Fighters that were involved or managed by the MOB

Klompton and Saintpat, sincere apologies, i assume that either your sense of humours have evolved to be on a more mature level than my own (which isn't difficult) or the term "fingering" means something different from where you're from than where I'm from. My comment was not intended to be serious.

 

He wasn’t tenuously tied to this situation — he was CONVICTED of it.

That’s not according to Pat. That’s according to the law. You just don’t like it.

Yes, people get plea deals to testify all the time. That’s how the law works. Doesn’t mean they were lying. It means by turning on the ‘bigger fish’ in the deal they got lesser sentences (or in some cases not charged or charged with a lesser offense) for testifying. If there weren’t plea deals, there wouldn’t be as many convictions because people wouldn’t testify.

Surely you know this. Surely you know that doesn’t make the person convicted off of their testimony innocent.

The whole thing about paying off cops is unsubstantiated and you know it. Tell me, was anyone ever charged in that? Anyone ever convicted? Hey, how about did anyone under oath even testify it was about that? No, and, again, you know that.

If you think the mob let him run a club in Miami with no tribute and use it as a place to promote prostitution (of an underage girl no less), I don’t know what to tell you. But maybe they gave their buddy a pass since he covered their asses back in the day when the law came sniffing around over him throwing a fight for them.

 

I was tuned into your post Greg.

It means the same thing down under..err..I mean, the same thing in Oz.

We speaka your language - so forget the others, we can just smile and share a Vegemite sandwich OR, to make you feel really at home, howabout a dinky di warm beer and cold pie?

 

Was the sandwich made by a man from Brussels who was six four and full of muscles?

 

He seems to have a lot of those.

 

He's the type of person that would rather be ''factually'' correct rather than moral and upstanding. He once accused Burn Bienstock of lying about his age because he ''didn't have enough proof of being an octagenarian and had contradictions in his stories'' and claimed that he apparently wanted to emotionally manipulate us into listening to him. It was disgusting.

 

At least one poster got the joke, as they've said as much.

At least two were probably too emotionally invested in their debate to see it.

As you didn't either, I'll put that down to my sense of humour being more childish than yours. I'm 41, but my sense of humour stopped developing when I was about 16.

 

What was disgusting was how people bought his schtick hook line and sinker despite being caught either stretching the truth or just flat out making **** up as he went along. Im wrong for questioning an anonymous nobodys age over the internet when hes been caught spreading bull**** over and over. So he might actually be old, doesnt change the dact that he was a ****ing liar. So yeah, sue me. Id rather be factually correct than kowtow to some nobody with a pocket full of fake stories because he said he was 87 years old…

 

Ah, Tin my man, you speaka the language too.

 

It's a mistake to start Men Down Under song related puns, TR.

It would be overkill if a 4th poster joined you, Pug and I, but I feel 1 may. Who it can it be now?

 

Are we to take it that you consider yourself a “somebody” — I’ve seen you call other people on the forum “nobodies” many times.

Hard as it may be for you to believe, the people posting on this forum are not bots. They are actual human beings.

Every living, breathing human being is a somebody. All are flawed, myself (and yourself) included. But we are all people.

Too bad you never learned this valuable lesson: Treat people with respect because of who you are, not who they are. When you do that, you are a respectful person. When you don’t, you advertise loud and clear what you are (and are not).

Your rage at the world and at anyone who dares have a different opinion, outlook, belief or who draws a different conclusion than you is really not a good look.

It’s never too late to learn. You could learn, for instance, to disagree with someone by discussing the topic without calling them names or insulting them. You seem to hold that anyone who disagrees with you is an idiot. Believe it or not, that’s not the case.

You may notice that I, for instance, have not called you any names or said anything insulting to you during our discussion of LaMotta. There’s no need to do that. Yet you seem to need it. Maybe you think it makes you right?

Lighten up, Francis.

And have a happy Thanksgiving.

 

Plus Carl Frampton and a few others.

 

One more post like this and I’m going to have to be the one to tell you: Go away; don’t come ‘round here no more.