Quote:
Originally Posted by Less
I think you should be grateful that he's supplied some information It may be wrong (i doubt it), but you shouldn't treat him in such a nasty way.
|
another off thread wander, ok i will explain it, again
READ his posts, it wasn't provided in any way other than "evidence" to tell me i was wrong
not have you seen this? is this of interest?
or even
"i have found this cutting regarding your relative, it does say that he was killed in action, how did you know of the wife's visit? although the red cross did arrange visits there was a lot that couldnt go i have seen the telegrams denying the visit"
no he responded with
"This is the Newspaper report of his death, the first she knew was in a letter from her hubands C/o"
he then went back an added in the extra line, look at the post you will see the edit.
as far me being nasty, in what way have I been nasty?
there was no malice, no spite, no anger, what was nasty? because i was short with someone who posted a correction that was incorrect?
i am sure retlaw has provided a lot of useful information and has spent many many hours researching on other peoples behalf, and that is commendable.
that doesnt excuse, what i believe as him "being rude", and the arrogance in assuming he has all the answers.
but no doubt a lot of you wont see that, they won't read subjectively, they won't see anyone elses point of view, look at whats in front of their own noses, no they will just go through life agreeing, when they dont know what they agreeing to.