My final thought:
If you have to defend someone, maybe they do have a problem.
Why? Some people need to be defended from those who misrepresent the truth about them, or tell outright lies, for reasons stemming from emotion. Some don't.
In 23 years of practicing with my Instructor, I have never had to defend him against anyone.
Lucky you. My instructor (whom I've been with for 20 years) left our previous organization with a group of other seniors because he, and they, felt it was in the best interest of his students (it was) - and the previous organization did their best to black-ball all of us with other organizations, for what they percieved as "disloyalty" (and in the interest of not going off-topic, I'll just say that there was a lot of disloyalty toward their students that led to the split... you reap what you sow)... but nothing they said about any of us was true, and I defended my instructor throughout this time.
Some fellow Korean Instructors (and American too) have resented him over the years due to his connections and access to power, but they have never questioned his abilities or credentials. Never.
Again, lucky you... or it could be that you just aren't aware of what people are saying when you're not around. Lots of people only say bad things about others when people who might defend them aren't around to hear. In this instance, I have no way of knowing which it is.
If this Mr. Humesky must be defended against me or anyone else, maybe he is not all that he says he is. Jhoon Rhee and Tae Hi Nam never had to be defended.
Interesting inference, but I find your logic to be faulty. Just because "a" is true (that Joon Rhee and Tae Hi Nam - pioneers in TKD - don't need defending), it does not necessarily follow that "b" is true (no one who needs defending holds valid credentials). As a Ch'ang H'on stylist, and former member of the ITF, I'll use Gen. Choi as an example - lots of people had to defend him, or against him - does that mean his credentials, as the founder of a kwan of TKD, are invalid? Somehow, I don't think so.
And I'll leave it at that.
Hmmm... speaking for myself, I can't see that you've done this... certainly, you keep coming back to beat what appears to me to be a dead horse.:deadhorse Perhaps you should do as you said you would, and let this one drop.... after all, we don't know
your credentials either, any more than you know ours - true? So given that, why should be believe that your word is truth, any more than you believe what others have said in support of Master Humesky? And before you ask - no, I have no personal knowledge of him - but neither will I disrespect someone based solely on what is, or is not, available on the internet.
