All posts with more than 3000 Hits, prior to 2008

Sat Feb 04, 2006 9:32 pm

Now this is funny considering our past debates.

Dude let me say this in all sincerity. If you were being treated the same way, I would step up. I have for others I didn't get along with, and I am glad for your comment now.

You are probably right on your comment. Like a moth to a flame I guess. :lol:

Remember, I write mostly for my own entertainment. :D

Sat Feb 04, 2006 9:41 pm

Lets do a quick recap:

I have made some statements about how I feel Elvis looked in the pictures.

A. From being a huge Elvis fan and watching many many hours of footage as well as imports and seeing thousands of pictures.

I am no stranger to the subject.

B. I have been around drug addicts in my personal life as well as working as a Pathology Assistant/Phlebotamist and spending many hours in ER and IC seeing all sort of horrible sights.

C. I also spent 5 years developing pictures as well as my father being a photographer/artist/Police officer/Private detective

In short, I feel I have a firm grasp on people and their behavior as well as presentation from being right in the situation many times.

Not to mention I like the show C.O.P.S :twisted:

I formed my opinion based on all the above and it is up to the public to decide how "Ignorant" I am. I feel the Docs comments are unfounded and at the least "ignorant" himself.

The other word I used because it is only this type of person that would make this judgement based off of knowing absolutely nothing about the person behind the mask so to speak.

I don't think I am alone in this assessment.

My statement was at the very least completely understandable knowing the facts we know about Elvis...let alone my personal experience. I had an opinion, and I gave facts to support my claim. The Doc's judgement was offensive, and worse, most likely dead wrong. At any rate, it had no place on this board.

Let alone the "idiots" comment which came FIRST!

Also Steve_M you are dead wrong about me calling names first. That is not my style and never has been. I make it a point to wait on that matter. But usually I even then hold my tongue as long as possible.

Sat Feb 04, 2006 10:03 pm

How is what I said conflicting with now?

The statement still holds.

A. Elvis was surrounded by a bunch of ass kissers.

B. Elvis did die of a drug overdose months later.

C. He was probably high in the pictures.

Where is the lie?

That I was done with the BS. I am. Doesn't mean I have to stop the subject NOW.

I have left it up to others. Did I ever say, you have to think this way. NO. I am giving evidence to support my claims. Its just not the way that you like.

And of course it "holds no water". You don't respond well to reason. For evidence. Look above.

I answer direct, you skate. See the difference?

Ezzz was right.

Sat Feb 04, 2006 10:12 pm

I am staggered sometimes by the sheer audacity of some people on MB's.

I don't want anyone thinking i'm some kind of saint on MB's as I'm far from it. I had a warning via e-mail on elvisnews a couple of years back and I posted once on tcb-world a few months ago and had my only post deleted.

Ironically my intent both times was to offer help to those running the site in order than nothing untoward should occur. in doing so I broke the rules or the site etiquette or protocol, not sure which, but it didn't matter to me, what mattered was that I'd done wrong, even if i hadn't meant to or hadn't intended to or whatever, I still did wrong.

On both accounts I never went back and posted again, I had too much respect for how those who ran their sites wanted to run their sites.
I didn't think that because outside of those sites those rules would be considered mad and or extreme, that it was an excuse or reason to start ranting to the owners about what i thought of their rules and how unfair blah blah blah they were. No, I was sorry for having upset them. In order that I never repeated the mistake / error of judgement I have never been back and posted again, thus ensuring from my point of view those sites carried on being run how their respective owners wanted them to be run.

The "boo hoo he's got more than me" or the "blah-ha-wahhhh - he started it first - it's not fair" routine is weak considering that we are all here by invitation of the site owners. They pay money in order for us to use the utilities here for free, is it too unreasonable to give back to them by just adhereing to the rules?

If you think someone has acted wrong against you on the site either put up with it or complain to the admin in private not on the site in public. Dont make your views public and start an on site rant / war against the person, let the admin deal with the complaint and accept their decision. Everytime one half is not going to like their decision, but that's tough and there is still choice in that no one is forced to stay here.

Genesim, I've tried to just get you to explain yourself about your claims of letting others decide, of being done with this thread etc, but you refuse to do so thus far.
I have no idea what you meant as it seems the opposite of what i thought you meant, that being the case then everything else you've said could mean the opposite.

I'll be done with this thread now myself and I'll demonstrate to you what i believe that to mean.

Edited twice on May 20th 2006 to include signature.
Last edited by Steve_M on Sat May 20, 2006 1:42 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Sat Feb 04, 2006 10:18 pm

Fair enough.

Now seriously. How about giving me all this in private. Had you not come aboard this wouldn't have lasted this many pages.

Practice what you preach.

Sat Feb 04, 2006 10:34 pm

People I say this with all respect. I found someone crazier then that other guy I fight with on a daily basis.

After reading Steve M's response to me in private....I should have kept it public!! :lol: :lol:

Sorry to bog down this wonderful post with great pictures. High or not, it was a great pleasure to see them!

Sun Feb 05, 2006 3:37 am

genesim wrote:People I say this with all respect. I found someone crazier ...............

After reading Steve M's response to me in private....I should have kept it public!! :lol: :lol:

"Genesim" -

I certainly don't agree with you often, but I will grant you this one. (This, I have also always known & have even said so in the past).

Sorry, "Steve", ....... but I call them like I see them.


genesim wrote:Sorry to bog down this wonderful post with great pictures. High or not, it was a great pleasure to see them!

Yep, ....... I've tried to get it back ON-TOPIC, ............ but you guys have hopelessly derailed it all the way to Siberia now.


Aloha `oe

... just a fan ....

Sun Feb 05, 2006 4:36 am

genesim wrote:Sorry to bog down this wonderful post with great pictures.

Too little, too late. Next time, why don't you simply refrain from hijacking other people's topics in the first place? Problem solved!


Sun Feb 05, 2006 6:38 am

Is this the "A" again?

I state an opinion, so therefore it is hijacking???

Yeah rules for the Doc only.

Sorry, I can post where I want, and it wasn't I that started the namecalling and personal attacks.

That was where the topic went south.

Sun Feb 05, 2006 7:43 am

look,i dunno who started it, but, have u ever heard of PRIVATE MESSAGING?!

we started this thread with lovely pics of Elvis's last vacation in Hawaii, and now we get to this

and is it just me, or does just about every time GeneSim posts, we get a argument?


Sun Feb 05, 2006 7:48 am

Anybody know where Steve dissapeared to?

Sun Feb 05, 2006 8:01 am

probably could'nt take the bull sh*t being thrown around this board

.......and i don't mean that in a literal way :lol:

Sun Feb 05, 2006 8:08 am

No, it is everytime my detractors throw a pot shot at me for having an opinion.

I tried to stop it earlier, and the Doc comes back with yet another smart ass remark.

Check out other threads and see, but hey, I can stop if they do....tick tick tick.

Sun Feb 05, 2006 8:45 am

genesim-No, it is everytime my detractors throw a pot shot at me for having an opinion.

bullshit! i've just read through this thread, and you have tried to MAKE people think that Elvis was stoned, you did'nt just say something like 'just my opinion', you tried to convince us that Elvis was 'high as a kite' in those photos, when clearly he was not. its you wearing the rose coloured glasses, not us. you think that in those pics, he's 'high as a kite' . ah hello, its called enjoyment, and not from drugs, but from life. i can't see a high Elvis here, why don't you look some place else.

and geezus christ help me, how many other threads have i seen where you try to defend your self, and you keep going and going and going to try and prove YOUR point past any one elses. you can't just say that you have an opinion, you like to have your way like a little kid. well clearly it ain't happening, and leave again, for all i and WE care, don't come back

and if you'd like to remind your self just how much you wine, look back at your own threads

Sun Feb 05, 2006 10:36 am

YET are you gonna ignore all the pot shots taken at me for having a freakin' opinion!!!!!

I am strong with my views. There is nothing wrong with that.

The pages and pages have to do with people calling me names.

Damn right I am going to defend myself.

As for Elvis being high, did I not bow out??? Did I not state that I would lay off since Elvis Babe compared me to Goldman.

It wasn't good enough for Doc though.. Oh no, had to come back with one last comment. You must not have read the post very closely.

It was just an opinion. Isn't that what this board is about? Oh for shame that someone isn't spewing all over themselves because Elvis was "happy". Well I don't see it the same way.

its you wearing the rose coloured glasses, not us.

I said Elvis looked high in the pics and you few have a fit?? It is I that has the rose coloured glasses. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

I didn't MAKE anyone have the same view. I have stated it is just my opinion over and over again. I tried to convince you. So what???? What did I do, put a hot iron to your feet. :lol: :lol: I FORCED people. :lol: :lol: I MADE YOU THINK. :lol: :lol: I brainwashed you.

Dude get a grip. I mean really GET A GRIP.

As for the rest.


Sun Feb 05, 2006 11:09 am

Gents, shall we say opinions are like arse-holes ? that we all have one? it'd be a boring MB if we all thought and agreed the same, I personally don't think Elvis was/looks high on the pics, Geneism obviously does, so then we agree to disagree, bit of debate/banter then we go and talk about something else. :roll:

Sun Feb 05, 2006 11:28 am

Genesims, the only thing I can figure why you are getting attacked is maybe... just maybe... these guys aren't KISS fans. :o

Just for the record, I don't agree with Genesims on his opinion that Elvis was high in those pics. But I don't think he shouldn't be slammed because of it.

I am of the understanding, (and not first hand) that getting stoned or high on prescribed medication is a totally different thing than getting high on pot, cocaine, or LSD or whatever illegal drug you want to name. Maybe someone here can answer that one.

Elvis could be on medication in those pics. He did have medical problems and Dr. Nick did prescribe lots stuff in 1977.
But is he on medication when those pics were taken? No one really knows.

But high or stoned? I don't think so.
There is a definite difference.

For example a sleeping medication will make you sleepy or drousy.
But if you become drousy after taking them does that qualify as stoned?

He was out of shape. He got tired quickly. He still had not learned to eat correctly. That should have been one of his priorities at that time.
But he was relaxing. He was having fun.

It looks like some of those shots were taken at real awkward moments such as running after the ball, or just releasing it.
Home movie footage would be most helpful for analyzing these sequences.

He should have stayed in Hawaii up unitl the week he had to do the TV special.
If he had, I bet it would've turned out better.

Sun Feb 05, 2006 5:13 pm

We can't know whether or not Elvis was high/stoned. It's probably a safe bet that he had stuff in his system, so was likely under the influence to a certain degree.

As for his appearance, his face has that sickly, weak-eyed look that it took on in '76, and never really lost. I don't think you can conclude from facial appearance that he was stoned, only that he was not healthy.

As I wrote in an earlier post I don't find him to be all that overweight, and in photos from the March tour it's clear his weight is down - relatively speaking. He's not as heavy as the spring/summer of '76, or May & June '77, but his weight isn't quite as down as it was in October-December '76.

He does look as if he's enjoying himself, which is nice to see.

Sun Feb 05, 2006 8:20 pm

See this is what this messageboard should be about!

I may disagree to some degree with the 3 replies, but they are great answers nonetheless.

I never disagreed when I said Elvis was having fun. I said most "high" people do.

So perhaps I should have chose better words. Maybe not "high", maybe just under the influence. Whatever, pick your wording. A high is a high though. A drunk, a is all the same. Your judgement is impaired and you are no longer a fully functional person as you should be. It is the degree of which we quibble over, which to me is splitting hairs big time!

Though the point is a two parter. The 2nd was that the people are oblivious to the obvious pain this guy is going through. The "low" that is going to follow. Maybe that was the biggest problem. E wanted to play, he didn't want to work. He hated the life he had to go back to. Hated the fact there was a job to do. Hated that very job, because of what it had become.

All these things would have been much clearer had he not been on drugs. Eliminate those, and the other problems would have made more sense.

Now in my life, what has helped me. My peers. Be it friends, parents..etc. They helped with these issues. Eliminate the "excess" and for the most part, the problem solved.

Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that one out, but it may help to have friends that show you the correct path.

Still I agree that the pictures could have been much worse. I may not see the same things that everyone else sees, but I can say that it is a different Elvis. Civilian clothes, big smiles..etc. They are beautiful, maybe not the real story, but if one believes in fairytales, this is how I would have really liked to see E. Shame I know how the story really played out.

Liverbobs point about him being better off staying in Hawaii only works if you don't have "friends" like those. In the end, they may watch him, but how close they watch won't change the inevitable. Only a temporary fix.

Mon Feb 06, 2006 3:57 am

Like most here, I enjoy seeing the candid shots of Elvis enjoying life in Hawaii.
There is definitely some merit to what Genesim states ... the people gathered around Elvis seem to be playing "client golf" here. They're babysitting the golden goose, enjoying a vacation on the boss' dime.

I realize that the mm always did kiss ass, but in the sixties, the boss was always in charge, perhaps even feared. On this last vacation, Elvis looks out of place and very fragile. On previous visits, he looked like he owned the islands. I get the impression that if he wasn't Elvis Presley, the cool kids wouldn't have even invited him to this party. Right or wrong, thats my impression of seeing Elvis bundled up around fit sunbathers.
Great pics, but also very insightful. I believe they give us a very rare look inside Elvis' inner sanctum.

Mon Feb 06, 2006 6:22 am

Wow! Posting these photos has produced some interesting comments and observations 8)

Mon Feb 06, 2006 6:24 am

If ignoring the side show, TCB TED has given some great insite.

My point exactly.

Mon Feb 06, 2006 6:43 am

Check out tcb site. More Hawaii shots and Elvis looks much better (in those) than the ones posted on this thread so far.


Mon Feb 06, 2006 8:19 am

Can you link us up so we don't have to go searching?


Mon Feb 06, 2006 8:22 am

TCB TED wrote:On this last vacation, Elvis looks out of place and very fragile. On previous visits, he looked like he owned the islands. I get the impression that if he wasn't Elvis Presley, the cool kids wouldn't have even invited him to this party. Right or wrong, thats my impression of seeing Elvis bundled up around fit sunbathers. Great pics, but also very insightful. I believe they give us a very rare look inside Elvis' inner sanctum.

Let us not forget, ......... if he were not "Elvis Presley", he wouldn't have to bundle up to protect his privacy while on vacation. EP was 42 & in ill-health during the '77 visit; not so on "previous" visits. JMO.

I will agree with you, however, .......... that the ever present sycophants of the "inner sanctum" were indeed a big part of EP's ultimate problem.

... just a fan ....