Posted on 08/01/2012 11:18:33 AM PDT by Seizethecarp
FReeper Polarik IS Dr. Polland!
See this FR thread about Polland up by Polarik (himself):
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2557490/posts
FN is on the thread...
That’s so true, but some people still haven’t figured that out.
Are you talking LIES about people behind their back?
If you don’t have the gonads to address me, in your sissy gossip about me, then don’t be posting nonsense BS about me!
Oh, I think things will be made more clear in a short while.
Looks like some people can't tell the difference between a studio shot, one tinted, one black and white, in which she's wearing the same dress, and an outdoor photograph that is a still from a video and subsequently poor quality and somewhat distorted? She's tied her hair back that's all, and she's only a few months older, she's as much older in that centre image as the child she is holding, is older.
They can call that child whatever they like, he's still simply the son she had in Kenya in 1965, and the dark boy standing with them looks at least five or six years old.
Thanks for the link. I’ll have a look when time permits. So not to be dense, but if Polland is Polarik, why the two names? Is there not something a little sneaky about going by two different names...or did he have a good reason for the alter ego?
“If La Loggia thinks that she has the right to demand and desist that my article be pulled or edited from your site, then I also have the right to demand and desist that Ms. La Loggia remove the slanderous comments and patently false statements that she made of me on her website, and which still appear where I originally found them.
She still does not get it that Ron Polarik is a real name, NOT a screen name, whereas her name is nowhere to be found on her website, on her comments listed here, or ON THE REGISTAR DATABASE.”
For those who missed it:
“She still does not get it that Ron Polarik is a real name, NOT a screen name”
Looks like it’s his real name. Or so he says:
But he wasn’t finished disposing of the fake ‘pseudonym’ issue just yet. In case some might still be confused into thinking ‘Polarik’ wasn’t his real name, he clarified the issue right here on FR:
“Walden claims that, in a video, I said that my last name was a pseudonym. Unless he thought I said “pseudonym” onstead of “last name,” Fibber Walden here needs to wake up from nappy time and learn to look, listen, and for take notes - lots of notes because you can’t handle the truth — or recognize it if it ever bit you. I never said that Polarik was a pseudonym. My critics and detractors did, and you can join the club.”
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/2232051/posts?page=41#41
One more:
‘””Anonymous pseudonym” is an oxymoron, and given that my name, Dr. Ron Polarik, is known around the world, I am hardly “anonymous.” Krawetz uses the term, pseudonym, as a pejorative to imply that I am a “fraud.” The truth is that “Dr. Ron Polarik” is the first person to blow the whistle on Obama and Factcheck”’
He says ‘Dr. Ron Polarik’ is his “name”. Not his screenname, not his pseudonym—his *name*. Okay; I take him at his word. It’s his name.
http://bogusbirthcertificate.blogspot.com/2008/12/bad-stridence-proof-positive-that.html
[Just for the record, I have never claimed that ‘Fantasywriter’ is my real name/not a pseudonym. Otoh, my “critics and detractors’ have indeed identified it as a pseudonym. Perhaps they didn’t realize, at the time, that while I’ve always identified it as a screenname, Polarik by contrast did indeed claim that ‘Polarik’ was his real name. A not so subtle difference, bound to be missed by those with a long history of missing the obvious.]
One more thing. I saw where, right here on FR, Polarik said he had it on good authority that Obama never attended Punahou. Is this something else Mal-Valers believe? Of did Polarik get taken to task for saying something so stupid? If he did, maybe someone could give me a link. That is a take down I’d enjoy reading.
The grade school age picture shows that David existed at the SAME TIME as 0.
Can’t get around that.
Also in 1963,0 was with SADO in Hawaii,so he can’t be with Ruth in Kenya.
And in 1963 Mark wasn’t born yet,because bho SR hadn’t met Ruth.
“Is there not something a little sneaky about going by two different names...or did he have a good reason for the alter ego?”
Well, most of us use an anonymous name on the web, don’t we...and for good reason!
True, Seize. But you have never claimed your screenname is your real name, nor have I. Polarik did so on multiple occasions. Here’s just one example:
“She still does not get it that Ron Polarik is a real name, NOT a screen name”
Post the waybackmachine link to marks website that had the toddler pics.
Fred Nerks wrote:
“The dark boy is simply the eldest,he was born early in 1961,he’s less than a year older than zero, and his brother was born in Kenya in 1965.
You can call him what you like.”
Am going by what Mark called them:
Tilted-head toddler per Mark is Mark.
Toddler on left per Mark is David.
Family pic per Mark has Mark standing and David held.
Going by what Mark said.
“..... The above image of the family group is a photograph originally copyrighted by Mark Ndesandjo,the photograph shows the kenyan and Ruth, the older,darker child appears to reach to Ruth’s waist,and must be in the range of sixyear of age or there-abouts. ....”
This phrase stood out:
“... Originally copyrighted by Mark Ndesandjo ...”
Couple questions arise from this:
1)was permission sought, AND GRANTED, to post that picture here, since its copyrighted?
2)if its copyrighted, wouldn’t the copyright owner know who is in it?
IIRC, Polarik was some kind of name that the Polland family used back in Poland or something like that, which was changed at Ellis Island or some such according to Polland. So Polland says, somewhat disingenuously, that he could claim that Polarik was a “real name.”
BTW, I chose not to ping Polarik or other FReepers who have posted intentional lies or abuse and, sadly, Polarik falls into that category, whatever the value of his research into reverse-engineering the SFBC. This is the same reason that I do not reply to FN or BD.
Polarik made false claims about the origin of a certain baby footprint image on a certain BC on a thread that got pulled (and on which I was zotted).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.