David Eduardo wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
David Eduardo wrote:

There is no risk in leaving the fight behind.
I would get a good chuckle out of finding out how you think I could have
remained, given I was escorted to the airport; the intent was to silence
the radio stations by nationalization, not to silence me personally.

How you would have stayed is not the question. You claim to have been
a defender of democracy. The question is, as a defender, how you would
risk life and property by leaving.

I did not leave, I was sent out of the country, by an armed escort. I risked
life and property, lost all my property and barely kept my life.
Changing the subject is another charming debate tactic designed to get
you out of clarifying a statement that makes no sense.

Once again, making my point for me.

You made no point. "Left the country" sounds voluntary. Removed at gunpoint
is the reality of the matter.




Yes, I did make a point. Whether you left voluntarily, or you were
removed at gun point, is a semantic matter-- the point is that you did
not stay and fight. The conflict remained in your absense. You did
nothing to defend democracy, because you didn't participate in the
fight. You did not risk life and property by leaving the fight behind you.

Whether there was personal risk or loss is one thing. Whether you
risked, or lost defending democracy is something else.

Chauncey, your stories, and supporting evidence on your website,
change with the telling.

Doroteo Arámbula you are not.

"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...


Yes, I did make a point. Whether you left voluntarily, or you were
removed at gun point, is a semantic matter-- the point is that you did not
stay and fight. The conflict remained in your absense. You did nothing to
defend democracy, because you didn't participate in the fight. You did not
risk life and property by leaving the fight behind you.

There was no fight, other than in the media. The junta fell when the members
started to disagree, and elections were finally held. In aobut 8 years, I
saw 5 changes of government, only two by elections. On person alone could
not do anything about that...

Whether there was personal risk or loss is one thing. Whether you
risked, or lost defending democracy is something else.

The fact is, I did lose everything from home to business.

Chauncey, your stories, and supporting evidence on your website, change
with the telling.

The bio part, aside from the addition of some scans that have been provided
by people I knew (I'm about to add pictures of my outside engineer and car
racing partner, Eduardo Curz, from his son who found them following
Eduardo's death) the teext has not changed for about 10 years.

Doroteo Arámbula you are not.

Nor would I want to be.

David Eduardo wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...

Yes, I did make a point. Whether you left voluntarily, or you were
removed at gun point, is a semantic matter-- the point is that you did not
stay and fight. The conflict remained in your absense. You did nothing to
defend democracy, because you didn't participate in the fight. You did not
risk life and property by leaving the fight behind you.

There was no fight, other than in the media. The junta fell when the members
started to disagree, and elections were finally held. In aobut 8 years, I
saw 5 changes of government, only two by elections. On person alone could
not do anything about that...


Then don't sell yourself as a Freedom Fighter. Do not sell
yourself as Risking Life and Property as a Defender of Democracy.

You had been removed from the game. No risk. No defense.


Whether there was personal risk or loss is one thing. Whether you
risked, or lost defending democracy is something else.

The fact is, I did lose everything from home to business.

Again, thank you for making my point. You lost, but you did not
risk. You accepted your losses and you left. Risk in the Defense of
Democracy would have required you to remain and make a stand. You did
not. Put whatever spin you wish on this, the facts are that you didn't
risk in the defense of democracy. You didn't make your stand. You took
your screwing by the junta and left.

Doroteo Arámbula you are not.

You cannot regale us with your implications of heroic defense of a
cause, when you didn't face the conflict. Put a weapon in your hand and
make a stand, yes, then, you'd be a hero.

Put you on a plane at gunpoint and you're just another faceless
American who got run out of a South American dictatorship to return to
the country he worked so hard to leave.

If it weren't so insulting it could be a Movie of the Week.

With each telling, you more become Cliff Clavin: Invincibly
convinced of his superiority, while cluelessly the butt of everyone's
jokes. Going and blowing about his great feats, while in reality being
just a mailman. A letter carrier, who hides behind his uniform as some
great hero of Liberty and Democracy, who, in fact, has done nothing but
carry mail. And lives with his mother.

I have no doubt that you've lived a life and accomplished things
that you're proud of. That many of us would respect. But your self
aggrandizements cut the nuts off your credibility, and point to
something that's less than there may actually be.

And that's a shame. Because, here, in this group, we're all
allies. Disparate. Broadly distributed in social position. And
economics. But, here to share experiences of radio hobbycraft, and some
more general interests. Here, we're all colleagues. Having a beer.

And then there's you. The guy in the uniform at the end of the
bar. Telling us all of his heroics.

I thought you were better than that.

Apparently, I was embarrassedly mistaken.





Chauncey, your stories, and supporting evidence on your website, change
with the telling.

The bio part, aside from the addition of some scans that have been provided
by people I knew (I'm about to add pictures of my outside engineer and car
racing partner, Eduardo Curz, from his son who found them following
Eduardo's death) the teext has not changed for about 10 years.

Scans of documents supporting your claims, however, have. As
documented in this group. DXAce having made that point more than a year
ago. Myself having witnessed what he pointed out had changed.

You're very good at playing semantic games. Your debate coach
would be proud. But you are in conflict with your own facts. Your
credibility, like CCU's stock price, is slipping.


Doroteo Arámbula you are not.

Nor would I want to be.


Probably the truest thing you've said, to date.

"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
David Eduardo wrote:
There was no fight, other than in the media. The junta fell when the
members started to disagree, and elections were finally held. In aobut 8
years, I saw 5 changes of government, only two by elections. On person
alone could not do anything about that...


Then don't sell yourself as a Freedom Fighter. Do not sell yourself
as Risking Life and Property as a Defender of Democracy.

Excuse me, but when one comes within a hair of being shot (as evidenced by
the disappearance of my colleague at the newspaper), and exiled with next to
nothing, about all that can be risked has been risked. There was not a civil
war, just one of over 100 changes of government in the 150 years of
independence of Ecuador. The people had not taken up arms for decades
there...

Scans of documents supporting your claims, however, have.

Additions add depth, and do not change the underlying facts. It took me 5
years to get a scan of a verification letter for HCRM1 that I had written in
the 60's, and I finally got one from well respected DXer John Callerman of
Krum, TX. Adding that only gave a bit of dimension to the information, and
changed not a tad the facts.

As documented in this group. DXAce having made that point more than a year
ago. Myself having witnessed what he pointed out had changed.

DXace proved nothing... in fact, I have given dozens of names of persons who
can corroborate the facts he so glibly dismissed. To his crippled mind, the
idea of a 17 year old with a corporation and a business is impossible...
witness his obsession with "nothing in your name" when corporations are a
way of life in business. He is simply ignorant of how things work in
business and outside the US.

You're very good at playing semantic games. Your debate coach would
be proud. But you are in conflict with your own facts. Your credibility,
like CCU's stock price, is slipping.


Doroteo Arámbula you are not.

Nor would I want to be.


Probably the truest thing you've said, to date.

Pancho Villa was basically a thief and a thug, who latched on to the Mexican
Revolution to achieve notoriety and to escape prosecution by the law.

On Jan 8, 11:39*am, "David Cornholio" wrote:
DXace proved nothing... in fact, I have given dozens of names of persons who
can corroborate the facts he so glibly dismissed. To his crippled mind, the
idea of a 17 year old with a corporation and a business is impossible...

Impossible? Not at all. Not even that unusual. What DxAce finds
difficult to believe, I think, is that you'd actually tell the truth
about something.

David Eduardo wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
David Eduardo wrote:
There was no fight, other than in the media. The junta fell when the
members started to disagree, and elections were finally held. In aobut 8
years, I saw 5 changes of government, only two by elections. On person
alone could not do anything about that...

Then don't sell yourself as a Freedom Fighter. Do not sell yourself
as Risking Life and Property as a Defender of Democracy.

Excuse me, but when one comes within a hair of being shot (as evidenced by
the disappearance of my colleague at the newspaper), and exiled with next to
nothing, about all that can be risked has been risked. There was not a civil
war, just one of over 100 changes of government in the 150 years of
independence of Ecuador. The people had not taken up arms for decades
there...
Scans of documents supporting your claims, however, have.

Additions add depth, and do not change the underlying facts. It took me 5
years to get a scan of a verification letter for HCRM1 that I had written in
the 60's, and I finally got one from well respected DXer John Callerman of
Krum, TX. Adding that only gave a bit of dimension to the information, and
changed not a tad the facts.

As documented in this group. DXAce having made that point more than a year
ago. Myself having witnessed what he pointed out had changed.

DXace proved nothing... in fact, I have given dozens of names of persons who
can corroborate the facts he so glibly dismissed. To his crippled mind, the
idea of a 17 year old with a corporation and a business is impossible...
witness his obsession with "nothing in your name" when corporations are a
way of life in business. He is simply ignorant of how things work in
business and outside the US.
You're very good at playing semantic games. Your debate coach would
be proud. But you are in conflict with your own facts. Your credibility,
like CCU's stock price, is slipping.


Doroteo Arámbula you are not.
Nor would I want to be.

Probably the truest thing you've said, to date.

Pancho Villa was basically a thief and a thug, who latched on to the Mexican
Revolution to achieve notoriety and to escape prosecution by the law.



But he didn't leave the fight behind and then wave the flag of
Liberty. If nothing else, he stood and fought for what he believed.

Like I said, leave the fight behind, and you risk nothing. Put a
weapon in your hand, and you can make the claim.

You opted to take the road out that was handed you.

You may have lost much. But your risk, like other things, isn't what
you claim.

D Peter Maus wrote:
David Eduardo wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
David Eduardo wrote:
There was no fight, other than in the media. The junta fell when the
members started to disagree, and elections were finally held. In
aobut 8 years, I saw 5 changes of government, only two by elections.
On person alone could not do anything about that...

Then don't sell yourself as a Freedom Fighter. Do not sell
yourself as Risking Life and Property as a Defender of Democracy.

Excuse me, but when one comes within a hair of being shot (as
evidenced by the disappearance of my colleague at the newspaper), and
exiled with next to nothing, about all that can be risked has been
risked. There was not a civil war, just one of over 100 changes of
government in the 150 years of independence of Ecuador. The people had
not taken up arms for decades there...
Scans of documents supporting your claims, however, have.

Additions add depth, and do not change the underlying facts. It took
me 5 years to get a scan of a verification letter for HCRM1 that I had
written in the 60's, and I finally got one from well respected DXer
John Callerman of Krum, TX. Adding that only gave a bit of dimension
to the information, and changed not a tad the facts.

As documented in this group. DXAce having made that point more than a
year ago. Myself having witnessed what he pointed out had changed.

DXace proved nothing... in fact, I have given dozens of names of
persons who can corroborate the facts he so glibly dismissed. To his
crippled mind, the idea of a 17 year old with a corporation and a
business is impossible... witness his obsession with "nothing in your
name" when corporations are a way of life in business. He is simply
ignorant of how things work in business and outside the US.
You're very good at playing semantic games. Your debate coach
would be proud. But you are in conflict with your own facts. Your
credibility, like CCU's stock price, is slipping.


Doroteo Arámbula you are not.
Nor would I want to be.

Probably the truest thing you've said, to date.

Pancho Villa was basically a thief and a thug, who latched on to the
Mexican Revolution to achieve notoriety and to escape prosecution by
the law.


But he didn't leave the fight behind and then wave the flag of
Liberty. If nothing else, he stood and fought for what he believed.

Like I said, leave the fight behind, and you risk nothing. Put a
weapon in your hand, and you can make the claim.

You opted to take the road out that was handed you.

You may have lost much. But your risk, like other things, isn't what
you claim.


You know nothing about the Chicago Boys, do you?

David wrote:

D Peter Maus wrote:
David Eduardo wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
David Eduardo wrote:
There was no fight, other than in the media. The junta fell when the
members started to disagree, and elections were finally held. In
aobut 8 years, I saw 5 changes of government, only two by elections.
On person alone could not do anything about that...

Then don't sell yourself as a Freedom Fighter. Do not sell
yourself as Risking Life and Property as a Defender of Democracy.

Excuse me, but when one comes within a hair of being shot (as
evidenced by the disappearance of my colleague at the newspaper), and
exiled with next to nothing, about all that can be risked has been
risked. There was not a civil war, just one of over 100 changes of
government in the 150 years of independence of Ecuador. The people had
not taken up arms for decades there...
Scans of documents supporting your claims, however, have.

Additions add depth, and do not change the underlying facts. It took
me 5 years to get a scan of a verification letter for HCRM1 that I had
written in the 60's, and I finally got one from well respected DXer
John Callerman of Krum, TX. Adding that only gave a bit of dimension
to the information, and changed not a tad the facts.

As documented in this group. DXAce having made that point more than a
year ago. Myself having witnessed what he pointed out had changed.

DXace proved nothing... in fact, I have given dozens of names of
persons who can corroborate the facts he so glibly dismissed. To his
crippled mind, the idea of a 17 year old with a corporation and a
business is impossible... witness his obsession with "nothing in your
name" when corporations are a way of life in business. He is simply
ignorant of how things work in business and outside the US.
You're very good at playing semantic games. Your debate coach
would be proud. But you are in conflict with your own facts. Your
credibility, like CCU's stock price, is slipping.


Doroteo Arámbula you are not.
Nor would I want to be.

Probably the truest thing you've said, to date.

Pancho Villa was basically a thief and a thug, who latched on to the
Mexican Revolution to achieve notoriety and to escape prosecution by
the law.


But he didn't leave the fight behind and then wave the flag of
Liberty. If nothing else, he stood and fought for what he believed.

Like I said, leave the fight behind, and you risk nothing. Put a
weapon in your hand, and you can make the claim.

You opted to take the road out that was handed you.

You may have lost much. But your risk, like other things, isn't what
you claim.


You know nothing about the Chicago Boys, do you?

Bigger than Fidel, Bigger than Che... It's David Frackelton Gleason, Freedom
Fighter!

David Eduardo wrote:

"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
David Eduardo wrote:
There was no fight, other than in the media. The junta fell when the
members started to disagree, and elections were finally held. In aobut 8
years, I saw 5 changes of government, only two by elections. On person
alone could not do anything about that...


Then don't sell yourself as a Freedom Fighter. Do not sell yourself
as Risking Life and Property as a Defender of Democracy.

Excuse me, but when one comes within a hair of being shot (as evidenced by
the disappearance of my colleague at the newspaper), and exiled with next to
nothing, about all that can be risked has been risked. There was not a civil
war, just one of over 100 changes of government in the 150 years of
independence of Ecuador. The people had not taken up arms for decades
there...

Scans of documents supporting your claims, however, have.

Additions add depth, and do not change the underlying facts. It took me 5
years to get a scan of a verification letter for HCRM1 that I had written in
the 60's, and I finally got one from well respected DXer John Callerman of
Krum, TX. Adding that only gave a bit of dimension to the information, and
changed not a tad the facts.

Ah, the 60's! That was long berfore you adopted the 'Eduardo' shtick.

As documented in this group. DXAce having made that point more than a year
ago. Myself having witnessed what he pointed out had changed.

DXace proved nothing...

Sure I have! The biggest problem you have is that you are a pathological liar.

in fact, I have given dozens of names of persons who
can corroborate the facts he so glibly dismissed. To his crippled mind, the
idea of a 17 year old with a corporation and a business is impossible...
witness his obsession with "nothing in your name" when corporations are a
way of life in business. He is simply ignorant of how things work in
business and outside the US.

It's interesting how much you are now infatuated with the corporation thing! I
do recall you saying in the past (when questioned about the ownership thing)
that the number one reason you wanted Ecuadorian citizenship was so that you
could put your *radio stations* in your name.

But *conveniently* you were thrown out of the country just days before getting
citizenship.

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



You're very good at playing semantic games. Your debate coach would
be proud. But you are in conflict with your own facts. Your credibility,
like CCU's stock price, is slipping.


Doroteo Arámbula you are not.

Nor would I want to be.


Probably the truest thing you've said, to date.

Pancho Villa was basically a thief and a thug, who latched on to the Mexican
Revolution to achieve notoriety and to escape prosecution by the law.

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'?