The Challenge From Mr. Savvas Savopoulos
buj...@mb.kcom.ne.jp
I just read on the iaido list that you were down here posting messages.
I wanted to remind you that you still have not answered the last message
I sent you asking why you feel the need to threaten me.
Is this normal for the students of Mr. Lovret to threaten people that ask
historical questions and ask the people of your school to back up their
historical claims? Is this some insecurity on your part because there is
no physical evidence to back up Mr. Lovret's claims?
As I mentioned before, it is such a shame not to mention a dishonor to
your school and your teacher that you have to go around challenging other
people to a fight just because you do not agree with what they have to
say. Why do you have to resort to threats of physical violence just
because you cannot deal with opinions that run contrary to your's in
peaceful manner? It comes as more of a shock as this is such a basic
teaching of the martial arts that is taught to every white belt as soon
as they enter a school.
I never questioned the effectiveness of you school's techniques and I
still do not see why you would want to resort to physical violence over a
historical matter.
I have attached the last message that you failed to reply to for your
convenience. I am eagerly awaiting your reply.
Sincerely,
Ron Beaubien
--------------------------------------------------
Subject: TSKSR (Lovret and Kondo)
From: Ron Beaubien <buj...@mb.kcom.ne.jp>
Date: 1999/05/06
Newsgroups: rec.martial-arts
Dear Mr. Savopoulos,
> So you say. However such a response from Stan Pranin is not
> unexpected. You also preceded the statement you posted with plenty
> of your own, derogatory, opinion. You did not simply post the reply.
You really should read these posts more carefully. You are really
embarassing yourself again. Please read it again carefully.
Here is the first message I posted word for word:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
TSKSR
Author: bujutsu1 <buj...@my-dejanews.com>
Date: 1999/04/07
Forum: fa.iaido
Hello Everyone,
I contacted the dojo of Katsuyuki Kondo in Japan about the claims of Mr.
Savvas (attached below) and I have received an official response from
Kondo sensei's dojo. I was also asked to post a response here.
This incident in question took place at the first Daito-ryu seminar in
Baltimore, Maryland in 1997. Mr. Stanley Pranin of the Aiki Journal (who
has also been contacted regarding this issue) was also present at the
time.
Kondo sensei was shown a document which was apparently a copy of an old
makimono or menkyo. Kondo sensei did not spend much time looking at the
document, nor did he compare the content with his own documents.
Basically it comes down to the fact that the document in question could
have come from anywhere. Documents like the one that was shown to Kondo
sensei can be found floating around antique shops, used bookstores, etc.
It could have even been copied out of a book about aikido for that matter
according to the response I received.
From here on out I'll directly quote the response I recieved:
"In other words, Mr. Shutz' claim that Katsuyuki Kondo 'verified' the
document shown to him is mistaken. He only said they were a copy of such
a
document, which anyone... could obviously do..., and in no way should be
construed as recognition or non-recognition of Lovret's credentials, his
students, or his system." (April 8th, 1999).
I hope this clarifies the matter.
Sincerely,
Ron Beaubien
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I did not precede the statement that I posted with "plenty of your own,
derogatory, opinion" as you have stated. I only stated the facts as they
were given to me by Kondo sensei's organziation about the wide spread
availability of documents such as the one Mr. Adam Shultz showed Kondo
sensei and exactly where and when the incident in question took place.
It was not my "opinion" nor was it "derogatory".
> By the way, your first post stated that you used the word "verify".
> Both your predisposition and motives are clear.
Again, regarding the word "verify", as stated previously in my last
message on the 28th of April, 1999, I only forwarded your own publicly
posted message word for word to Kondo sensei's organization and also to
Mr. Stan Pranin of the Aiki Journal who was present at the time and only
asked them if your statement was correct as you stated it. It was a
simple yes / no question. I did not use the word "verify" in my query,
thus my question was not incorrect.
The only use of the word "verify" in my first posting on April 7th, 1999
was a direct quotation of the reply I received from Kondo sensei's
organization that was included within it and set off by quotation marks.
I did not use the word "verify", the direct quote of the reply from Kondo
sensei's organization did. You really should read these messages more
carefully.
> A quick mea culpa.... I did act improperly by mentioning Kondo
> Sensei's name without first consulting him.
No, merely mentioning Kondo sensei's name without consulting him is not
improper nor did I ever say that.
However, your misleading use of Kondo sensei's name as a way to try and
add support to not only your argument that "Lovret's Daito-ryu
credentials have never been in question" but also to imply legitimacy to
Mr. Lovret and the various schools he claims are classical Japanese
martial art schools the he claim he has inheirited in the message posted
to Meik Skoss on March 25th, 1999 was a mistake:
"Lovret Sensei's Daito-ryu credentials have never been in question and
were authenticated and sealed. Again, revisionist history is being
promulgated. Without going into who and how he was tested, let it suffice
that Kondo Sensei was presented the menkyo a year ago for review when he
was in Maryland. The presenter was Mr. Adam Schutz. Kondo Sensei stated
that it is correct and official." (Savopoulos. TSKSR. 1999/03/25).
> Also, note that this is not at all pertinent. In fact, my relating of
> the comments made by Kondo Sensei was a bad example for this reason.
Here we are in total agreement! Not at all logical at all, was it?
But you still did it.
Now I know that you are an intelligent man, but when you start making
claims and then try to back them up with information that has no
connection to the topic at hand (as you stated on April 22nd, 1999) then
we can only assume that you are intentionally trying to mislead everyone.
(As did Kondo sensei's organization).
> By the way, who in the organization purportedly so responded?
Now your not going to threaten them (like you did me) as well, are you?
As I mentioned before, Kondo sensei through his organization. As I
mentioned before, if you have any doubts about the reply I received (as
apparently you still do despite having had weeks to follow up on this)
feel free to contact him yourself. Better yet, here is the URL for his
official web site: www.daito-ryu.org
> Maybe it was shown to Kondo Sensei to confirm that people interested in
> training in the Daito-ryu are present in Maryland. I do not really
> know, but I suspect this is probably the answer. I do not intend to
> ask.
Sorry, I don't understand how a mere paper document of Mr. Lovret's, who
lives on the West Coast, can even be sugggested as a means to confirm to
Kondo sensei that "people interested in training in the Daito-ryu are
present in Maryland" (??!!)
The idea is absurd. Wouldn't people just coming to his seminars and
training hard be enough?
Let me see if I understand this. Now, you keep stating how you were there
at the meeting with Mr. Adam Shultz when the document was shown to Kondo
sensei, but we are supposed to believe that you had no idea why the
document was shown to Kondo sensei. However, you suspect that "it was
shown to Kondo Sensei to confirm that people interested in training in
the Daito-ryu are present in Maryland" (??!!) but you are not even
interested in asking another member of your own school (at least for
everyone else's benefit). Despite all this, we are still supposed to
believe that what you heard is what you heard and there is no way that
you could have possibly been wrong?
> Last time I checked, aikijutsu was a participatory activity. If you
> want to see if what we do is real, get on the mat. This is not a
> challenge to a duel, it is a challenge for you to discover the truth
> that you vigilantly hide from by staying behind your keyboard instead
> of seeing the art for yourself.
Aikijutsu? What are you talking about?
I do not study aikijutsu (nor have I ever). I study a sword art just as
you do. If you want to "test" my sword technique against yours or a
member of your school then it is indeed a "duel". Your pugnacious
attitude is not appreciated.
Why do you feel the need to challenge someone like this anyway? Is this
some kind of insecurity on your part? I have never suggested that your
technique was not "real" (as you like to call it) or anything of the
sort. I merely posted a message which contradicted what you had said and
have pointed out all of your misleading statements (or "flaws in logic"
should we say?). Why would you issue a challenge such as this out of
nowhere? This has nothing to do with the topic we have been discussing.
As for getting out from "behind my keyboard" and "discovering the truth"
well... I have been practicing martial arts in Japan for 8 years now. I
have seen plenty of koryu schools including Daito-ryu by Kondo sensei
several times a year. What have you been doing over there on the East
Coast of the United States?
I have seen Mr. Lovret and his students (including your teacher) on video
on numerous occasions and I would love to see either Itto Tenshin Katori
Shinto-ryu or Yamate-ryu for myself, but since there is no record of them
ever existing in Japan and they have apparently only been taught in the
US (and now Europe) since 1968 that will just have to wait till my next
trip back to the States.
> Mr. Clark will not receive a response from me (not that I know the
> history - I never cared enough to ask).
That is certainly most rude of you. If you had read his request carefully
you would have noticed that he also asked about which weapons were taught
in Itto Tenshin Katori Shinto-ryu and Yamate-ryu. That is not a
historical question. The least you could do would be to post a public
reply answering the one question you can answer and explain to him why
you are unable (or "unwilling") to answer his other questions.
Personally, I don't know how it would even be possible to learn two
classical martial arts from Japan and not learn about their history at
the same time. Learning the history of the school it such an important
and inseperable part of any legitimate classical art that I know of.
>As you choose to live in ignorance, and are obviously unwilling to get
>on the mat, this discussion is fruitless and is terminated. Once you
>get on the mat, I will be happy to discuss technical merits of
>technique, etc.
Huh? (Another jump in logic here!) Again resorting to violence and name
calling. Not very mature at all. You keep trying to turn this topic into
some sort of discussion about technique. The topic was your misleading
use of Kondo sensei's name. Please try to stay focused.
Fruitless? No, I don't think so. I have gotten many letters of support
from people due to the messages we have posted here. They have seen both
the schools and students of Itto Tenshin Katori Shinto-ryu and Yamate-ryu
under Mr. Fredrick Lovret in a new light. Actually, I would like to thank
you. I really couldn't have done it without you.
Thanks again,
Ron Beaubien
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: TSKSR (Lovret and Kondo)
Author: savvas1 <sav...@my-dejanews.com>
Date: 1999/05/06
Forum: rec.martial-arts
Sir,
Please find below my response.
> Dear Mr. Savopoulos,
>
> I only forwarded your own publicly posted message word for word to
> Kondo sensei's organization and also to Mr. Stan Pranin of the Aiki
> Journal who was present at the time and only asked them if your
> statement was correct as you stated it. It was a simple yes / no
> question. I did not use the word "verify" in my query, thus my question
> was not incorrect.
>
So you say. However such a response from Stan Pranin is not unexpected.
You also preceded the statement you posted with plenty of your own,
derogatory, opinion. You did not simply post the reply. By the way, your
first post stated that you used the word "verify". Both your
predisposition and motives are clear.
A quick mea culpa.... I did act improperly by mentioning Kondo Sensei's
name without first consulting him. But, I was there and I know what was
said. However, as I most recently posted, we would not ask Kondo Sensei
to validate a Kodokai maki. He simply made a comment in passing.
Also, note that this is not at all pertinent. In fact, my relating of
the comments made by Kondo Sensei was a bad example for this reason. As
I have stated, the maki exists and is a proper Kodokai maki. Comments to
the contrary are irrelevant.
> The reply that I received as I said before stated only that Kondo
> sensei was shown a copy of a document. He did not spend much time
> looking at it nor did he compare it to his own documents.
I agree he did not compare it to his own documents. He did review the
entire maki, especially the lineage and the seals. His comments were as
I have already stated.
> was misleading as written by
> the mere fact that Kondo sensei's organization took the time to repond
> to your comments.
Maybe, maybe not. By the way, who in the organization purportedly so
responded?
>> Kondo Sensei would never be asked to approve the credentials of Mr.
>> Lovret or verify the menkyo because it would put him in an odd
>> position to accredidate a menkyo issued by Kodokai. Mr. Kondo was
>> just asked to look at it, and
>> his comments were as I described.
>
> Moreover, why did Mr. Shultz and yourself feel the need to not only go
> out of your way to bring a valuable old document such as a classical
> martial art school scroll (which wasn't even your own so you had to
> borrow it from your teacher who lives on the West coast when you and
> Mr. Adam Shultz live on the East coast) and then bring this important
> document to a training seminar but to also approach Kondo sensei who
> must have been terribly busy trying to concentrate on his teaching with
> the document and ask him to "just look at it" when you yourself have
> stated already that there was no point in having him look at it?
>
Mr. Schutz already properly had the document in his possession in
Maryland, and decided to bring it. Mr. Kondo had a free moment, and was
asked if he was able to look at it. He agreed. Nice try though.
Maybe it was shown to Kondo Sensei to confirm that people interested in
training in the Daito-ryu are present in Maryland. I do not really know,
but I suspect this is probably the answer. I do not intend to ask. Your
assumption of the worst is not surprising though.
>...you still insist that
> you are right and Kondo sensei is wrong. This seems very much like the
> thought patterns of some religious cult or hate group that totally
> disregards the facts for their own self-righteous doctrine.
I have not stated that Kondo Sensei is "wrong." I have great respect
for Kondo Sensei. I have received nothing from Kondo Sensei stating what
you say. However, such a statement, without your puffery, may be
"politically" correct.
But keep harping on the "Kondo Sensei" comment if you must. No matter
how irrelevant it is, it seems to be your angle.
> Just last month in a letter to Meik Skoss you basically challenged him
> to a fight when you stated: "This latest salvo in your obvious effort
> to discredit Lovret Sensei tempted me to simply drive the short
> distance from D.C. to New Jersey to show you the ryu first-hand."
> (Savopoulos. TSKSR. 1999/03/25) and then you also told him that he
> should go by your dojo the following Sunday. Then two days later you
> fired off another angry letter stating: "As I have not heard otherwise,
> I will expect you tomorrow morning at 10:00 a.m." (Savopoulos. TSKSR.
> 1999/03/27).
>
Things can be interpreted many ways. But then you do apparently look for
the worst in things. Mr. Skoss and I have reached an amicable and
mutually respectful resolution. Please do not try to salvage this thread
by expanding it to include Mr. Skoss, who has behaved like a gentleman.
>
>> You can visit us anytime if you want to test what Mr. Lovret teaches.
>
> Sir. I do believe duelling is illegal in the United States.
>
> It is such a shame not to mention a dishonor to your school and your
> teacher that you have to go around challenging other people to a fight
> just because you do not agree with what they have to say. Why do you
> have to resort to threats of physical violence just because you cannot
> deal with opinions that run contrary to your's in peaceful manner? It
> comes as more of a shock as this is such a basic teaching of the
> martial arts that is taught to every white belt as soon as they enter a
> school.
Last time I checked, aikijutsu was a participatory activity. If you want
to see if what we do is real, get on the mat. This is not a challenge to
a duel, it is a challenge for you to discover the truth that you
vigilantly hide from by staying behind your keyboard instead of seeing
the art for yourself.
>
> Now you asked me to take time out of my busy schedule to reply to your
> message when you found the reply I received from Kondo sensei through
> his organization puzzling and I did. However, Mr. Chuck Clark has
> politely asked you at least twice publicly to respond to some questions
> that he has about the history of the schools that Mr. Lovret teaches
> and of which you are a member (Clark. TSKSR [Lovret and Kondo]. 1999/
> 04/22 and Clark. TSKSR. 1999/04/07). You have not yet to replied to
> either of his messages despite being given a considerable amount of
> time. For your convience I have attached his last message to you below.
> Mr. Clark and I await your reply.
>
> Thanks again.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Ron Beaubien
>
Your busy schedule... Somehow I think you'll find the time to reply to
this post.
Mr. Clark will not receive a response from me (not that I know the
history- I never cared enough to ask). He strives to be a historian by
his own admission. I strive to be a swordsman (though I fail miserably).
For me history is irrelevant. There is only now. My job is not to
provide Mr. Clark with his historical information. Anyone that has seen
aikijutsu or kenjutsu, that attends one of Lovret Sensei's seminars, will
be convinced that he is the real thing. Again, we are not a bunch of
idiots following someone blindly.
As you choose to live in ignorance, and are obviously unwilling to get on
the mat, this discussion is fruitless and is terminated. Once you get on
the mat, I will be happy to discuss technical merits of technique, etc.
History does not hold my interest.
Savvas Savopoulos
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
cbo...@my-deja.com
I think the real question here is, if you've got your hand in the
cookie jar, why pull out Mr. Lovret's Kodokai mokuroku? Anyone can open
"The Aiki News Encyclopedia Of Aikido" to pg. 71 and clearly see the
Kodokai authenticated Mr. Lovret's hiden mokuroku. Why waste Kondo
sensei and Mr. Pranin's time showing them the Kodokai mokuroku when
what they really want to see is Mr. Lovret's Yamate-ryu credentials?
Seems pretty simple to me.
Chris Bourne
Chuck Clark
cbo...@my-deja.com wrote:
> Just a thought...
>
> I think the real question here is, if you've got your hand in the
> cookie jar, why pull out Mr. Lovret's Kodokai mokuroku? Anyone can
open
> "The Aiki News Encyclopedia Of Aikido" to pg. 71 and clearly see the
> Kodokai authenticated Mr. Lovret's hiden mokuroku. Why waste Kondo
> sensei and Mr. Pranin's time showing them the Kodokai mokuroku when
> what they really want to see is Mr. Lovret's Yamate-ryu credentials?
> Seems pretty simple to me.
>
> Chris Bourne
>
--
Good idea Chris. Unfortunately Mr. Lovret is either not willing or
unable to discuss the Yamate Ryu or the Tenshin Ryu except the very
little information printed in his Budo Jiten or Koryu Budo.
If you ask several of his senior students about the Yamate Ryu, its
founder and its history you will get several different answers. Same
goes for the erstwhile Tenshin Ryu.
I really feel sorry for those who have bought Lovret's story and are
essentially being defrauded. They are wasting their time learning what
they think is a traditional art when it is actually a hodgepodge of
techniques Lovret has thrown together over the years and passes off as
the real thing.
Chuck Clark
cbo...@my-deja.com
Indeed. Indeed. With no documented evidence to date, one can only
assume the Yamate-ryu was formulated using the technical repertoire
found in the Kodokai's hiden mokuroku. Yeah, yeah, I've heard the claim
that the Yamate-ryu contains advanced Daito-ryu waza and how they got
there is a "mystery." My response to that theory is how do they know,
for one? Secondly, Yonezawa could have shown Lovret waza from the
advanced scrolls if properly motivated.
Tenshin-ryu 101 (fall semester):
Personally, I have many questions. For instance, why was Omori-ryu
iaido passed off as kenjutsu in Lovret's "Kenjutsu Shoden?"
Why has the founder of the Tenshin-ryu's name changed recently?
Couldn't Mr. Lovret remember it? Also, is the Tenshin-ryu from the
"late Edo period" or was it "founded around 1900?" Couldn't he remember
this immensely important fact either? In fact, that wouldn't make the
Tenshin-ryu a koryu at all.
The full name of the ryu is or was the Itto Tenshin Katori Shinto-ryu
(as is supported by the makimono on pg. 196 of Lovret's "The Way and
The Power") but you don't see the full name used much anymore after the
Tenshin Shoden Katori Shinto-ryu stepped in (through Dreager). Yeah,
I've heard the Tenshin-ryu rumor about how Lovret was a student of
Otake's but was written out of history. Oddly enough, now the Tenshin-
ryu claims desendence from the Itto Tenshin Shindo-ryu (Terada's
Tenshin Itto-ryu + a certain Shindo-ryu), Tetsujin-ryu (based on Niten
Ichi-ryu) and perhaps a dash of Kashima Shinto-ryu. That kinda leaves
the technical door wide open doesn't it. Regardless, notice no mention
of Katori Shinto-ryu? Hum....
Anyone confused yet? Remember, there will be a quiz.....
Chris Bourne
ota...@my-deja.com
said there is a connection of Lovret,jujutsu/sword arts in the '60's era
and not a reputable one. Instruction was during his stint in the armed
forces like most of the early martial arts practioneers. I mentioned
before in this forum that try to look up a Mr.Lee, who was teaching
Yamate-ryu in the Norfolk area, he may have the answer for the lineage.
In article <7tlklo$55n$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
Chuck Clark <oshi...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> In article <7tigp9$ssm$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> cbo...@my-deja.com wrote:
> > Just a thought...
> >
> > I think the real question here is, if you've got your hand in the
> > cookie jar, why pull out Mr. Lovret's Kodokai mokuroku? Anyone can
> open
> > "The Aiki News Encyclopedia Of Aikido" to pg. 71 and clearly see the
> > Kodokai authenticated Mr. Lovret's hiden mokuroku. Why waste Kondo
> > sensei and Mr. Pranin's time showing them the Kodokai mokuroku when
> > what they really want to see is Mr. Lovret's Yamate-ryu credentials?
> > Seems pretty simple to me.
> >
> > Chris Bourne
> >
> > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> > Before you buy.
> >
>
> --
> Good idea Chris. Unfortunately Mr. Lovret is either not willing or
> unable to discuss the Yamate Ryu or the Tenshin Ryu except the very
> little information printed in his Budo Jiten or Koryu Budo.
>
> If you ask several of his senior students about the Yamate Ryu, its
> founder and its history you will get several different answers. Same
> goes for the erstwhile Tenshin Ryu.
>
> I really feel sorry for those who have bought Lovret's story and are
> essentially being defrauded. They are wasting their time learning what
> they think is a traditional art when it is actually a hodgepodge of
> techniques Lovret has thrown together over the years and passes off as
> the real thing.
>
> Chuck Clark
>
cbo...@my-deja.com
Unfortunately, we are still talking about it. Incidentally, this Mr.
Lee is an enigma. Doesn't seem to be around.
My point is, regardless of my personal opinions, people simply have the
right to know that the art they're applying for admission to has not
been historically documented and the senior members of the art itself
aren't publicly discussing it. I think people have the right to an
informed decision. That's all I'm concerned about. When informed, if
they choose to study at a Yamate-ryu or Tenshin-ryu dojo, GREAT!
For example. Prospective students who are more than likely, drawn by
the "koryu" advertisement of these ryu have a right to know that the
ryu aren't even koryu at all, no matter the lineage. Both were created
post restoration, or more correctly, after the ban on wearing swords.
Therefore. while possibly based on koryu, they are in fact, gendai
bujutsu. So the claim that the Tenshin-ryu and Yamate-ryu are koryu is
about as plausible as Judo or Toyama-ryu claiming that. Is Judo based
on koryu? Yes, but does that make Kano's "ryu" a koryu? No.
And frankly, being a senior member of a ryu is equivalent to being a
senior military officer or NCO. If you asked a DI at Paris Island to
explain the history of the Corps and the responce you got was "I was
never much interested in the history of my art." Folks, I think that
sergeant would be missing some teeth, courtesy of his senior DI. A
member of a koryu not knowing much about the history of his ryu, makes
about as much sense as the above analogy. Don't you think?
This isn't feudal Japan. Our lord isn't forcing us to study the
domain's official ryu. We have choices and we also have the right to
make our choices based on factual information. That's what this is all
about, period!
Chris Bourne
buj...@mb.kcom.ne.jp
I am still waiting for you to reply from my message on June 11th of 1999.
Please do so.
Please use you full name when posting. You can't expect us to take your
claims seriously if you are not willing to stand by them by at least
signing your name.
> Looks like you guys are still at it.
Still asking for Mr. Lovret to verify the spurious claims that he has
made. Yes, of course. Mr. Lovret has still failed to come forward with
any documentation to support them.
> Enquires made in Japan basically said there is a connection of
> Lovret, jujutsu/sword arts in the '60's era and not a reputable one.
I live in Japan. Who exactly made the enquiries and who answered them?
Which sword and jujutsu arts are you referring to? Exactly when in the
60s?
As for Mr. Lovret having a connection to jujutsu and sword arts, well yes
of course they are not reputable. There is no documentation in Japan of
Tenshin-ryu or Yamate-ryu ever existing and the earliest mention of them
has been in Mr. Lovret's own error ridden English language publications
in the 1970s. Mr. Lovret has changed the lineage of his school several
times and has failed to come forward with any documentation to support
his claims and so they are quite often referred to not being reputable
for those reasons.
If he trained in Japan then exactly where did he train in Japan? What
city? What part of the city? What was the name of the dojo? Who was the
teacher in Japan?
>Instruction was during his stint in the armed forces like most of the
>early martial arts practioneers.
Just like Mr. Lovret they were in the military and not able to devote
much time to training at all. Many of those early pioneers were also
notorious for leaving Japan with shodan blackbelt ranks that were given
as "gifts". The certificates were stamped with the Japanese chararcters
"meiyo" meaning that the ranks were given on a honorary, not a technical
basis. Many of these early pioneers allowed their ranks to be verified,
unlike Mr. Lovret, and those who received honorary ranks often went on to
continue their training under legitimate instructors to get more than an
honorary rank.
> I mentioned before in this forum that try to look up a Mr.Lee, who was
> teaching Yamate-ryu in the Norfolk area, he may have the answer for the
> lineage.
Yes, I am fully aware of that post and I have been waiting for you to
reply to my message of June 11th of 1999. You claimed that we should
contact a Mr. Lee, but you don't know his whereabouts nor even what his
first name is. You only mention that you "heard the name aikijutsu
mentioned" possibly in realtion to "Yamate-ryu OR Daito-ryu". This is
hardly anything substancial to go on in that the aikijutsu of Daito-ryu
is not at debate. This kind of information with so many obvious ommisions
wouldn't even be considered credible in an junior high school research
paper.
I am interested in finding the truth and have made every attempt to do
so. Unlike yourself I have not been guided by hearsay and I have appealed
directly to Mr. Lovret and his teachers who have failed to provide
physical documentation. The fact remains that the burden of proof lies on
the shoulders of Mr. Lovret and his teachers to back up what they have
claimed.
Mr. Lovret has repeatedly been asked to step forward to allow others
(such as the Aiki News) to verify his claims of becoming the headmaster
of not only one, but two previously unheard martial traditions. This kind
of request is not at all unusual and done frequently in Japan. If Mr.
Lovret has truly been honest about his claims then he shouldn't have any
problems with backing them up with physical evidence. Even though Mr.
Lovret did respond to the Aiki News' request, he only supplied a copy of
the hiden mokuroku he received from the Kodokai (so he did receive the
request). For those of you that don't know, the hiden mokuroku is also
the lowest classical rank in Daito-ryu given after a mere 28 training
sessions. It does not give the authority to teach Daito-ryu either. You
can double check this by doing a search of the archives of Iaido-L.
If you are truly interested in finding out the truth then lets do it
right by properply citing sources of information, giving specific details
and names, and citing our names, and discussing it publically where
everyone can benefit from our research.
Thanks again.
Ron Beaubien
In article <7vnp57$luu$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
ota...@my-deja.com wrote:
> Looks like you guys are still at it. Enquires made in Japan basically
> said there is a connection of Lovret,jujutsu/sword arts in the '60's
> era and not a reputable one. Instruction was during his stint in the
> armed forces like most of the early martial arts practioneers. I
> mentioned before in this forum that try to look up a Mr.Lee, who was
> teaching Yamate-ryu in the Norfolk area, he may have the answer for the
> lineage.
