[Seizethecarp]

“Really you did no such thing—your response was to call me a liar which is just fine, you are certainly welcome to do that.”

Link please.

I do not believe I did any such thing. IIRC, you were confused about what document you were looking at, which was partially computer generated (most likely in the late 1970’s) and you failed to note the hand-typed U of HI graduate degrees recorded in the lower right-hand corner.

You, also have failed to provide evidence of a coherent alternative narrative with alternative parents for Barry that I have seen.

Do you claim that the FOIA INS docs are forged and the U of HI registrar and U of WA current databases are tampered with, all of which have produced numerous FOIA confirmations that Stanley Ann was at both institutions and in each other’s institutions, and tie to the INS docs, IIRC?

[Brown Deer]

You, also have failed to provide evidence of a coherent alternative narrative with alternative parents for Barry that I have seen.

Why can't you get it through your dense head, that you're not important? Why do you continue to have this fantasy that people are going to share their evidence with you? Nobody has anything to prove to you, so why do you continue to make an ass of yourself?

[David]

I do not believe I did any such thing. IIRC, you were confused about what document you were looking at, which was partially computer generated (most likely in the late 1970’s) and you failed to note the hand-typed U of HI graduate degrees recorded in the lower right-hand corner.

I am not confused about anything. I do this every day for real money and have a Great time doing it.

I clearly distinguished between the computer generated document and the original entry document and explained the circumstances under which the computer document might have been generated.

The references to the original entry document were to a copy posted by Fred which cut off the additional information and I specifically referenced that also. I don't think that has anything to do with the credibility of the basic document.

The fundamental proposition is that the purported Stanley original entry transcript is an indefensible fraud for all of the reasons I specified in my original post on the topic.