Somehow I knew you would not list anything that HAD FIRST HAND HAPPENED TO YOU! But, let’s take a look anyway.
1. Charlie Brown – you say
a. Karen claimed she knew who everyone was. Did she claim this to YOU? Otherwise, it’s hearsay on your part. I know for a fact that she neither claimed that or ever stated it. I know this because back then I was very curious as to the identity of two posters who attacked me and she banned them but even posted that she couldn't figure out who they were.
b. She allowed Heather to masquerade. Did she tell you she knew Heather was Charlie Brown? Otherwise, hearsay again.
c. Harold Ryden’s alleged abuse from Charlie Brown did not happen to you Simon.
d. Did Karen lead you to believe anything regarding Charlie Brown?
All speculation on your part Simon, nothing with first hand experience.
2. Ottawa
a. Karen made the statement to you that “it took a woman (herself) to get us unification”? Funny, she came to Florida State right from Canada not even going home first and told all of us in the room that her biggest fear was that everything is run by men and their egos have gotten in the way of talking to each other and trying to accomplish unification. Not once did she mention anything about a woman had to do it or even brag on herself. She told all of us that she took a proposal to the Roy WAF from the Das WAF. She never said it was her idea or her proposal or anything else about herself doing anything. But, let’s look at this honestly Simon – it did take a woman to get the ball rolling, didn’t it. So even if I’m to believe she said this to you, it would be factual wouldn’t it? I don’t see any other proposals out there between the 2 world federations.
b. You say, “The proposal Karen brought was never voted on due to unacceptable content”. How do you know this? Were you in the meetings so you have first hand knowledge or are you going on hearsay?
c. The Roy WAF knew full well Karen didn’t have the authority to negotiate? I have to keep asking, how do you know this? Were you there? And if they knew this then why did they even meet with her?
Again, speculation on your part unless you tell me you were in the meetings in Canada discussing the proposals and unification.
3. Unification
a. Ok Simon, I did a little research back when all the mumbo jumbo was going on about only having 1 rep in Congress so the agreement between the AAA & USA had to be voided.
b. This is what I found: Go to
waf.homestead.com/message.html where you will find the Roy WAF Constitution online. Look under Article 6 Congress and tell me where it says there can be only 1 representative from a country in the Congress meeting. Guess what? It doesn’t say it.
c. Also tell me then why you can go on the USA website and find the minutes of the past Roy WAF Congress meetings and there are multiple representatives listed from the same country attending the meeting. Example: 2002 in Springfield, Il 2 Canada – Terry Palaschak & Keith Koening, 2 Russia – Igor Akhmedshin & Alexander Filimonov, 4 USA – Denise Wattles, Phylis Bown, Bill Cox, Alan Bown, Tony Picchioldi. Last year in Canada correct me if I’m wrong but weren’t Denise Wattles, Leonard Harkless, Dave Devoto, and Bill Cox all in the meeting? That’s 4 from the U.S. So much for only having 1 person from a country in the Roy WAF Congress meeting. So your point of saying the signed agreement between the AAA & USA was nullified because the Roy WAF won’t allow more than 1 rep in the meeting doesn’t hold water, Simon. The minutes of the meeting prove otherwise.
d. How did Karen discuss with you that the USA wasn’t honoring their agreement with AAA? When she was in Florida, she had a copy of the signed agreement. It wasn’t until after Florida State that Denise put it out on the message board so what gives here?
e. You say Karen pretended she was shocked that the USA reneged on their agreement? Well guess what Simon, they did renege.
f. Alleged advice from the IOC was nonsense? Simon the letter is on the USA website. Go to:
www.armwrestling.com/Olympic.html It says there has to be one world body for the sport of armwrestling or we’re never going to be recognized.
4. Bob O’Leary
a. Simon you are speculating again.
b. Whatever transpired between O’Leary and the Beans is their business not yours or mine. There is absolutely no reason to speculate and then try to issue that as fact.
c. Again, not first hand experience either.
5. “In the above section I followed your extremely strict guidelines for making my point all pursuant to items I was directly involved in, now your obligation is to PROVE the above items are incorrect.”
a. The only item that you can even attempt to claim direct involvement is your conversation with Karen in Ottawa.
b. Everything else is nothing but speculation and hearsay.
Show me where you have listed your first hand dealings with AAA using
a. questionable propaganda
b. control techniques
Your side note is not your own first hand experience but let’s look at it. RJ said he called his son and his son found the deposit receipt. Geez Simon this subject has been the topic of conversation for a year now. RJ has said he sent Karen a check. A check Simon so how would his son find a receipt? And if he found the receipt why didn’t he fax it right then so his father could compete? Do I think Craig would have gotten a reminder? Who knows or who cares? Craig isn’t the point here. Why do you even bring him up? Apparently Olin didn’t get one when he couldn’t pull the Arnold for the same reason.
It’s a poor way to treat someone by not reminding them to send in their money? You’re kidding me. Since when is Karen held responsible for RJ’s or anyone else being irresponsible? Give me a break.
I think I’ve found the problem here. You refuse to believe what is right in front of you. You use nothing more than propaganda to try to get your point across. For whatever the reason you have a problem with AAA and Karen Bean. Funny, not Frank Bean because you never mention him. I don’t know what your problem is but you need to figure it out. You have had not one single dealing with Karen where she has used questionable propaganda or control techniques on you. You try to prove she does by using your own speculations. I don’t believe you have dozen and dozens or even 1 dozen first hand accounts from people who have been wronged by the AAA (Frank & Karen Bean) or anyone that has witnessed Frank & Karen’s wrong doings. You are sworn to secrecy because these witnesses are afraid of Karen’s wrath? What wrath? Who has this so-called wrath been put on? Name one person! Geez man if anyone was to see wrath it would be Travis Bagent but has Karen exhibited any toward him? Let me tell you this – I screwed up pretty bad a couple of years ago. Did I see Karen’s wrath? No, she was nothing but courteous and professional with me and to me. And don’t try to say she was nice to me because we were friends because we were only acquaintances. Sorry Simon, but I don’t buy your story about these supposed emails. If, and I mean if you have these emails then produce them. Otherwise it’s nothing but hearsay and nothing factual.
Your second post once again is nothing more than your opinions and that’s not what I asked for or what you agreed to furnish.
Put down the Thesaurus and try again
I have Soccer coaching tonight so I will be out of the saddle until 8 ish.
Meet you here