EEVS@aol.com wrote: > [Of course the foregoing information is pertinetnt, it is not however a > reflection of your previous post on this topic, nor does it reflect the > content of the other posts] >
Yes it Was pertinent. And indeed it represented the content of my other
post. > > [I will be happy to review materials in my library and see if I can help you] >
That would be extremely kind of you. I can use all the help that I can
find. That's why I'm here <G>. > > [I do not need to rethink my comments, they are my considered opinion. > Insofar as rude flaming is concerned, I suggest you look in the mirror.] >
Thank you. I know what I look like, and it is no longer a pretty sight.
Age is not kind. I did not flame you or anyone else to my knowledge. I
apologize if you thought that I did. It was not my intention. > > [Requires more than words. Peace is a result of actions, taken and not > taken. We all have the opportunity to achieve peace, yet so few are willing > to do what it takes to make it happen. My families motto, by the way is > "Amor et amcitia requent".] >
I believe the words 'in peace' are self explanatory and need no defense.
Since I speak no Latin nor Italian, but do speak some Spanish, I have a
vague of idea of what this means: Love and friendliness (amicability)
required. If not, please explain further? Am always willing to learn.