Santosh Helekar" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
First, it is clear that Joe Vaz cannot defend his Assertion.
Santosh,
There is hardly anything new that you have presented to refute what I said
earlier, regarding inaccuracies. There is NO need to defend my assertion;
it is amply and abundantly clear, -- by your own admission and confirmation,
-- that there were inconsistencies in your story. Now, you can either tell
us that you were right and those who pointed out those errors were wrong.
In this case you will have to revise your own statements and words, to say
there were no errors in your story.
There is no need to further extrapolate this issue or go into an extended
debate, and involve other people i.e. those that agree that there were
inconsistencies as presented in your paper. BTW it is only appropriate that
historical data is extensively and exhaustively researched and accurately
presented. It is inappropriate to present inaccurate data, as is your
habit. There are several other conflicting statements by you, related to
other matters, which are purely nonsensical and without sound basis. In
fact many of your posts have been provocative in nature and content, as the
records will reveal.
I hope this puts the issue to rest. Also, please try and refrain from
inciting others (including your buddy that you want to protect and keep
anonymous). I suggest you and your buddy refrain from ccing/ spamming
others, when you find yourselves in awkward positions.
Thanks,
Joe Vaz
PS: BTW we havent heard from you regarding your anonymous buddy who
conspired with you to aggravate this matter.
_________________________________________________________________
Bought a New Cellphone?
http://adfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/4686-26272-10936-318?ck=Sell Sell your old
one for a Great Price in eBay!
