Hello everybody,
What "
I find is particularly disturbing" (to use the original wording
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=8491&start=495#p82859) is the fact that a forum member is posting twice, with the excuse of debating about "process", in clear violation of the (easy ) rule of "one and one only post" above....
Also "
what I find is particularly disturbing" is that he keeps posting not a summary about the very topic of this thread, but just complains about his own dissatisfaction for the outcome of the discussions since 2013 (when the new evidences started to surface and could not be countered without spectacular but not credible fantasy exercises)..
This "obliges" me to answer to points that should have never been mentioned in a "summary"....
"The observations by the other knowledgeable people on the manifest shortcomings of the interesting take are shouted down with a blizzard of personal insults including Hooligan and claims that anybody who does not accept it is stupid, ill-educated and believes in fairy stories"
I would kindly remind to everybody that the tones have been very well-educated and friendly until Antonio Bonomi started linking his (until then) well accepted 2005 reconstruction to the "regrettable aftermath" (CM menace, cover-up and final celebrations). Immediately he got plainly insulted (
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=5830&p=54913&hilit= ... lme#p54913), without any excuse up to now.
Starting from this point in time, we were called "conspiracy theorists"(
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=6495&p=60879&hilit= ... ist#p60879), "well concocted zigurrat of supporsitions tellers" (
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=6728&p=77855&hilit= ... rat#p77855), "flat-earth theorists"(
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=8491&p=82619&hilit= ... rth#p82619), fallen "bridge builders"( see
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=5752&hilit=Genova&start=675#p80371), "stupid" (
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=6728&p=65547&hilit=stupid#p65542) or told we were not able to read an English text (e.g. the use of past perfect (
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=6728&hilit=past+per ... 375#p76143) or the meaning of "conduct" in military environment (
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=6728&p=76803&hilit=conduct#p76803) are blatant examples), despite having provided any kind of solid proof supporting our statements.
Wadinga wrote: "We were informed about a potential vote. Has it happened? That should decide it."
No, the vote (that was never about Leach's timidity, as a forum member has tried to say...) could possibly indicate the forum majority position, not telling us who is right. The historical truth is (fortunately) not depending on the number of people accepting it. It is in the official documents presented and in the battle reconstruction complete and consistent work done vs. the "indeterminateness" (possibly majoritarian) party.
Finally,
coming to the summary of this specific thread topic (as here we are not discussing the whole "story"...), not a single figure, out of the following ones (especially the 1) to 4) points that do not depend on "luck", are based on data available to everyone here and do not need any "
digital timing" to be calculated), could be definitely countered in these past days with any valid argumentation (attempts have been counter-questioned and... left without answer/alternative by the opponents).
- BS vs PoW gunnery performances.jpg (63.32 KiB) Viewed 1663 times
These figures complement and confirm Adm.Santarini published gunnery work conclusions, 1) pointing to the fact that PoW gunnery was indeed very good and 2) outlining the reasons why someone refused (and apparently still refuses) to recognize her performances for a very understandable reason (
download/file.php?id=3420).
Bye, Alberto