Walter Scott Jr.,a Forbes-recognized billionaire who headed
Peter Kiewit Sons after Peter Kiewit,born in May 1931,died September
25th 2021 according to the Associated Press and others.

Coverage noted his service as a director of Berkshire Hathaway,
and I looked at their website and found this year's proxy statement.
It was interesting to note that among the directors reelected this
year,he was younger than chairman Warren Buffett (born 1930),
who was younger than David Gottesman(born 1926),who was younger
than Thomas Murphy(born 1925),who was younger than vice chairman
Charles Munger(born 1924).

-=-=-
The World Trade Center towers MUST rise again,
at least as tall as before...or terror has triumphed.

Well, Louis, the historically[-meticulous historian you are may have fumbled the Nebraska Cornhusker football on this one!

That is, while you cite the late Scott's years leading the mega-construction firm Kiewit (and might have even mentioned he was a childhood pal of Warren Buffett who joined his lifelong friend's Giving Pledge project in adulthood long after he already was already a generous billionaire philanthropist), you left out what to me is his most interesting distinction.

I mean, billionaires seem dime-a-dozen these days. But Louis, but there was only ONE who had (1) the personal interest in doing so and (2) the means to purchase the original Bill of Sale of the Louisiana Purchase! (That 1803 France-sold territory of course having included the region now occupied by Omaha, his home town and where Scott was both born and died.)

It's not clear who Scott bought it from nor how it became possible to purchase this Purchase relic; I wonder if someone had sifted it from a certain isolated house on St. Helena Island once cancer claimed Napoleon I on Saturday, May 5, 1821?

BRYAN STYBLE/Florida

Yet another report from The Department of Redundancy Department: That should have read, "the historically-meticulous fellow you are..."

I regret my error. And I regret it.

STYBLE/Florida

AND THAT, alas, was another dispatch from Moronsville:

After some reflection (amid various NFL silliness this Sunday aft), it occurred to me that Napoleon would NOT have had possession of said Bill of Sale, as he got the cash (or gold, or whatever was specifically tendered). Rather, it was JEFFERSON who would have the Bill of Sale (as well as, I suppose, a Deed translated from French).

So perhaps the late magnate' Scott's one-of-a-kind* document was first pilfered from Monticello!

STYBLE//Florida
___________________________________________
* I'd adjectivally-employ "unique", but that word long ago lost its treasured semantic value--originally meaning "one-of-a-kind", but due to many decades of boneheaded misuse is nowadays also recognized as synonymous with "unusual". (But it SHOULDN'T be.)

radioacti...@gmail.com <radioactiveseattle@gmail.com> wrote:
> AND THAT, alas, was another dispatch from Moronsville:
>
> After some reflection (amid various NFL silliness this Sunday aft), it occurred to me that Napoleon would NOT have had possession of said Bill of Sale, as he got the cash (or gold, or whatever was specifically tendered). Rather, it was JEFFERSON who would have the Bill of Sale (as well as, I suppose, a Deed translated from French).
>
> So perhaps the late magnate' Scott's one-of-a-kind* document was first pilfered from Monticello!
>
> STYBLE//Florida
> ___________________________________________
> * I'd adjectivally-employ "unique", but that word long ago lost its treasured
> semantic value--originally meaning "one-of-a-kind", but due to many decades of
> boneheaded misuse is nowadays also recognized as synonymous with "unusual".
> (But it SHOULDN'T be.)

I would hasten to opine,however,that there most definitely IS such a thing
as "more unique",as there can easily be a collection of things among which
no two are exactly alike (and thus uniqueness an attribute as common as one
can possibly be) yet one of them differ from the others by a much greater
degree than any other does.

-=-=-
The World Trade Center towers MUST rise again,
at least as tall as before...or terror has triumphed.

radioacti...@gmail.com <radioactiveseattle@gmail.com> wrote:
> Yet another report from The Department of Redundancy Department: That should
> have read, "the historically-meticulous fellow you are..."

Only if you are intending to allude to me as a person known for
meticulousness (meticulosity?) with regard to matters of history,
and not as a person who,among historians,is known for possessing
a historic degree of that attribute.

> I regret my error. And I regret it.
>
> STYBLE/Florida

-=-=-
The World Trade Center towers MUST rise again,
at least as tall as before...or terror has triumphed.

radioacti...@gmail.com <radioactiveseattle@gmail.com> wrote:
> AND THAT, alas, was another dispatch from Moronsville:
>
> After some reflection (amid various NFL silliness this Sunday aft), it
> occurred to me that Napoleon would NOT have had possession of said Bill of
> Sale, as he got the cash (or gold, or whatever was specifically tendered).
> Rather, it was JEFFERSON who would have the Bill of Sale (as well as, I
> suppose, a Deed translated from French).

It is in any event unlikely that Bonaparte would have taken government
paperwork into exile.

> STYBLE//Florida

-=-=-
The World Trade Center towers MUST rise again,
at least as tall as before...or terror has triumphed.