Re: Bruce Lee's letter to James Lee (7th Aug '65)December 30 2015 at 10:35 PM
|JKD54 (Login JKD54)|
Response to Bruce Lee's letter to James Lee (7th Aug '65)
From the above letter, you got all that? Lol... How much cognitive dissonance is going on in your head to come up with those conclusions?
From the letter, it's clear Lee admits to "screwing up". So to you, 'screwing up' means he won? Not only won, but won easily? Please name one other fighter in all of human history who think they screwed up by winning easily.
'The runner' tallies with Linda's and James Lee's accounts because 'the runner' story originated with Bruce. Nine other witnesses did not see any 'running' going on. They say they saw WJM trip backwards over a raised part of the floor.
From the above letter, it's clearly written that WJM did not get 'blasted bad', which you spin into getting blasted. Nine eyewitnesses report that Bruce only landed a few glancing blows, and that WJM hit Lee a few times as well, one that really seemed to sting. Neither fighter was hurt, and neither fighter had any serious marks on them.
Yet somehow WJM got "blasted"? And that Bruce was the "obvious" victor? Huh? Why, because Bruce said so? Yes, Bruce the egomaniac would never lie about such a thing! Even though Bruce told the Chinese Pacific Weekly (December 17, 1964) that he had beaten WJM "so badly that his face was black and blue and had to stay home from work for three days". This, despite the fact Bruce asked WJM not to discuss the fight afterwards. Now, why would the 'victor' of an easily won fight need to ask the loser not to discuss the fight?
Re:Re: Bruce Lee's letter to James Lee (7th Aug '65) - Milo on Dec 31, 2015, 2:29 PM