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.