Comment by throw10920

Reading my previous comment, anyone with decent reading comprehension can tell that I'm describing a possible interpretation. I'm clearly not assigning it as fact, as echelon is.

I can also explain exactly why echelon's interpretation is unfounded, yet you cannot make any coherent argument and are forced to resort to allusions and baseless accusations stemming from a failure to read what I wrote. Although, that's consistent with a failure to read what ralph84 wrote, too.