when I complete the side-by-side comparison of your Iran Iraq book with Gillcrist's volume, it will be trully irrefutable. You're going to be known as a plagerizer pretty soon. By calling me a liar, you're on your way to being a defamer as well. I never faced an authority superior in knowledge about air warfare between Iran and Iraq (or about specific Arab and African air forces) - on the internet. That's right. You have an unjustifiably high opinion of yourself. Give me a ****ing break. You only respond in personal taunts. Can you show me these "personal taunts" in which I responded to you? Where did I offend you by even a single word? Despite all your bragging I haven't said even a single bad word about you - except you consider pointings at your constructions and lies as such? You called me a liar. You called me a character. You claim I write my review in order to gain a free book off you? And all those other posters you have insulted over the years...the base of your fan club. With other words, you haven't read the book either... But you comment about it? Oh I certainly attempted to read it. But it was written in such fractured, grammatical error-filled English; not to mention the areas that I was able to withstand and comprehend, were filled with superficial ramblings on an interesting topic the authors' have little insightfull knowledge on. I did not take home that 5lb, $40 overpriced piece of ****, waste of ink and paper, to join my 7000 strong aviation library. As said: you haven't read it. Period. How do you think I discovered your plagerism of "Tomcat!" by Gillcrist if I did not read your book? Now you changed your opinion and say that only a "portion" of Gillcrist's book - i.e. Chapter 7, page 48 - was "lifted". (BTW, you spell Mr. Gillcrist's name wrongly). Portion? Authors who plagerize take little bits here and there. You damn near copied several hundred words from Gillchrist near word for word. Let's see. First you said: "Iran-Iraq 80-88 book draws massive portions from Paul Gillchrist's "Tomcat!"...almost word for word plagerism". Then you said, "portion". Now you're down to, "several hundred words" (in a book of nearly 360.000 words). Could you agree with yourself about how much was eventually "plagiarised" from that book? I can. I will define 'massive' as "several sentences". And when I do my side-by-side comparison, we'll see where you ****ed yourself. You're going to be in deep ****. Tell me one thing (at least): Don't you ever read your own posts? Or are you unable of understanding what you write? On amazon.com you stated: "Whole sections are simply lifted from other works...Tom Cooper unashamedly plagerizes Gillchrist's volume for much of this chapter. He does not offer citations and whole sections are copied word for word". In your first post here you stated, "Iran-Iraq 80-88 book draws massive portions from Paul Gillchrist's "Tomcat!". In your second post you stated that "portions" of that book were "lifted". Then, in the last message above you say, "several hundred words", and all the time you "stress" that we have completely omitted any kind of indication from where the three sentences in question came. Now you say that you, "thought...(I) gave credit for that single line". Are you a man enough to stand and admit that you are lying about this whole issue? I admit slight, very minor and inconsequential inconsistencies in my posts, but the core issue I stand by: The fact that you plagerized is irrefutable. Now, to end this bull **** he-haw dance, you go and post that chapter I'm speaking of, word for word, as it appeared in the book. This will serve three causes: a)People who have yet to see your work will see how poorly written that book is; b)It will stroke your ego; and c)It will prove you're a plagerizer, because I'm going to post the corresponding chapter from "Tomcat!", and we can compare and will see what you refuse to acknowledge. We will know that you God damn stole other people's work. I could easily post the whole chapter here. That's not a problem as I still have the original manuscript in electronic form. But, it is you who is attacking me of being a plagiarizer - so you have to deliver evidence for your accusation. Either you are able of doing this, or you are lying - in which case my lawyer would be outright greateful if you continue in the same style.... Await my upcoming side-by-side review. Please share it with your lawyer, as I will certainly be sharing it with mine, for review. Schiffer and Admiral Gillcrist too will recieve a copy. For your information, the same book is mentioned at least five times elsewhere in footnotes of our book. So, you're lying here too. A reputable, and now-late historian, Dr. Whatshisface Ambrose, also quothed heavily from "Wings of Morning" by Dr. Childers. But a noticable chunks of Childers' work, he flat out stole. He got pinched for that one, just like you're going to be, Herr Cooper. Ambrose can be forgiven. You cannot, because you are not a reputable historian. Is this all you have of "evidence" that I am a "plagiarizer"? No. It is an example of the type of plagerism that exists in your Iran Iraq book. Quote some here, then use a bunch un-cited. Dr. Ambrose was badly damaged by this expose; he expired shortly after this incident! Please, do us all a favour: contact R.Adm (USN ret.) Paul T. Gillcrist and bring your matter also up to Schiffer Military Publishing. I don't know the contact details of Mr. Gillcrist, but you can reach the editor of the book via the website of Schiffer Military Publishing. You can expect no less from me. This I assure you, Mr. Tom Cooper. Be so kind to do that - and then post the results he I'm really curious about their reactions and looking forward for them. Foremost: I want you to present your evidence of any kind of my plagiarisations. Await my review. You want me to add Osprey, several other publishers, and retailers to that list? Yes, please, do that too. Let me know if you need any e-mail adresses of responsible people at Osprey. I'll limit this to Admiral Gillcrist and Schiffer publishing. This is where your mistakes lie. But if you insist, I shall forward my report to Osprey as well. I'm actually rather surprised you haven't already informed all the relevant authorities and never issued a law suit against all these crimes I committed.... ? I was not the victim of plagerism here, I am only reporting it. But if this issue evolves into the legal realm, I can report to you with absolute confidence that we have the determination and resources neccessary to fight and prevail. Your caper on that "Iran Iraq 80-88 book" alone would sink ya, or at the minimum put a mark on ya you won't be able to rub off. Again: feel free to "sink" me, or "rub (me) off" as much as you like. I'm not doing the "sinking" nor "attacking" here. The enemy's vulnerability lies not in the attacker but within himself. Before I read that book, you were known simply as an amature, egotistical wannabe aviation historian. Now you can add plagerizer to your title. I am positively certain, others more knoledgable than I have recognized this as well. But they don't like to wrestle with pigs, like I do. And that should be a reason that none of them ever complained - less issued a law suit against somebody who is so much plagiarising "them all" as you explain here? Await my review, and its innevitable dispersion to the relevant parties. Well, of course not: you don't hate me. You are just engaged in a campaign of spreading lies about me. I can say that I now dislike you very much. I was not the victim of plagerism, but your ideas of me somehow running a 'campaign of spreading lies' are just the stuff that defamation lawsuits are made of. Contact me at This has become very serious and I wish to discuss it with you in private. |
#84
|
|||
|
|||
Could you do us all a favour and finally get yourself a copy? I know you
wouldn't ever admit it, but your message is a clear-cut try to get one... If you would like to have one, why don't you simply ask? I'll gladly send you a copy. I had an opportunity to buy, and I didn't. For the hundreth time, I told you I don't buy crap for my library. You said you wanted a full critique and I offered. You think I've gone through all this trouble just for a ****ing handout? Now you've proved again that you haven't read the book. You're commenting "about it" nevertheless: strangely, you don't do so by criticising the book, it's contents or whatever else - but all the time by offending my person. You asshole. I have said I have seen your book and read it. Although whether it was comprehensible to any human with a minimum of an average intellect is in serious question. I am a very well read person, and I can spot **** from a mile away. You don't raise a several thousand volume library without gaining an insight for quality. I'm going to do a side-by-side comparison of that chapter(s) and the uncited material from Gillcrist's "Tomcat!" So, can you provide evidence for what you're talking about or not? I've spent the last week posting evidence, you just refuse to budge. You're going to get nailed good, and you know it. Just because I do not own your book does not mean I have not read it! There are bookstores, where one can examine and read, and public libraries out there you idiot! I can't wait to prove your Dr. Ambrose-style plagerism. You are in very deep ****. I'm going to purchase that book post it myself. And you are going to be one very embarrased person. Then I'm going to forward it to Admiral Gillcrist and Schiffer. Then they're going to spank you ass for being what you are. I can see you won't post what I have asked. I will purchase this book and do the comparison myself. I need the book to hone the fine details, but the outcome will be the same. Another lie. Two days ago your critique was there, just like it was there one, three, four and regardless how many days lapsed since you posted it there. Shut the **** up about my review. Amazon accepted it after review and it stayed there for awhile. When I checked on it, it was gone. Now you say its back. I haven't checked but I said I'll take your word for it. Don't try to pick nits and change the topic Herr Cooper...we're talking about plagerism here. That's a very very serious crime. However, I can perfectly understand that you'll deny this. Must've been there is a conspiracy between amazon.com and me - against you, of course... Can you provide evidence that any kind of critique for that book was ever removed from amazon.com? Can you provide evidence it was never removed? Do you check that page every minute for the last 3 months? I think not. So it is you that's misinformed and possibly lying. You were the man who said people were after you. It was very amusing indeed to discover you have a fan club out there. You have a talent of making enemies, Mr. Tom Cooper. That's not very smart, when you're so vulnerable on the "Tomcat!"-"Iran-Iraq air war 80-88" plagerism. My issue here is with the "Iran-Iraq 80-88 air war" book and how you plagerized "Tomcat!" by Gillcrist. I was very kind and offered you several opportunities to avoid my now-inevitable side-by-side comparison of both texts. Now everyone will see it and you're going to have some explaining to do to your Publisher. However, Pechs and me have never discussed tactics with even a single word in any of our exchanges (all of which can still be found under google.google.com/groups). You don't have to believe me: ask him. Well, sigh, this would mean that you're lying again - and there is evidence for this as well. You had better watch who you call a liar. I don't relish being defamed, and although I'm a very lenient man, I have my limits. You're oppening another vulnerability here, by attacking my person. It's a fact that you plagerized "Tomcat!" and when I complete the side-by-side comparison of your Iran Iraq book with Gillcrist's volume, it will be trully irrefutable. You're going to be known as a plagerizer pretty soon. By calling me a liar, you're on your way to being a defamer as well. I never faced an authority superior in knowledge about air warfare between Iran and Iraq (or about specific Arab and African air forces) - on the internet. That's right. You have an unjustifiably high opinion of yourself. Give me a ****ing break. You only respond in personal taunts. Can you show me these "personal taunts" in which I responded to you? Where did I offend you by even a single word? Despite all your bragging I haven't said even a single bad word about you - except you consider pointings at your constructions and lies as such? You called me a liar. You called me a character. You claim I write my review in order to gain a free book off you? And all those other posters you have insulted over the years...the base of your fan club. With other words, you haven't read the book either... But you comment about it? Oh I certainly attempted to read it. But it was written in such fractured, grammatical error-filled English; not to mention the areas that I was able to withstand and comprehend, were filled with superficial ramblings on an interesting topic the authors' have little insightfull knowledge on. I did not take home that 5lb, $40 overpriced piece of ****, waste of ink and paper, to join my 7000 strong aviation library. As said: you haven't read it. Period. How do you think I discovered your plagerism of "Tomcat!" by Gillcrist if I did not read your book? Now you changed your opinion and say that only a "portion" of Gillcrist's book - i.e. Chapter 7, page 48 - was "lifted". (BTW, you spell Mr. Gillcrist's name wrongly). Portion? Authors who plagerize take little bits here and there. You damn near copied several hundred words from Gillchrist near word for word. Let's see. First you said: "Iran-Iraq 80-88 book draws massive portions from Paul Gillchrist's "Tomcat!"...almost word for word plagerism". Then you said, "portion". Now you're down to, "several hundred words" (in a book of nearly 360.000 words). Could you agree with yourself about how much was eventually "plagiarised" from that book? I can. I will define 'massive' as "several sentences". And when I do my side-by-side comparison, we'll see where you ****ed yourself. You're going to be in deep ****. Tell me one thing (at least): Don't you ever read your own posts? Or are you unable of understanding what you write? On amazon.com you stated: "Whole sections are simply lifted from other works...Tom Cooper unashamedly plagerizes Gillchrist's volume for much of this chapter. He does not offer citations and whole sections are copied word for word". In your first post here you stated, "Iran-Iraq 80-88 book draws massive portions from Paul Gillchrist's "Tomcat!". In your second post you stated that "portions" of that book were "lifted". Then, in the last message above you say, "several hundred words", and all the time you "stress" that we have completely omitted any kind of indication from where the three sentences in question came. Now you say that you, "thought...(I) gave credit for that single line". Are you a man enough to stand and admit that you are lying about this whole issue? I admit slight, very minor and inconsequential inconsistencies in my posts, but the core issue I stand by: The fact that you plagerized is irrefutable. Now, to end this bull **** he-haw dance, you go and post that chapter I'm speaking of, word for word, as it appeared in the book. This will serve three causes: a)People who have yet to see your work will see how poorly written that book is; b)It will stroke your ego; and c)It will prove you're a plagerizer, because I'm going to post the corresponding chapter from "Tomcat!", and we can compare and will see what you refuse to acknowledge. We will know that you God damn stole other people's work. I could easily post the whole chapter here. That's not a problem as I still have the original manuscript in electronic form. But, it is you who is attacking me of being a plagiarizer - so you have to deliver evidence for your accusation. Either you are able of doing this, or you are lying - in which case my lawyer would be outright greateful if you continue in the same style.... Await my upcoming side-by-side review. Please share it with your lawyer, as I will certainly be sharing it with mine, for review. Schiffer and Admiral Gillcrist too will recieve a copy. For your information, the same book is mentioned at least five times elsewhere in footnotes of our book. So, you're lying here too. A reputable, and now-late historian, Dr. Whatshisface Ambrose, also quothed heavily from "Wings of Morning" by Dr. Childers. But a noticable chunks of Childers' work, he flat out stole. He got pinched for that one, just like you're going to be, Herr Cooper. Ambrose can be forgiven. You cannot, because you are not a reputable historian. Is this all you have of "evidence" that I am a "plagiarizer"? No. It is an example of the type of plagerism that exists in your Iran Iraq book. Quote some here, then use a bunch un-cited. Dr. Ambrose was badly damaged by this expose; he expired shortly after this incident! Please, do us all a favour: contact R.Adm (USN ret.) Paul T. Gillcrist and bring your matter also up to Schiffer Military Publishing. I don't know the contact details of Mr. Gillcrist, but you can reach the editor of the book via the website of Schiffer Military Publishing. You can expect no less from me. This I assure you, Mr. Tom Cooper. Be so kind to do that - and then post the results he I'm really curious about their reactions and looking forward for them. Foremost: I want you to present your evidence of any kind of my plagiarisations. Await my review. You want me to add Osprey, several other publishers, and retailers to that list? Yes, please, do that too. Let me know if you need any e-mail adresses of responsible people at Osprey. I'll limit this to Admiral Gillcrist and Schiffer publishing. This is where your mistakes lie. But if you insist, I shall forward my report to Osprey as well. I'm actually rather surprised you haven't already informed all the relevant authorities and never issued a law suit against all these crimes I committed.... ? I was not the victim of plagerism here, I am only reporting it. But if this issue evolves into the legal realm, I can report to you with absolute confidence that we have the determination and resources neccessary to fight and prevail. Your caper on that "Iran Iraq 80-88 book" alone would sink ya, or at the minimum put a mark on ya you won't be able to rub off. Again: feel free to "sink" me, or "rub (me) off" as much as you like. I'm not doing the "sinking" nor "attacking" here. The enemy's vulnerability lies not in the attacker but within himself. Before I read that book, you were known simply as an amature, egotistical wannabe aviation historian. Now you can add plagerizer to your title. I am positively certain, others more knoledgable than I have recognized this as well. But they don't like to wrestle with pigs, like I do. And that should be a reason that none of them ever complained - less issued a law suit against somebody who is so much plagiarising "them all" as you explain here? Await my review, and its innevitable dispersion to the relevant parties. Well, of course not: you don't hate me. You are just engaged in a campaign of spreading lies about me. I can say that I now dislike you very much. I was not the victim of plagerism, but your ideas of me somehow running a 'campaign of spreading lies' are just the stuff that defamation lawsuits are made of. Contact me at This has become very serious and I wish to discuss it with you in private. |
#85
|
|||
|
|||
Could you do us all a favour and finally get yourself a copy? I know you
wouldn't ever admit it, but your message is a clear-cut try to get one... If you would like to have one, why don't you simply ask? I'll gladly send you a copy. I had an opportunity to buy, and I didn't. For the hundreth time, I told you I don't buy crap for my library. You said you wanted a full critique and I offered. You think I've gone through all this trouble just for a ****ing handout? Now you've proved again that you haven't read the book. You're commenting "about it" nevertheless: strangely, you don't do so by criticising the book, it's contents or whatever else - but all the time by offending my person. You asshole. I have said I have seen your book and read it. Although whether it was comprehensible to any human with a minimum of an average intellect is in serious question. I am a very well read person, and I can spot **** from a mile away. You don't raise a several thousand volume library without gaining an insight for quality. I'm going to do a side-by-side comparison of that chapter(s) and the uncited material from Gillcrist's "Tomcat!" So, can you provide evidence for what you're talking about or not? I've spent the last week posting evidence, you just refuse to budge. You're going to get nailed good, and you know it. Just because I do not own your book does not mean I have not read it! There are bookstores, where one can examine and read, and public libraries out there you idiot! I can't wait to prove your Dr. Ambrose-style plagerism. You are in very deep ****. I'm going to purchase that book post it myself. And you are going to be one very embarrased person. Then I'm going to forward it to Admiral Gillcrist and Schiffer. Then they're going to spank you ass for being what you are. I can see you won't post what I have asked. I will purchase this book and do the comparison myself. I need the book to hone the fine details, but the outcome will be the same. Another lie. Two days ago your critique was there, just like it was there one, three, four and regardless how many days lapsed since you posted it there. Shut the **** up about my review. Amazon accepted it after review and it stayed there for awhile. When I checked on it, it was gone. Now you say its back. I haven't checked but I said I'll take your word for it. Don't try to pick nits and change the topic Herr Cooper...we're talking about plagerism here. That's a very very serious crime. However, I can perfectly understand that you'll deny this. Must've been there is a conspiracy between amazon.com and me - against you, of course... Can you provide evidence that any kind of critique for that book was ever removed from amazon.com? Can you provide evidence it was never removed? Do you check that page every minute for the last 3 months? I think not. So it is you that's misinformed and possibly lying. You were the man who said people were after you. It was very amusing indeed to discover you have a fan club out there. You have a talent of making enemies, Mr. Tom Cooper. That's not very smart, when you're so vulnerable on the "Tomcat!"-"Iran-Iraq air war 80-88" plagerism. My issue here is with the "Iran-Iraq 80-88 air war" book and how you plagerized "Tomcat!" by Gillcrist. I was very kind and offered you several opportunities to avoid my now-inevitable side-by-side comparison of both texts. Now everyone will see it and you're going to have some explaining to do to your Publisher. However, Pechs and me have never discussed tactics with even a single word in any of our exchanges (all of which can still be found under google.google.com/groups). You don't have to believe me: ask him. Well, sigh, this would mean that you're lying again - and there is evidence for this as well. You had better watch who you call a liar. I don't relish being defamed, and although I'm a very lenient man, I have my limits. You're oppening another vulnerability here, by attacking my person. It's a fact that you plagerized "Tomcat!" and when I complete the side-by-side comparison of your Iran Iraq book with Gillcrist's volume, it will be trully irrefutable. You're going to be known as a plagerizer pretty soon. By calling me a liar, you're on your way to being a defamer as well. I never faced an authority superior in knowledge about air warfare between Iran and Iraq (or about specific Arab and African air forces) - on the internet. That's right. You have an unjustifiably high opinion of yourself. Give me a ****ing break. You only respond in personal taunts. Can you show me these "personal taunts" in which I responded to you? Where did I offend you by even a single word? Despite all your bragging I haven't said even a single bad word about you - except you consider pointings at your constructions and lies as such? You called me a liar. You called me a character. You claim I write my review in order to gain a free book off you? And all those other posters you have insulted over the years...the base of your fan club. With other words, you haven't read the book either... But you comment about it? Oh I certainly attempted to read it. But it was written in such fractured, grammatical error-filled English; not to mention the areas that I was able to withstand and comprehend, were filled with superficial ramblings on an interesting topic the authors' have little insightfull knowledge on. I did not take home that 5lb, $40 overpriced piece of ****, waste of ink and paper, to join my 7000 strong aviation library. As said: you haven't read it. Period. How do you think I discovered your plagerism of "Tomcat!" by Gillcrist if I did not read your book? Now you changed your opinion and say that only a "portion" of Gillcrist's book - i.e. Chapter 7, page 48 - was "lifted". (BTW, you spell Mr. Gillcrist's name wrongly). Portion? Authors who plagerize take little bits here and there. You damn near copied several hundred words from Gillchrist near word for word. Let's see. First you said: "Iran-Iraq 80-88 book draws massive portions from Paul Gillchrist's "Tomcat!"...almost word for word plagerism". Then you said, "portion". Now you're down to, "several hundred words" (in a book of nearly 360.000 words). Could you agree with yourself about how much was eventually "plagiarised" from that book? I can. I will define 'massive' as "several sentences". And when I do my side-by-side comparison, we'll see where you ****ed yourself. You're going to be in deep ****. Tell me one thing (at least): Don't you ever read your own posts? Or are you unable of understanding what you write? On amazon.com you stated: "Whole sections are simply lifted from other works...Tom Cooper unashamedly plagerizes Gillchrist's volume for much of this chapter. He does not offer citations and whole sections are copied word for word". In your first post here you stated, "Iran-Iraq 80-88 book draws massive portions from Paul Gillchrist's "Tomcat!". In your second post you stated that "portions" of that book were "lifted". Then, in the last message above you say, "several hundred words", and all the time you "stress" that we have completely omitted any kind of indication from where the three sentences in question came. Now you say that you, "thought...(I) gave credit for that single line". Are you a man enough to stand and admit that you are lying about this whole issue? I admit slight, very minor and inconsequential inconsistencies in my posts, but the core issue I stand by: The fact that you plagerized is irrefutable. Now, to end this bull **** he-haw dance, you go and post that chapter I'm speaking of, word for word, as it appeared in the book. This will serve three causes: a)People who have yet to see your work will see how poorly written that book is; b)It will stroke your ego; and c)It will prove you're a plagerizer, because I'm going to post the corresponding chapter from "Tomcat!", and we can compare and will see what you refuse to acknowledge. We will know that you God damn stole other people's work. I could easily post the whole chapter here. That's not a problem as I still have the original manuscript in electronic form. But, it is you who is attacking me of being a plagiarizer - so you have to deliver evidence for your accusation. Either you are able of doing this, or you are lying - in which case my lawyer would be outright greateful if you continue in the same style.... Await my upcoming side-by-side review. Please share it with your lawyer, as I will certainly be sharing it with mine, for review. Schiffer and Admiral Gillcrist too will recieve a copy. For your information, the same book is mentioned at least five times elsewhere in footnotes of our book. So, you're lying here too. A reputable, and now-late historian, Dr. Whatshisface Ambrose, also quothed heavily from "Wings of Morning" by Dr. Childers. But a noticable chunks of Childers' work, he flat out stole. He got pinched for that one, just like you're going to be, Herr Cooper. Ambrose can be forgiven. You cannot, because you are not a reputable historian. Is this all you have of "evidence" that I am a "plagiarizer"? No. It is an example of the type of plagerism that exists in your Iran Iraq book. Quote some here, then use a bunch un-cited. Dr. Ambrose was badly damaged by this expose; he expired shortly after this incident! Please, do us all a favour: contact R.Adm (USN ret.) Paul T. Gillcrist and bring your matter also up to Schiffer Military Publishing. I don't know the contact details of Mr. Gillcrist, but you can reach the editor of the book via the website of Schiffer Military Publishing. You can expect no less from me. This I assure you, Mr. Tom Cooper. Be so kind to do that - and then post the results he I'm really curious about their reactions and looking forward for them. Foremost: I want you to present your evidence of any kind of my plagiarisations. Await my review. You want me to add Osprey, several other publishers, and retailers to that list? Yes, please, do that too. Let me know if you need any e-mail adresses of responsible people at Osprey. I'll limit this to Admiral Gillcrist and Schiffer publishing. This is where your mistakes lie. But if you insist, I shall forward my report to Osprey as well. I'm actually rather surprised you haven't already informed all the relevant authorities and never issued a law suit against all these crimes I committed.... ? I was not the victim of plagerism here, I am only reporting it. But if this issue evolves into the legal realm, I can report to you with absolute confidence that we have the determination and resources neccessary to fight and prevail. Your caper on that "Iran Iraq 80-88 book" alone would sink ya, or at the minimum put a mark on ya you won't be able to rub off. Again: feel free to "sink" me, or "rub (me) off" as much as you like. I'm not doing the "sinking" nor "attacking" here. The enemy's vulnerability lies not in the attacker but within himself. Before I read that book, you were known simply as an amature, egotistical wannabe aviation historian. Now you can add plagerizer to your title. I am positively certain, others more knoledgable than I have recognized this as well. But they don't like to wrestle with pigs, like I do. And that should be a reason that none of them ever complained - less issued a law suit against somebody who is so much plagiarising "them all" as you explain here? Await my review, and its innevitable dispersion to the relevant parties. Well, of course not: you don't hate me. You are just engaged in a campaign of spreading lies about me. I can say that I now dislike you very much. I was not the victim of plagerism, but your ideas of me somehow running a 'campaign of spreading lies' are just the stuff that defamation lawsuits are made of. Contact me at This has become very serious and I wish to discuss it with you in private. |
#86
|
|||
|
|||
|
#87
|
|||
|
|||
"Tom Cooper" wrote in message ... For example, the only day in "early Feb 88" on which F-14s engaged Mirage F.1s in two different engagements over the Persian Gulf was 9th of February. That, however, is not a date I'd describe as "early February". Why not? If you break the month evenly in to"early", "mid" and "late" (that is, "thirds") the 9th falls in to the first third of the month or the "early" part. |
#88
|
|||
|
|||
Mr Cooper- - COMOPTEVFOR NORFOLK VA BRBR
- AIRTEVRON FOUR BRBR - NAVFITWEPSCOL SAN DIEGO CA BRBR Like I said, I worked for COMOPTEVFOR at VX-4, and my CO was former CO of TopGun..and the headers look genuine altho I can't understand why a civilian has SECRET/NOFORN/ documents. BUT never heard a sound of the engagments that you say were all so common... P. C. Chisholm CDR, USN(ret.) Old Phart Phormer Phantom, Turkey, Viper, Scooter and Combat Buckeye Phlyer |
#89
|
|||
|
|||
wrote in message
om... Could you do us all a favour and finally get yourself a copy? I know you wouldn't ever admit it, but your message is a clear-cut try to get one... If you would like to have one, why don't you simply ask? I'll gladly send you a copy. I had an opportunity to buy, and I didn't. For the hundreth time, I told you I don't buy crap for my library. You said you wanted a full critique and I offered. You think I've gone through all this trouble just for a ****ing handout? Well, so far, you certainly did. Namely: you haven't offered any kind of evidence our book being a "plagiarisation" of Gillcrist's work. Do you have such evidence or not? Now you've proved again that you haven't read the book. You're commenting "about it" nevertheless: strangely, you don't do so by criticising the book, it's contents or whatever else - but all the time by offending my person. You asshole. "Asshole"? Is that what you call "book review"? I have said I have seen your book and read it. Although whether it was comprehensible to any human with a minimum of an average intellect is in serious question. I am a very well read person, and I can spot **** from a mile away. I'm sure you did exactly that in this case: saw the book on the shelf in some store - perhaps indeed from quite a few meters away - and instantly declared it for what you guess it is. There is no other explanation for all the nonsence you're babbling about it. You don't raise a several thousand volume library without gaining an insight for quality. I'm going to do a side-by-side comparison of that chapter(s) and the uncited material from Gillcrist's "Tomcat!" If you have such an immense "library", then you should actually be in a perfect condition to offer evidence for any kind of plagiarisations - if there are any. But, there are none, so all you can do is to insult me. So, can you provide evidence for what you're talking about or not? I've spent the last week posting evidence, you just refuse to budge. You're going to get nailed good, and you know it. Just because I do not own your book does not mean I have not read it! There are bookstores, where one can examine and read, and public libraries out there you idiot! Where is all that "evidence" you've spent the last week posting? All you posted is nonsence, supported by even more nonsence. Not that this would surprise me very much: you can do whatever you like - and there is no evidence for any kind of a plagiarisation, because there is none. I can't wait to prove your Dr. Ambrose-style plagerism. You are in very deep ****. I'm going to purchase that book post it myself. And you are going to be one very embarrased person. Then I'm going to forward it to Admiral Gillcrist and Schiffer. Then they're going to spank you ass for being what you are. Babblabalah... Do you have evidence or not? I can see you won't post what I have asked. I will purchase this book and do the comparison myself. I need the book to hone the fine details, but the outcome will be the same. Yes, just like in the case of what you said about there being no citation of Gillcrist's work where it should have been... Another lie. Two days ago your critique was there, just like it was there one, three, four and regardless how many days lapsed since you posted it there. Shut the **** up about my review. Amazon accepted it after review and it stayed there for awhile. When I checked on it, it was gone. Now you say its back. I haven't checked but I said I'll take your word for it. Don't try to pick nits and change the topic Herr Cooper...we're talking about plagerism here. That's a very very serious crime. So, instead of becoming a candidate for heartattack, why don't you simply sue me? However, I can perfectly understand that you'll deny this. Must've been there is a conspiracy between amazon.com and me - against you, of course... Can you provide evidence that any kind of critique for that book was ever removed from amazon.com? Can you provide evidence it was never removed? Do you check that page every minute for the last 3 months? I think not. So it is you that's misinformed and possibly lying. You're accusing me that it was removed, so you have to provide evidence that it is. Can you provide any sort of evidence that anything was removed from amazon.com - except for your useless guessing? You were the man who said people were after you. It was very amusing indeed to discover you have a fan club out there. Which "fan club"? You have a talent of making enemies, Mr. Tom Cooper. That's not very smart, when you're so vulnerable on the "Tomcat!"-"Iran-Iraq air war 80-88" plagerism. And you're extremely talented in babbling nonsence and lying about things you don't have the slightest clue about. My issue here is with the "Iran-Iraq 80-88 air war" book and how you plagerized "Tomcat!" by Gillcrist. I was very kind and offered you several opportunities to avoid my now-inevitable side-by-side comparison of both texts. Now everyone will see it and you're going to have some explaining to do to your Publisher. I told you above that you should do so. So, what are you waiting for? Why do you lose your and my time with all this BS here instead of writing to Schiffer and Mr. Gillcrist? However, Pechs and me have never discussed tactics with even a single word in any of our exchanges (all of which can still be found under google.google.com/groups). You don't have to believe me: ask him. Well, sigh, this would mean that you're lying again - and there is evidence for this as well. You had better watch who you call a liar. I don't relish being defamed, and although I'm a very lenient man, I have my limits. Well, I don't think you really have any limits: your offense, lies and threats are getting more intense with every new post.... You're oppening another vulnerability here, by attacking my person. It's a fact that you plagerized "Tomcat!" and when I complete the side-by-side comparison of your Iran Iraq book with Gillcrist's volume, it will be trully irrefutable. You're going to be known as a plagerizer pretty soon. By calling me a liar, you're on your way to being a defamer as well. Have you provided any kind of evidence for anything of the BS you posted here so far? Not? So, what should one call you? I never faced an authority superior in knowledge about air warfare between Iran and Iraq (or about specific Arab and African air forces) - on the internet. That's right. You have an unjustifiably high opinion of yourself. Give me a ****ing break. If you don't like to hear my opinion then don't ask me about it. You only respond in personal taunts. Can you show me these "personal taunts" in which I responded to you? Where did I offend you by even a single word? Despite all your bragging I haven't said even a single bad word about you - except you consider pointings at your constructions and lies as such? You called me a liar. You called me a character. You claim I write my review in order to gain a free book off you? And all those other posters you have insulted over the years...the base of your fan club. Which "all these other posters"? What would you like to lie about now? With other words, you haven't read the book either... But you comment about it? Oh I certainly attempted to read it. But it was written in such fractured, grammatical error-filled English; not to mention the areas that I was able to withstand and comprehend, were filled with superficial ramblings on an interesting topic the authors' have little insightfull knowledge on. I did not take home that 5lb, $40 overpriced piece of ****, waste of ink and paper, to join my 7000 strong aviation library. As said: you haven't read it. Period. How do you think I discovered your plagerism of "Tomcat!" by Gillcrist if I did not read your book? Don't know. But it's sure you simply never read that book Worst yet, you obviously don't have a slightest clue about the meaning of a word "plagierism", otherwise you'd never come to such a stupid idea like stating that a book of almost 360.000 words is "plagiation" because it cites - stress: CITES - two or three sentences (total of some 50 words) from another book. If you read the book you'd never come to the idea to say that "whole sections" were "lifted" from anywhere else: you'd know they were not and you could only make yourself silly by such statements. If you read the book you'd know that it's silly to say that even "sections" were "lifted", because nothing was lifted at all. Even more so, you wouldn't come to the idea to declare "Iran-Iraq War in the Air, 1980-1988" a plagiation also because it is describing the developments surrounding the purchase of F-14s by Iran in a completely different context - and to a much greater detail. Finally, you wouldn't come to this ridiculous idea because Gillcrist states something completely different about the combat experience with Tomcats in Iran than Farzad and me are doing - not only in "Iran-Iraq War in the Air, 1980-1988", but even more so in "Iranian F-14 Tomcat Units in Combat", which includes also quite a rebuff of some of Gillcrist's statements by one of the Iranian officers who was involved in decision-making process. Had you read the book you would know about this all. But, you're so obviously clueless about this, that it's clear you never saw more but the cover. My guess is that you've heard that the book contains some citations from "Tomcat!" and that you found this suitable for your purpose. There is at least no other logical explanation that comes to my mind. Of course, given what nonsence you're posting here, I guess the word "logic" does not mean much to you... Now you changed your opinion and say that only a "portion" of Gillcrist's book - i.e. Chapter 7, page 48 - was "lifted". (BTW, you spell Mr. Gillcrist's name wrongly). Portion? Authors who plagerize take little bits here and there. You damn near copied several hundred words from Gillchrist near word for word. Let's see. First you said: "Iran-Iraq 80-88 book draws massive portions from Paul Gillchrist's "Tomcat!"...almost word for word plagerism". Then you said, "portion". Now you're down to, "several hundred words" (in a book of nearly 360.000 words). Could you agree with yourself about how much was eventually "plagiarised" from that book? I can. I will define 'massive' as "several sentences". And when I do my side-by-side comparison, we'll see where you ****ed yourself. You're going to be in deep ****. Who are you to define anything? You don't even know the meaning of the word "plagiarisation" as defined by internationally accepted rules and laws. So, how can you define the word "massive" in connection to "plagiarisation"? What you don't have the slightest clue about is, namely, that even if "Iran-Iraq War in the Air, 1980-1988" would consist of only some 10.000 words, and 100 of these would've been cited from "Tomcat!" it would still not be a plagiarisation. Because the source was cited, and nothing like 10% of the original work was used for creation of the new one. Consequently, what you're doing here is plain nonsence: you don't really even have a point. All you are doing is defamation. Tell me one thing (at least): Don't you ever read your own posts? Or are you unable of understanding what you write? On amazon.com you stated: "Whole sections are simply lifted from other works...Tom Cooper unashamedly plagerizes Gillchrist's volume for much of this chapter. He does not offer citations and whole sections are copied word for word". In your first post here you stated, "Iran-Iraq 80-88 book draws massive portions from Paul Gillchrist's "Tomcat!". In your second post you stated that "portions" of that book were "lifted". Then, in the last message above you say, "several hundred words", and all the time you "stress" that we have completely omitted any kind of indication from where the three sentences in question came. Now you say that you, "thought...(I) gave credit for that single line". Are you a man enough to stand and admit that you are lying about this whole issue? I admit slight, very minor and inconsequential inconsistencies in my posts, but the core issue I stand by: The fact that you plagerized is irrefutable. Your whole standpoint is based on such "very minor and inconsequential inconsistencies". You fabricate a case for a pure wish to bash and babble about things you don't have a clue about. You ignore the fact that there is absolutely NO evidence for your accusations, and you ignore the fact that you are therefore lying. That's all that is "irefutable" so far - and that's going to remain so even if you post the whole book "Iran-Iraq War in the Air" here. Now, to end this bull **** he-haw dance, you go and post that chapter I'm speaking of, word for word, as it appeared in the book. This will serve three causes: a)People who have yet to see your work will see how poorly written that book is; b)It will stroke your ego; and c)It will prove you're a plagerizer, because I'm going to post the corresponding chapter from "Tomcat!", and we can compare and will see what you refuse to acknowledge. We will know that you God damn stole other people's work. I could easily post the whole chapter here. That's not a problem as I still have the original manuscript in electronic form. But, it is you who is attacking me of being a plagiarizer - so you have to deliver evidence for your accusation. Either you are able of doing this, or you are lying - in which case my lawyer would be outright greateful if you continue in the same style.... Await my upcoming side-by-side review. Please share it with your lawyer, as I will certainly be sharing it with mine, for review. Schiffer and Admiral Gillcrist too will recieve a copy. Could you finally do this so I can stop wasting my time with your nonsence? For your information, the same book is mentioned at least five times elsewhere in footnotes of our book. So, you're lying here too. A reputable, and now-late historian, Dr. Whatshisface Ambrose, also quothed heavily from "Wings of Morning" by Dr. Childers. But a noticable chunks of Childers' work, he flat out stole. He got pinched for that one, just like you're going to be, Herr Cooper. Ambrose can be forgiven. You cannot, because you are not a reputable historian. Is this all you have of "evidence" that I am a "plagiarizer"? No. It is an example of the type of plagerism that exists in your Iran Iraq book. Quote some here, then use a bunch un-cited. Dr. Ambrose was badly damaged by this expose; he expired shortly after this incident! I'm asking again: Is this "evidence" that "Iran-Iraq War in the Air, 1980-1988" is a plagiarization of "Tomcat!"? Please, do us all a favour: contact R.Adm (USN ret.) Paul T. Gillcrist and bring your matter also up to Schiffer Military Publishing. I don't know the contact details of Mr. Gillcrist, but you can reach the editor of the book via the website of Schiffer Military Publishing. You can expect no less from me. This I assure you, Mr. Tom Cooper. Then do it finally. Be so kind to do that - and then post the results he I'm really curious about their reactions and looking forward for them. Foremost: I want you to present your evidence of any kind of my plagiarisations. Await my review. I'm waiting since four days... You want me to add Osprey, several other publishers, and retailers to that list? Yes, please, do that too. Let me know if you need any e-mail adresses of responsible people at Osprey. I'll limit this to Admiral Gillcrist and Schiffer publishing. This is where your mistakes lie. But if you insist, I shall forward my report to Osprey as well. Yes, I insist you do so. I insist you to contact Osprey and declare all the books I co-authored for them for plagiarizations as well. Then they can sue you for your lies and I don't need to do that. I'm actually rather surprised you haven't already informed all the relevant authorities and never issued a law suit against all these crimes I committed.... ? I was not the victim of plagerism here, I am only reporting it. But if this issue evolves into the legal realm, I can report to you with absolute confidence that we have the determination and resources neccessary to fight and prevail. I'm sure you have determination. Most likely you have also resources. The problem is that you have no evidence - because there is none. Oh, and because there are clear laws about what can be called a "plagiarization". The book we're talking here about is no plagiarization and it can never be one. Consequently, whenever you say that it is a "plagiarization" you lie. Do you understand this, and is this clear to you? Your caper on that "Iran Iraq 80-88 book" alone would sink ya, or at the minimum put a mark on ya you won't be able to rub off. Again: feel free to "sink" me, or "rub (me) off" as much as you like. I'm not doing the "sinking" nor "attacking" here. The enemy's vulnerability lies not in the attacker but within himself. Talking from your own experience? Before I read that book, you were known simply as an amature, egotistical wannabe aviation historian. Now you can add plagerizer to your title. I am positively certain, others more knoledgable than I have recognized this as well. But they don't like to wrestle with pigs, like I do. And that should be a reason that none of them ever complained - less issued a law suit against somebody who is so much plagiarising "them all" as you explain here? Await my review, and its innevitable dispersion to the relevant parties. Then stop making yourself wet and post it finally. Well, of course not: you don't hate me. You are just engaged in a campaign of spreading lies about me. I can say that I now dislike you very much. I was not the victim of plagerism, but your ideas of me somehow running a 'campaign of spreading lies' are just the stuff that defamation lawsuits are made of. I told you already two times that I don't care about your opinion the least. But, bear in mind that with every additional e-mail in which you post lies about me, my work, or my co-workers, you are only adding more evidence into the files of my lawyer. Should your interest be to get yourself sued and charged for defamation, then you are free to continue in the same manner. Contact me at This has become very serious and I wish to discuss it with you in private. If you have a matter to discuss with me in private it's on you to contact me, not on me to contact you. It's you who is lying here; it's you who is offending me, my work - and my co-workers. I never said anything against you, have no clue who you are or what is the actual purpose of your lies about me posted on this NG. It's you who is lying about my work on amazon.com and it is you who is doing so here; it is also you who is offending me in every of your posts here. There can be no evidence that my work is plagiarization because it is no plagiarization. Consequently, I have nothing to hide. -- ************************************************** *********************** Tom Cooper Freelance aviation journalist Author: - Iranian F-14 Tomcat Units in Combat http://www.ospreypublishing.com/titl...hp/title=S7875 - Arab MiG-19 and MiG-21 Units in Combat http://www.ospreypublishing.com/titl...hp/title=S6550 - Iranian F-4 Phantom II Units in Combat http://www.ospreypublishing.com/titl...hp/title=S6585 - African MiGs http://www.acig.org/afmig/ - Iran-Iraq War in the Air, 1980-1988 http://www.acig.org/pg1/content.php ************************************************** *********************** |
#90
|
|||
|
|||
"Pechs1" wrote in message
... Mr Cooper- - COMOPTEVFOR NORFOLK VA BRBR - AIRTEVRON FOUR BRBR - NAVFITWEPSCOL SAN DIEGO CA BRBR Like I said, I worked for COMOPTEVFOR at VX-4, and my CO was former CO of TopGun..and the headers look genuine altho I can't understand why a civilian has SECRET/NOFORN/ documents. Because I requested their release according to "FOIA" procedure. FOIA stands for "Freedom of Information Act". This US law grants the right to any person to request the release of documents from whichever authority in the USA: the authority in question must answer to any such request (the question is only how much of the document is going to be released and how much is going to be blotted out). For details about FOIA inquiries related to the USN, please see he http://foia.navy.mil/ The procedure is very simple, and I must say ONI is usually swift to respond. -- ************************************************** *********************** Tom Cooper Freelance aviation journalist Author: - Iranian F-14 Tomcat Units in Combat http://www.ospreypublishing.com/titl...hp/title=S7875 - Arab MiG-19 and MiG-21 Units in Combat http://www.ospreypublishing.com/titl...hp/title=S6550 - Iranian F-4 Phantom II Units in Combat http://www.ospreypublishing.com/titl...hp/title=S6585 - African MiGs http://www.acig.org/afmig/ - Iran-Iraq War in the Air, 1980-1988 http://www.acig.org/pg1/content.php ************************************************** *********************** |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|