"It isn't at all, theleveller. But that is NOT what you said."

Yes, that's exactly what I meant, as you well know. It was you who chose to interpret it differently, despite my admitting that I had not read the previous posts that Jim had made.

I joined the discussion quite a long way down the line and, as I've said, did not have the time to read all the previous posts. Thst happens all the time on a long thread.

You can choose to take whatever interpretation you like - your refusal to accept my explanation is churlish and totally bad-mannered. Anyone who knows me or has read any of my previous posts will know that I would never stoop so low as to put words into other people's mouths. It's not my way. It never has been and it never will be. I value my integrity far more than that - that's why I am upset about being called dishonest. Persoanl abuse does not usually upset me but this is beyond the pale.

Please do me the courtesy of accepting that, if I sinned, it was the sin of ommission.