Yuku free message boards

This is rich. (Note the spelling of the word gentlemen and sentence structure)

Vic states:

"The first upgrades were the replacement of the rear sight Knovalov with the new sight Mansner. The option to upgrade what and how much was to the soldier. You could have front and rear or just rear. The first ones done was only the rear sight which makes sense here. This is a question that can be debated around for ever and this info give credence to the statement he made to us in 2002 that he had a m/28. Maybe it was a 28 upgraded to a 28/30 rear sight or a very early 28/30. It does not really matter in the long run. The specifics in technicality for a 97 year old man was not an important thing. The fact that he was a gentelman and a hero to meet with me/our group twice was much more important. "

They never want to admit that they are wrong about the m/28 issue with Mr. Hayha. The above statement is not supported by the facts presented in the Palokangas books, nor are there examples of "some parts were replaced and some were not." In fact the Palokangas book Volume #2 page 54 covers this modification issue along with page 69 of the same volume. Nothing states some parts were replaced and some were not. I had my Finn friends check the narrative in Finnish text, in that book and it simply does not state that. Once again stuff made up or stuff assumed to cover a mistake.

This speaks loads, when they can't admit to their errors. In fact they have to make stuff up to cover the other error. Where does it stop? The question is, what other errors have they found, that they will not willing to admit? Is the ego much more important than the facts? It would be much simpler to admit your wrong and move on. More people would believe you, if you would do that.

The lesson learned here? Be very careful what the experts say on the Internet.

http://forums.gunboards.com/showthread.php?t=100985

Kari


I don't think it would do any good to include footnotes or citations to that group of egg spurts. The SVT-40 carbine has been proven several times by people that are true experts in the field. But the egg spurts still will not admit their mistake on that one, but continue to say there was a few made and refuse to talk about the 3000-5000 that they quoted in the past.

When I say true experts, I mean people who have first hand knowledge of the subject matter, not people who copy others work. The SVT-40 Manual for an example and items out of the Palokangas books in which they insert into their websites. The whole time they are being paid money by sponsors for advertising on those sites filled with others work. The real injustice with that is that they often claim credit for the "copied" work. This speaks loads to who they really are.

As far as seeing this old 94 year old gentleman in Finland twice, that is still a controversial subject over there in some circles. They provided a very strong alcoholic bottle of booze to him. Considering his age and physical/medical problems this was not a smart move. But then again you must consider the sobriety of a certain American/Finn member that basically ran that tour for them. His reputation in Finland and America among collectors and Govt. officials speak loads.

Does this mean when someone has not served their country and do only dress play war they don't qualify? Does that make one wonder what egg spurts we are talking about?