report, page-25

Reichman,

That is not the way I interpreted your first reply. You can re-read it and see what you make of it.

Yes, EE did interpreted it the wrong way and he gave me support, but your request to me was a straight request to explain/clarifying myself.

Your reply to EE's post was clear proof of that. You put him straight as to my past ideas/comments, and even going to the extent of making reference of some of my past posts by copying and paste them, in order to support your insinuations/statements.

EE's reply was to tell you that he didn't follow (Wasn't aware of) my previous posts.....

Anyway all is good and you can see what I am clearly thinking. I would still like a balanced reply to my previous post though, if at all possible.

Buddy