David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


Billy Burpelson wrote:

dxAce wrote:

It all makes for an interesting story, with little or no paper trail.

As a disinterested observer and without taking sides in this Great
Debate, just how much 'paper trail' should be expected from something
that:

a) happened around -40- years ago
b) in a foreign country
c) and occurred during a turbulent government take-over

Do you speak/read Spanish?

Do you have access to the 40 year old foreign newspapers? If so, have
you researched them?

No?

Well then, how do you know there -isn't- a 'paper trail'?

Because I long ago discovered that David 'Eduardo' was a pathological
liar.

With absolutely no proof.

What you have done is trumped up insignificant issues and used them to
support your claim. For example, the NAB's error of incorrectly printing my
title in the program for a convention seminar was seen by you to be evidence
of lying about my title. Despite demonstrating to you how the error occured
and how the title, in fact, did not exist, you laid claim to your belief
that there was some kind of chicanery or deceipt involved.

Even more amusing was the insistence that I could not have editied my high
school´s paper since I was but a Sophomore when I became editior...

I don't believe I ever *insisted* that you were not the editor 'Tardo, the
question was about the date(s) that you were the editor. In the beginning when I
questioned that date, which did not jive with your story, you conveniently tried
to hide the date that was on the document displayed on your website.

Remember, 'Tardo?

Nice try.

yet the
totally verifiable fact that in that year, there was no Junior or Senior
class fell on your deaf ears. My class was the first to "extend" the school
from 1st to 9th grade to 1st to 12th grade, meaning that for that first
year, the "High School" had only one grade. You could verify that with an
e-mail, but didn't. You preferred to trump that realtive triviality into a
case to demonstrate your claim I had lied... which is not so.

And on and on with the same sort of thing, none of which proved anything.