Part
3 - The Best Bits - again!
I know, I know . . . but if I get it all out
of my system in one day, we can have a News, Views tomorrow, to clear the
decks for a return to what I do best;
Which is: Irascibly Blog mass-produced, plastic, toy
shite, 'cos I never managed to get a degree in something more useful like palaeontology,
volcanism or astrophysics! Now that is rocket-science!
Unlike judging the origins of a web page,
that's not rocket-science, that's Basic
Internet Knowledge - Part 1 - Lesson
2 - URL endings
The
Link
It's labouring the point, but I want to drive
this home while we wait for their 'equally devastating' Erwin Sell versus Hugh Walters - Blue Box - Part 2
On the 17th of December 2015, Erwin Sell (or
his mentor Paul Stadinger?) posted a link on Stad's Stuff and stated it was (and as always I will quote him so
there's no room for error)
"Here from
Hong Kong official (ministry of Health and
labor-Welfare ) official site update as till
2015."
It's not
English - by any stretch of the imagination, but we'll let that ride for now;
this is the link as provided, and it's double-'official' apparently;
Hoping
you've followed it out of curiosity - not that you need to, or you may have
followed it from the earlier post here, today - as you will notice it has a '.jp'
URL. Yes, the Ministry of Health and Labour-welfare we have been sent to by the
two fuckwitted-stooge fruitcake's is the Japanese
Government Ministry of Health and Labour-welfare, not the Hong Kong Chinese one!
If you wish
to read about the latest earthquake in Japan, or an official goodwill visit by
some Dutch minister to her Japanese counterpart, click 'English' at the top and
you'll find you're in the right place, if - however - you want to find evidence
to back-up Mr Sell's claim that the Tai
Sang subsidiaries Redbox and Blue Box were NOT related and were in
fact rivals; and again - let's quote the genius in full . . .
"It has been BLUE BOX main competitor since from china market.
It has “”wrongly mentioned”” as same or part as Blue Box companies in PW magazine incorrect. They are two complete different companies …"
. . . then you will by now have realised you are not in the right place at all! Oh, no, not even slightly the right place! Although; a little clue here - there's no 'right place' to prove that particular claim of the Cock-wackin' Monkey-lizard's as it's errr . . . not true.
No, what we get is a relatively short, eclectic list of companies based in Hong Kong, some of which are long gone, some of which are not toy manufacturers, but all of which - I assume - (don't tell Erwin - he hates it when I assume stuff) have a link to the Health Ministry (in Japan - when I labor something I really labor it!), probably in the manufacture of plastic (and/or other) medical equipment, parts and/or components and/or emergency supplies and/or something like that.
I further 'assume' the list being comprised of those companies - specifically from HK - that have [at some point in the past (in the case of Stromberger; some time in the past!)] received some form of clearance or permission from the ministry. For want of a better phrase; an 'approved companies' list.
My Japanese being what it is (non-existent), and my failure to locate the English version of the page meaning I can only guess at the nature of that clearance/permission granting, I will assume (again!) that it is related to medical grade plastic production and/or Quality Assurance ('QA') and/or import-export licenses and/or something like that?
It does not prove that Redbox and Blue Box are 'main competitors', just because they both appear on it with different mailing addresses! Indeed, all the various incarnations of Tai Sang, "BLUE-BOX", Blue Box, Redbox, and Red Box (among others) have at one point been found in the one building in Aberdeen, known locally as 'The Blue Box Building'.
"It has been BLUE BOX main competitor since from china market.
It has “”wrongly mentioned”” as same or part as Blue Box companies in PW magazine incorrect. They are two complete different companies …"
. . . then you will by now have realised you are not in the right place at all! Oh, no, not even slightly the right place! Although; a little clue here - there's no 'right place' to prove that particular claim of the Cock-wackin' Monkey-lizard's as it's errr . . . not true.
No, what we get is a relatively short, eclectic list of companies based in Hong Kong, some of which are long gone, some of which are not toy manufacturers, but all of which - I assume - (don't tell Erwin - he hates it when I assume stuff) have a link to the Health Ministry (in Japan - when I labor something I really labor it!), probably in the manufacture of plastic (and/or other) medical equipment, parts and/or components and/or emergency supplies and/or something like that.
I further 'assume' the list being comprised of those companies - specifically from HK - that have [at some point in the past (in the case of Stromberger; some time in the past!)] received some form of clearance or permission from the ministry. For want of a better phrase; an 'approved companies' list.
My Japanese being what it is (non-existent), and my failure to locate the English version of the page meaning I can only guess at the nature of that clearance/permission granting, I will assume (again!) that it is related to medical grade plastic production and/or Quality Assurance ('QA') and/or import-export licenses and/or something like that?
It does not prove that Redbox and Blue Box are 'main competitors', just because they both appear on it with different mailing addresses! Indeed, all the various incarnations of Tai Sang, "BLUE-BOX", Blue Box, Redbox, and Red Box (among others) have at one point been found in the one building in Aberdeen, known locally as 'The Blue Box Building'.
Their first
'ace' seems to prove me right? It certainly doesn't prove what they state it
does! Nor is it what they want it to be, being another Ministry altogether, from another country altogether, and about as 'official' in these matters as my big toe!
However I'll thank him for finding it, there are 10 or twelve addresses and five or six companies there which are new to me, so more grist to the mill!
Moving swiftly along and leaving behind this farcical failure of an attempt to prove me wrong: the grim-faced duo had another ace up their sleeve on the 17th December didn't they? Oh yes, indeedly and yeay-verily did they have another ace, and the ace that they had was looked upon and found to be good, yeay, even unto the ends of time would it be talked-about as the ace of aces . . .
The Tai Sang 1981 Toy Catalogue Cover!
Again let us allow Erwin (or Paul, the authorship is confusing at the end of their post, although from the spelling I'm 'assuming' it's Erwin) to enlighten us as to the nature of the 'ace' in his own words . . .
However I'll thank him for finding it, there are 10 or twelve addresses and five or six companies there which are new to me, so more grist to the mill!
Moving swiftly along and leaving behind this farcical failure of an attempt to prove me wrong: the grim-faced duo had another ace up their sleeve on the 17th December didn't they? Oh yes, indeedly and yeay-verily did they have another ace, and the ace that they had was looked upon and found to be good, yeay, even unto the ends of time would it be talked-about as the ace of aces . . .
The Tai Sang 1981 Toy Catalogue Cover!
Again let us allow Erwin (or Paul, the authorship is confusing at the end of their post, although from the spelling I'm 'assuming' it's Erwin) to enlighten us as to the nature of the 'ace' in his own words . . .
"Other photo show a 1981 HK Toy fare advertise where
clearly show Blue Box And Red Box as two entities with separated address and
name plus factories .In this case showing the RED BOX factory in Singapore and
Blue Box from Hong Kong."
. . . note
the CAPITAL Redbox - here it is
again;
Image Credit - Vectis Auctions
Are you
getting as sick of the sight of it as I am? It actually
shows two factory buildings, both apparently designed by the same firm of
architects (I nearly did get a degree in that!), but these cheap, concrete,
1960's industrial buildings were (as they still are) often manufactured from off-the-peg,
pre-formed panels, so that might be a red-herring? Anyway - I digress - the
caption under the one which looks like the Aberdeen, Hong Kong building - I've
just mentioned above - states . . .
"Blue
Box Factory Building - Hong Kong"
. . . while the caption under the one which
looks like pictures of the Toa Payoh, Singapore building I found on-line while researching Blue Box states . . .
"Blue
Box Factory Building - Singapore"
. .
. and it even has, written across it, in Perspex letters about 750mm high (I
was a sign-fitter after the architecture thing, and before the Segway or Stretch-limo stuff!); Blue
Box Toy Factory Pte., Ltd.
There is no Red Box factory shown in either photo-image on that catalogue
(sorry: "1981 HK Toy fare advertise" he wants you to think he
was at the toy fair maybe? He was seven!), nor are either stated as being the
Red Box factory!
How did the fucktards even think to publish that, with the claims they attached to it? After stealing it from Vectis, and/or failing to acknowledge the source and then changing the description - Making it up as they go along!
How did the fucktards even think to publish that, with the claims they attached to it? After stealing it from Vectis, and/or failing to acknowledge the source and then changing the description - Making it up as they go along!
The only
other evidence presented by the cover is the contact details for 'an' office &
showroom, which because it doesn't stipulate the handling of either of the logo'd brands to
be found on the cover (Blue Box and Redbox) specifically: can be assumed
(yes Erwin; fucking assumption again!) instead to have represented both!
It also highlights one of the systemic failings in the Cock-wackin's research habits; he thinks (assumes!) that the rest of us haven't got the same Google! He imagined (assumed!) - despite my highlighting the Vectis archive at him, in the 12-000-worder J'accuse in October - that somehow, no one would check the origin of the picture - an image which obviously hadn't originated with him or the Jabbering Fuck!
Their second
'ace' [also] seems to prove me right? It certainly doesn't prove what they states it
does!
I'm not
celebrating here, I'm taking the piss out of two fuckwitted dullards who can't
get their shit together in order to beat me up, in a war THEY started. It is
beyond parody, it is tragic. These two couldn't fight their way out of a damp
paper sack with a fire-axe and a flamethrower.
And we have their
Parts 2, 3 . . . ; god-knows how many, to come? I will, before the year is out,
rip them both new arseholes, live on the Internet for 7.something-billion people to
read, again and again and again in the weeks and months and decades to come -
if they are not very careful.
And how
careful can they be? Manufacturing 'evidence' which then fails to back-up their
support for Erwin's 'make it up as he goes along' shit - as highlighted, by me,
in the autumn just past? They haven't even started to try.
===============================================================
As you've
been so patient today, here's a random picture of some toy soldiers from my
collection, they may be of Spanish* manufacture, but I'm going to assume you'd
have to ask a Cock-wackin' Monkey-lizard?
* I lied - they're Polish! Indeed, I may
have lied twice as they could be civilians, not soldiers, conscripted by the
local Count or Baron to presumably sacrifice themselves on some Teutonic shield-wall?
I will also assume from the pre-prepared body-armour that the middle guy is a professional soldier, but the other two? The guy in the mail shirt could be assumed to be a local levy or standing-militia type, while I'm assuming the other chap was probably beating corn a week before call-up!
No comments:
Post a Comment