Mark Ulrik

43 minutes ago, W. Niederhut said:

Mark,

     On this ad hominem note, what was your father's role in WWII?

     Was he also Antifa?

Danish resistance.

Oh no, did I hurt your feelings? I thought you enjoyed lighthearted banter.

15 minutes ago, W. Niederhut said:

My father spent the prime of his youth with Antifa--fighting the Nazis, (in the U.S. 753rd Tank Battalion) from North Africa to Italy, France, and Bavaria, but I don't think he had an opportunity to learn some of these neighborly Belgian niceties.

One can only hope that he had the good sense not to address the non-Germans with "Herr ..."

3 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

You know, you might be the only person in all of Denmark named Mark Ulrik!  (The website says "less than 3.")

Ulrik is very rare, with only 117 in Denmark.

I'm the only "pure" MU as far as I know. The others only have Ulrik as middle name (as in Mark Ulrik Jensen).

7 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Thanks Mark!

I live in Utah, where the Mormons settled. Among the Mormons were a lot of Danish and other Scandinavia converts. I've known people here with all but three of the surnames listed (Kristensen, Thomsen, Møller. and Mortensen).

BTW, my great, great, great grandfather's name was Lars Larsen.

It was surprising to me that the list was so dominated by -sen names. For a while, at least, there seemed to be a trend towards dropping traditional names in favor of more unusual ones. I would also have expected to see one or two names ending on (for example) -gaard or -mand.

PS: It seems that Larsen is also the 4th most common in Norway! Source: Norske efternavne

1 hour ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Mark,

I'm just curious.

I am told that I get my surname from a Danish immigrant. Is Larsen a common surname there?

What about Lars? is that still used as a given name?

Larsen and Lars are extremely common!

From Statistics Denmark (January 1st 2024)

Last names

1     Nielsen     229.327
2     Jensen     226.181
3     Hansen     191.794
4     Andersen     147.066
5     Pedersen     145.213
6     Christensen     109.380
7     Larsen     104.971
8     Sørensen     100.188
9     Rasmussen     86.230
10     Jørgensen     80.135
11     Petersen     70.715
12     Madsen     59.503
13     Kristensen     56.801
14     Olsen     43.612
15     Thomsen     37.881
16     Christiansen     34.509
17     Poulsen     29.968
18     Johansen     29.395
19     Møller     29.207
20     Mortensen     27.624

Boy's names

Lars Larsen combo : 907

How many people are called ...?

2 hours ago, Ron Bulman said:

BTW, Herr is considered an honorific salutation.

Herr (Hr.; pl., Herren)

for men (broadly equivalent to Mr., Lord and Sir in English). This word also means "master, owner, ruler, gentleman" and is also a form of address for the Christian God (English equivalent: Lord). If the surname is not used or known, e. g. when addressing a stranger in the street, the correct form is der Herr ("sir" or "gentleman"). 

Would you feel honored if I called you Mr. Bulman? Maybe even more so if I addressed you in German?

The Danish equivalent is of course Hr. Ulrik, but why so formal? You can call Niederhut many things, but polite is not high on the list.

PS: Thank you for expanding on thread context.

4 minutes ago, Jean Ceulemans said:

Mark really is one of the nicest members here, he helped me a number of times  in finding old books, how to perform certain searches, etcc.

Much appreciated, JP, and ditto 😇

40 minutes ago, W. Niederhut said:

Herr Ulrik,

Making fun of other people's names, are we? I haven't had a lot of that since elementary school. You're mocking my ancestor who, for very good reason, had the name changed from Ulrich some 160 years ago.

1 hour ago, W. Niederhut said:

Perhaps you can broaden your intellectual horizons, once you have finally learned that JFK wasn't murdered by a Lone Nut.

I don't think of him as a "nut" either.

1 hour ago, W. Niederhut said:

Until then, happy hunting, and visit the St. Alexander Nevsky chapel at the Amalienborg Palace some time.

I'm not sure "at" is the right proposition as these buildings are at least a couple of hundred yards apart. I worked in the area for a few years.

1 hour ago, W. Niederhut said:

P.S.  You identified yourself as a Lone Nutter in your original 2022 biographical introduction to the forum

I see. You probably had to tick one of the boxes. Did the label really say "Lone Nutter"? What were the other options?

On 7/21/2024 at 9:49 PM, W. Niederhut said:

Are you a self-professed Lone Nutter, like Mark Ulrik?

Kindly remind me where I made that profession.

On 7/18/2024 at 11:32 PM, W. Niederhut said:

Well, Captain Marvel, perhaps you're just sore that we don't have a "Vintage Comics" board.

But, no, the JFKA board is one of many boards on "the forum."

I have no idea why you keep pretending to misunderstand my rather obvious point. Yes, GPAC is a remarkable song, but this is a JFKA "board". Surely, a resourceful guy like you should be able to find a more suitable "board", especially since there are so many to choose from.

Btw, I've seen it suggested that the posting of the video was in response to something posted by Jim D, but why create a separate thread for that? Would merging the two threads not be reasonable? I mean, to keep everything in context.

A note on terminology: If you disapprove of people calling this a JFKA "forum", then maybe you should tell the forum software:

10 minutes ago, W. Niederhut said:

Mark,

     The Education Forum has a wide array of boards on a variety of subjects.

     The most popular EF board is the JFKA board, but we've also had informative discussions about current events at the Political Discussions and Water Cooler boards.

 Thank you, Captain Obvious. What you call "the JFKA board" is what I referred to as "this forum." Please feel free to read my post again with that in mind.

17 hours ago, W. Niederhut said:

Sandy,

      I think Mark Ulrik would prefer that we discuss John Lennon, the American military industrial complex, and Lennon's low opinion of metaphysics, at the Water Cooler.

We could also redefine the purpose of this forum. I mean, why should everything be about the JFKA when there are so many other interesting topics to discuss?

This thread will eventually be moved to a more appropriate forum, right?

1 hour ago, Gil Jesus said:

I know that it's part of YOUR JOB, all the way from Denmark, to support the AMERICAN government's investigation into the assassination of an AMERICAN president. Why is that ? Why does an Danish citizen so passionately support the American government ? Why is it that your name appears at the bottom of page 1 of this forum on some days, 12 hours a day ?

What is your interest in all of this ?

Inquiring minds want to know.

Geez, Gil, I didn't realize that pointing out your mistake constituted supporting the US government.

PS: If you really must know, I have a habit of opening too many tabs in my browser. Sometimes I return to them, sometimes not. Relax. You're not being monitored by agents operating on foreign soil (that I'm aware of).

On 6/10/2024 at 12:35 PM, Gil Jesus said:

While the Report was quick to note that the fibers in the bag matched some of the fibers taken from the blanket, it suppressed the conclusion of its fiber expert, FBI agent Paul M. Stombaugh, that because he found too few fibers in the bag, he could not positively identify them as having come from the blanket.

I know it's part of your job to discredit the WC, but they didn't actually "suppress" Stombaugh's non-identification of the fibers in the bag.

"Despite these matches, however, Stombaugh was unable to render an opinion that the fibers which he found in the bag had probably come from the blanket, because other types of fibers present in the blanket were not found in the bag" (WCR 137)

I like the way you think. Oswald, who had every reason to believe that the rifle was 36" long, would surely have measured it, while the police, with an unidentified weapon in their hands, couldn't be bothered to.

6 hours ago, Chris Bristow said:

I received a response from Lamson(I believe he has since passed.)

When was that? It's been a while since I had contact with him, but I think he retired last year. Maybe he'll resume posting if he gets sufficiently bored (and Mrs. Lamson allows).

The whole idea of enumerating the RFKs rubs me the wrong way. You can call Jr. anything you like, but there's no good reason to retroactively rename the father. It's almost as silly as calling JFK and his son JFK1 and JFK2.

I guess someone couldn't find the "RFK1" forum.

4 minutes ago, Keven Hofeling said:

In the context of the JFK assassination and other crime perpetrated by the United States Government, absolutely yes, we should be skeptical of what is claimed to be "hard evidence," such as in the cases of photographic and autopsy report evidence in particular, and even just as skeptical when there is an absence of evidence as the result of government concealment. If all is on the up and up with the involvement of the CIA's NPIC and Hawkeyeworks with the Zapruder film on the weekend of the assassination then there should be absolutely no problem with releasing each and every item of evidence that pertains to those particular sojourns of the film, right?

I see. For a moment it almost seemed as if you were comparing "hard evidence" of Z film alteration to "hard evidence" of WMD in Iraq.

1 hour ago, Keven Hofeling said:

Hard evidence like this, Mr. Cohen? In the event you are too young to remember this, the CIA had armed the administration of Bush the younger with all kinds of "hard evidence" of WMD's in Iraq and had suppressed all the evidence that there were none. Or are you one of those people who still contends that there were WMD's in Iraq?

What's your point? That we should be skeptical of people who claim to have "hard evidence"?

This thread is one of the most bizarre things I've ever seen. I'm just waiting for one of you good folks to suggest that Pat is possessed by the Devil. Or the ghost of Arlen Specter.

21 minutes ago, Cliff Varnell said:

Only in an effort to shield said member from accusations of lying.

After silencing him first? I wish you were joking.

Are we allowed to freely speculate on the moral and mental state of other members now?

If that's the case, I have some suspicions of my own.

1 hour ago, Benjamin Cole said:

I do not call you an old crank. I like the enumeration for clarity and brevity. Like the JKFA or TSBD6.

Surely, RFK is clearer and briefer than RFK1?