On Thursday, December 8, 2016 at 1:01:04 PM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 12/8/2016 11:56 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Thursday, December 8, 2016 at 12:27:23 PM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 12/8/2016 11:19 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Thursday, December 8, 2016 at 11:53:36 AM UTC-5, philo wrote:
On 12/08/2016 10:48 AM, trader_4 wrote:


snip

More rewriting of history.




Obviously you have done no reading on WW-II

I've read-up extensively especially Churchill.

Maybe you need to do some reading too?



Let's review, shall we? You came here and made a post about
Newt's tweet:

"75 years ago the Japanese displayed professional brilliance and
technological power launching surprises from Hawaii to the Philippines."

You told us with that post:

The above quote was a "stand alone" quote and was not been taken out of context. Had the statement been part of of a broader analysis it might have been a different issue but it's false no matter how one looks at it.

In fact, the quote was preceded immediately before by this tweet:

€œDecember 7 is a good day to remember that the world is dangerous and shattering surprise is possible even when we have been warned,€�


So, let's put it together in context:

€œDecember 7 is a good day to remember that the world is dangerous and shattering surprise is possible even when we have been warned,€�

"75 years ago the Japanese displayed professional brilliance and
technological power launching surprises from Hawaii to the Philippines."


And you think I'm the one that can't read or get things right?
And note this isn't the first time you've done this, it's happened
many times before, where you don't have the basic facts, or have
them wrong.


Good grief... Instead of arguing about silly points so you can win, why
don't you just try to have a conversation like normal people?



As usual, the village idiot weighs in. IMO, and in the opinion of at
least one other poster, it's not silly as to whether what Newt tweeted
was standalone, as Philo claims, or immediately preceded by another
tweet about Pearl that sets the context and paints a different picture.

And WTF exactly are you doing, when you engage in 100 posts about
something here?


It takes knowledge on how to "read" an entire scenario and understand
it. You, obviously, don't have that skill set.

--
Maggie

ROFL.

Philo talkes a sentence out of context, claims there is nothing more,
its "standalone", when it was immediately preceded by another tweet
that set the context. And I'm the one that can't read? That's another example why you're the village idiot.