it's really a pity that a denier at any cost "personally cannot" accept an honorable way of escape from a lost discussion (offered by Paul Mercer wise proposal) and came back to provoke, posting nonsense and offenses.
Mr. Wadinga will get back what he deserves now, in form of EVIDENCES (a word he is clearly allergic to, as well as to geometry, preferring his own interpretation to proven and written facts).
Here Mr.Wadinga is right! The two opinions are NOT equivalent as one is supported by evidences (+ historian evaluations) while the other one is only based on his desperate denial attempts.Wadinga wrote: "This is not a debate between two reasonable opinions where they are equally reasonable interpretations of known facts"
We have proven beyond ANY DOUBT that there was a serious threat aiming to disciplinary actions against both Leach and Wake-Walker (as a recap, I re-post here all the evidences we have already collected, I'm sure new ones will emerge from published and unpublished books/documents):
Against these EVIDENCES, Mr.Wadinga is free to continue to believe to his fantasies (based on nothing):
that Tovey was mis-remembering things ,
that Pound, Alexander and Churchill were misled by a secretary regarding such a delicate matter ,
that everybody in the RN was approving a still efficient British battleship retreating in front of the enemy
and a flag officer refusing to re-engage when in superiority (+ then loosing contact with the enemy) ,
that the son of Capt.Leach (former First Sea Lord) was unable to interpret facts regarding the honorability of his father ,
that the alteration of reality done in Tovey's despatches was due to "typos" ,
that, had Bismarck safely reached France, there would have been no consequence for Leach and W-W ,
but I would suggest him to think carefully before posting anymore, overwhelmed by his "crusader" spirit in defense of two militarily very "poor" officers, having wasted a good opportunity to quietly move to other subjects.
Bye, Alberto