False informtion ?? < insult removed>
The document presented was the orignal report that someone had bothered to put Bills name in the area's noted for people to understand who was being talked about. Not my alteration, as I already explained. And not false information either . Simply clarification on the part of the publisher of this particular accounting.
Now if you bothered to look up that much information you should have also by now found enough references to this incident, and Bills roll in it by a number of valid sources. This has been presented by other gun writers and historians and therefore nothing false about the data, even though Bill's name was used by someone other than me in this particular accounting.
So what mistake should I man up to, other than to argue with people like you ?
The document presented was the orignal report that someone had bothered to put Bills name in the area's noted for people to understand who was being talked about. Not my alteration, as I already explained. And not false information either . Simply clarification on the part of the publisher of this particular accounting.
Now if you bothered to look up that much information you should have also by now found enough references to this incident, and Bills roll in it by a number of valid sources. This has been presented by other gun writers and historians and therefore nothing false about the data, even though Bill's name was used by someone other than me in this particular accounting.
So what mistake should I man up to, other than to argue with people like you ?
Last edited by a moderator: