 |
PM |  | |
Quote | | |
Reply | | |
Full Topic | |
| Joined: | Mon Nov 21st, 2005 |
| Location: | California USA |
| Posts: | 6399 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |    |
I am thinking if you meant either 1 or 2 that I should move the word deliberately to the appropriate spot. If however, your intent was number 3 we could leave deliberately where it is at the end of the sentence, but folks may or may not pick up on the intention.
If there is a case where the writer prefers that the reader is beset with work to do in order to understand the writing, then this is that case. I prefer that the reader be left with some work to do, so my opinion is to leave it as written in this case.
In this case I don't think that the reader is beset with too much work to do while reading.
A victim of this big lie, this Dollar Hegemony, the new Caesar, with "that which is Caesar's," moves power inequitably from the victims to the criminals.
changed to:
A VICTIM of this big lie (this Dollar Hegemony) is ONE WHO HAS "that which is Caesar's," as the new Caesar moves power inequitably from the victims to the criminals.
That is an obvious improvement in communicating the intended message, thanks.
Progress toward war is carefully monitored, well documented, FACT.
Should it be:
Progress toward war is a carefully monitored, well documented FACT.
or
Progress toward war is carefully monitored, a well documented FACT.
I tried to say: Progress toward war is carefully monitored, accurately measured, meticulously documented, and factual.
The second sentence is the most accurate improvement of the message intended.
If that exchange, documented fact, could be known precisely, exactly, each step of the way. If such an understanding, precise, accurate knowledge, the entire transaction, could be accountable as an inequitable transaction whereby Person A "made a killing" at the expense of another person living in China (perhaps a person his same age, a person who for now is on the wrong end of the Legal Money Monopoly World Reserve Currency POWER stick): there is accurate judgment in that case.
How about this:
If that specific exchange could be known precisely as a documented fact, exactly each step of the way, completely understood from every conceivable angle, including Person A having "made a killing" at the expense of another person in China, then is there accurate judgment in that case, and could that case be measured as an equitable transaction, or is it by that measure another case of iniquity? The Chinese labor force is (temporarily) on the wrong end of the Legal Money Monopoly World Reserve Currency POWER stick. National Interest anyone?
bear,
My wife stumbled upon a book during some cleaning, where the book was written by my friend's father who was a veteran of World War II, and if you think it is worth publishing that book, with some edit work on your part, then on your say so I will try to reconnect with my friend and ask for permission to move that book into the current stream.
I saw the pile of papers and considered the viability of turning that pile of papers into a book for sale, proceeds, if any, going to the publisher and the writers son, so I'm asking my favorite publisher if she is interested in more work that may not pay well.