David Josephs

LOL... Yes, that's his backup argument... "you mean ALL the evidence is not believeable?" [incredulity shining thru] The book I am writing, "The Evidence IS the Conspiracy" will explain in detail this exact thing. (like I did for Mexico City and that pile of steaming evidence created a discarded repeatedly by the FBI even though they KNEW he was never down there... in fact I think they KNEW he was at Odio's and is the reason the reports on Oswald don't pick up again until Nov 1) So to LNers, no, the evidence we are offered in the WCR and HSCA is not authentic. none of it. It does not illustrate the event, it illustrates what the FBI, CIA, SS, I&NS and a handful of others compiled which says just about everything in the world but that Oswald killed JFK alone. It doesn't even show that he did it as part of conspiracy. The Evidence IS the Conspiracy... so when DVP or other LNers want to refer to any Evidence during their arguments, have them AUTHENTICATE IT. Prove it's provenance, Prove that a court of law would accept it as admissible... Since that never happens... and they build their arguments on facts made of pixie dust... well, you know the rest. It's all they've got Glenn. The number of things that can be said for certain from that day is woefully small. That can be proven, even smaller. The WCR and HSCA report are some of the greatest works of Fiction this world has ever seen... and they include the facts which prove it. Peace DJ

With the great work Jeff has done in his presentation... all I can do is stay true to my premise about the Evidence being the Conspiracy. While Jeff does a wonderful job with McCabe and the Imperial Reflex stories... I found evidence in the form of a Hosty report on Feb 3, 1964 which presents a different set of circumstances. In THIS report, Hosty writes that McCabe says the "box with camera and other photographic equipment" was in the living room, that it was obvious to McCabe it belinged to Ruth and Michael, and he just left it. As Jeff correctly wrote: According to the FBI, McCabe is “certain that he saw a light gray box camera in a box in Mrs PAINE’s garage. MCCABE stated that this camera was in a box which contained books and photographs belonging to LEE HARVEY OSWALD. MCCABE stated that he searched this box and did not take the camera since he did not consider it to be of evidentiary value.” (CE2557) CE2557 is taken from WCD724 which also does not mention the Hosty interview from 1/28, dictated 1/30 and has a 2/3 date at the top. The first date in CE2557 is 2/16 with Robert. Jeff's discussing the conflict between where these photos and negatives were found and this Hosty report being excluded from CE2557 is the beginning of my article. DJ

I'm tired of fighting and of being annoyed... that's whya few posts back I wrote to Steve what I did. Like getting mad at the sun for setting. DVP and LNers in general really have no other choice. ------------- As for CLC (as if the world needs another 3 letter acronym) - I like it What I meant that to mean is a set of evidence that only corroborates each other. The VC# assigned by Klein's to C2766 has only 3 pieces of evidence from which to corroborate it... 1) the 2 page VC# list of the 100 rifles 2) the Crescent packing slip #3620 for carton #3376 with C2766 in it and 3) the Order Blank with C20-T750 wherethe VC# and Serial # is written in. If I only show you only those three documents it APPEARS that VC836 = C2766 = what HIDELL was shipped As long as we never see other VC# = Serial #'s pages As long as we never see what happened to the other 99 rifles As long as we are never shown what Klein's shipped for other C20-T750 orders... This evidence corroborates itself. Yet in the paper CTKA is putting up shortly, I prove how these items are FBI frauds and why the FBI steered clear of any other records which showed what Klein's did inthenormal course of business... all we get is OSWALD's business docs... ---------------- As for your fingerprint comment... I don't think that's what I posted... http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=22128&page=3#entry310335 and no, the fingerprints cannot be CLC unless the fingerprint card it is compared to and the finger prints on evidence were never checked against Oswald's actual fingerprints. By stating that the fingerprints on the rifle match "this" fingerprint card which we claim is Oswald's can only stay closed-loop if we were neer allowed to authentically take his fingerprints and compare them. I am NOT saying this happened.. here me DVP, NOT... just an example of how fingerprints could qualify for a CLC. ---- Hope that made sense. Most CLC is used to authenticate evidence for which we should have recourse tro but don't. The Klein's microfilm is yet another. I asked DVP about this and he's never addressed it. WCD7 pages 187-188-189 show two teribbly conflicting reports with virtually all the same info except that in one Waldman keeps the microfilm and in the other FBI SA DOLAN takes the film with him. Since the film is now missing from the archives and the copy which Dolan claims he gave Waldman has not turned up, there is no way to corroborate that ORDER BLANK as authentic... the Closed Loop Corroboration is the FBI reports claiming what they say was on the film, was... Same page? DJ

Seems you've checked in at the Bates as well - tends to happen when you're stuck as to what to do next... Don't like how I addressed your inaccuracies?. You're so wrapped up in dissing H&L you forget about the grade cards or to do a real timeline with the evidence to see what a joke the FBI left us... So let's go Greg... Since I know you've not done your homework related to these documents and rely instead on the poor, wrong and terribly sourced arguments you offered years ago without update... this NEW VOLUME of yours will undoubtedly be full of these errors. Gonna post another passage? Or need to figure out how you got it so wrong. You mean to tell us that you, the man who knows everything about Oswald, cannot tell us when the BJHS year began or why the grade cards conflict with the permenant record? And yet you write a book on Oswald anyway. This will be like showing Posner or Myers for what they were... 5% truth mixed into 95% speculative and inaccurate fluff. Please tell me you continued on in that new volume to Easton, Arlington and beyond with the same attention to detail. Your take on Tujague's should also be illuminating... but first... punch your way out of this paper bag.

Having trouble with the math Greg? how does 5 = 12 ? As for the start of the 53-54 school year: This is for NYC - if you have something which shows a different start date for BJHS... as you have all the early Oswald answers - post it. and this one is for CT... same start date, Start date is actually Sept 9 which is earlier like the end date. 90 total days of school would mean the semester ends January 27th. unless there are more Winer vacation days in New Orleans. Yet if Oswald starts on Jan 13 as the WCR claims... how does he wind up with ANY grades for those 2 weeks and why does the "Re-Ad" not say 10-15 days as opposed to the full 89 of the semester? We can get to the BJHS to Easton to Arlington problems when you figure out how you botched the 168 + 12 presentation given the grade cards are in the same WCE and show only 5 absences... Watching you explain FBI altered evidence as pristine and original and then getting all caught up in the mistakes that were made creating them in the first place should be interesting to say the least.... You might start pondering where he was from Oct 1955 till Sept 1956... and how that is corroborated... given that the Easton records sent to Arlington in Sept 1956 and the Easton record shows he left Easton 10-14-56... And we will also get to 3830 W. 6th #3 versus 4936 Collinwood... You know Collinwood, the address on his enlistment papers But one step at a time. Where did you think the 12 absent days came from when you wrote this passage?

of all the data in that post you don't understand, your only concern is that you don't see the math grade problem... Why don't the grade card absences match the 12 absences you claim adds to 180 days? Why don't the math grades match at all? Why does Re-Ad have 89 days next to the fall 53-54 semester if 168 + 12 is the total number of school days...89+1 is the total of attendance and absences for the fall semester? There's a lot more to come Greg. This is the easy stuff... I look forward to your reply.

I'd be glad to discuss these BJHS records with you Greg.... and not use your juvenile multi-syllabic generalizations in the process. But I don't have the time right now so I'll just leave you with the actual records for 54-55... and those 12 absences and the actual grade cards. 12? (That the Math Grades don't match is something we can talk about later... ok?)

Steve... how best to put this... we're trying to pour water into a bucket that's been turned upside down. The initial splash can be impressive but ain't none of that water is going to make its way into the bucket. and it's a rare day and a rare talent getting buckets turned right side up. Glad to be keeping the water flowing with you. DJ

Kenneth... go back and look at my composite... look carefully at the shadows of the people compared to the shadow of the mike on the wall... why aren't the shadows at the people's feet headed toward that wall instead of directly behind them...? Flash?

I'm with ya Glenn... one thing we do need to watch for though... the "Why would they..." & "it's just not possible that..." type of statements... the incredulous non-believer in human nature and the depravity of self preservation ------- regarding your evidence blurb... As a strong proponent for the analysis of the evidence, I'm wondering where the "authentication" part comes into your evidence statement. Yes, fingerprints on the murder weapon is "real evidence" but if it is not authenticated it's not admitted as evidence or it is, with a caveat, that while "real", whether or not the evidence was part of the crime and not created at some later date has to be established. this is done thru authentication Just saying it came from a certain place or certain person does not authenticate the evidence - real or otherwise... I'm sorry if I sound preachy here... this case is chock full of real evidence, virtually none of it authentic... (In my journey the only authentic evidence I've seen is the jacket and shirt yet now that is even being called into question.... To be admissible, real evidence, like all evidence, must be relevant, material, and competent. Establishing these basic prerequisites, and any other special ones that may apply, is called laying a foundation. The relevance and materiality of real evidence are usually obvious. Its competence is established by showing that it really is what it is supposed to be. Proving that real or other evidence is what it purports to be is called authentication. Evid. Code § 1400; Fed. Rules Evid. 901. Real evidence may be authenticated in three ways--by identification of a unique object, by identification of an object that has been made unique, and by establishing a chain of custody. You only have to be able to use one of these ways, though it is prudent to prepare to use an alternate method in case the court is not satisfied with the one you have chosen. Funny thing though is all we can hope for is to expect authentication under the assumption that the evidence referred to by DVP would need to be accepted in a court of law to prove his guilt. When it is understood that the evidence's authentication was completely destroyed the first night for hundred of items of evidence when they magically appeared in the FBI DC labs only to be returned to Dallas and taken again - as if for the first time. David speaks of conflict between LN and CT... how about the conflict that almost 500 items of evidence have a fraudulent chain of possession... and that's not even getting to the photos, films and statements collected. IMO, I think it's critical if understanding the evidence for what it is, is desired...

Kenneth... I had not seen this before either, and probably for good reason. While I will look more deeply into the microphone in some images andnot in others... did you check out his other work? He claims Gerald Posner is actually Carrot Top... that a Bush brother is Larry Harris JFK author... that JFK is Jimmy Carter based on the veins in his hands! That Jim Reeves played Oswald in the faked movies.... he's got tons of these "famous actor who looks like the news story person" slides... Jane Fonda is Nancy Pelosi? He attempts to use junk science to claim that you can perform biometric measurements on the 2d representation of a 3d image without photogrammetry... which is not possible. 95% BS mixed with 5% truth can sound like truth to many... the microphone anomolie is worth a second look... yet I feel there is probably a realistic explanation for it.... We'll see... yet it sure does seem hard to argue that the mic should be there in the top right image

There's a line from a song which I use to explain DVP and those like him You ain't gonna learn what you don't wanna know So he has FAITH - which has no argument and no recourse... it's faith, which by definition is unnecessary to explain, justify or rationalize since rational thought and faith are mutually exclusive. Faith is confidence or trust in a person or thing or a belief not based on proof.

David - It's obvious you have the time to address questions - just not this one? You make this sweeping statement about the evidence "Any activity (or "overt act") of Oswald that is directly related to the plot to kill Kennedy that ante-dates 11/22/63 is not part of the cover-up, but part of the plot itself (or, more accurately, part of the camouflage designed to mislead future investigation)." yet do not provide any examples... so again. DSL - could you give us an example of an Oswald activity related to the JFK assassination that is part of the plot itself yet not part of the cover-up? Thanks DJ

Kenneth... in my article I will show that 4 PMO's were "found" within the evidence offered... One of them in Kansas City in fact. I hope the article will change how people see the evidence and the FBI/SS's creation of it along with their reports which wind up contradicting themselves. I introduce a new term... "closed loop corroboration" whereby the evidence corroborates itself, as long as no other evidence related to but outside the closed loop is examined. When looking at the different items of evidence, look to see if that which is offered to make it appear the evidence is authentic is an example of how it is ALWAYS done or just specific to the item of evidence being corroborated... The best example? There were 99 other rifles in that shipment in Feb 1963 and Klein's was selling this in one version or another from Feb 1962 to Nov 1963 as C20-T750 (although the "T" was dropped later April 1963) Have we ever seen any one of these other 99 rifles. Ever. Anywhere? Not a single soul in the entire US bought or has one of these rifles? There is no record of any other C20-T750 rifle sold to anyone, ever? You wont believe what happened to the "remaining inventory" at Klein's on Nov 25th. The rifle story had been done up pretty good. I think I've added enough back story to show HOW the items of evidence came to be and why they cannot be trusted. DJ

Why Dave? Cause like all the other evidence, it's not authentic. When you prove any of it to be so, the conversation can continue

I'm not sure how discussions evolve around to these things. There was NO 'order date', there was no 'ship date' These are creations of the conspirators, that has been proven so many times where all the 'created info' came from. this just feeds the nutters goals. Yet Kenneth, there was physical evidence offered which had dates and times and descriptions. Them being "creations of the conspirators" is true yet I am not sure the "where they came from" part has been flushed out as I will be offering next week on CTKA. For example, was the ORDER BLANK of which we are talking created from scratch or a repurpose of a real order for a C20-T750? Was the Money Order created from scratch or repurposed, altered from the real one with that real #? We are definitely seeing things the same way... All I am saying is that "according to the evidence offered" March 20 was the ship date, March 13th was the day Klein's rec'd the order and deposited the PMO and MArch 12 is the cancellation date on the envelope, all supposedly in the FBI's hands by 6am DC time on Nov 23rd. Someone called DPD Curry to tell him this date. Who, when and why did they get it wrong? or did Curry? At this point it is my belief all we have left in the evidence is the ability to reconstruct the conspiracy. Any talk of WCR conclusions being accurate or reflective of the situation does not even enter the conversation. The LNer is left with having to find a way to authenticate incriminating evidence that can't be. The conversation has to change.... CTs don't need to prove his innocence and shouldn't try. LNers need to prove guilt. Anything else is tap dancing around the issues and denying the core fundementals of the law - innocent until proven guilty, not the other way around.

Enough people have offered their view related to Oswald NOT ordering or ever having C2766 in his possession. The paper I will be submitting to Jim next week will prove once and for all that the FBI and Secret Service, along with the US postal Inspection Services and their Records departments falsified each and every record related to the shipment of that rifle after it arrives at Harborside in Oct 1960. They created what I'm calling a closed-loop corroboration. Evidence which proves itself (VC836=C2766) yet requires that no other evidence related to these processes be seen (not a single one of the other 99 rifles is accounted for anywhere, ever.) DSL - do you know what happened to the inventory Waldman claims they removed and did not sell? Have you ever seen reference to any other one of those 99 rifles - I know if I had one with one of those 99 serial numbers and it was a 40" FC rifle - I could prove what the FBI claims Klein's did - substituted the FC for the TS In the paper I will show: That the FBi both takes and leaves the Microfilm at Klein's That the 10 packing slips are provided to the FBI by both Waldman in March and Feldsott in Nov That the PMO was found at least 3 times in 3 different places on the 23rd. That the HSCA handwritting examination and conclusions of these items is poor speculation at best, a complete lie at worst That the serial number on a rifle is by no means a "unique identifier" and can easily be changed or added to without knowing it was done In my first "The Evidence IS the Conspiracy" article I show how the retreiving of the rifle as part of the plan is simply not possible or believeable given the conclusion at which the FBI arrived. DSL - could you give us an example of an Oswald activity related to the JFK assassination that is part of the plot itself yet not part of the cover-up? In that one sentence you atrribute Oswald with direct involvement in the assassination, for how can he knowingly perform an assassination related activity without knowing the assassination is coming? And if all these activities are not performed knowingly we go back to your next point - who was handling/directing Oswald into performing assassination related, cover-up activities. If Oswald had nothing to do with shooting JFK, ALL activities which he performs that get related to the conspiracy are part of the cover-up setup prior to the action. Could we not list a batch of activities that Vallee performed in the weeks, months leading up to early November which would have been incorporated into THAT cover-up for the same conspiracy but were not directly assassiantion related until he is killed?

When "IMHO" becomes - "after I read the book, followed the sources and learned a thing or two about the evidence involved" you can be taken seriously.. Until then you remain grouped with the others who think that reading a few paragraphs and the reviews of others who also did not read the book or do the work to understand what happened... Ascribing the FBI to a merry band of idiots who just happen to stumble across evidence which only incriminated Oswald and were honest and truthful in their securing and relaying of all the evidence is naive and pedantic at best. Hoover was calculating and extremely controlling. If evidence was needed which said a certain thing, it was found - regardless - or simply written that way while the lie of it was dealt with later. Furthermore, belief that there exists evidence which desribes what happened in DP that day, and it's just sitting there waiting for the light of day is unbelieveably optomistic. If you've noticed, the information that makes its way piecemeal to the world, including the ARRB, has all shown what happened in the conspiracy. There was more than enough info released thru the ARRB about the conspiracy in DP and Bethesda to try and reconstruct what happened, but it's not evidence of what happened itself, only how it was covered up. H&L is a detailed account of how the FBI manipulated evidence from consideration which repeatedly illustrated the existance of both these men... they simply could not get to all of it - so they marginalize that which they couldn't and buried the rest. Why else would Blakey need to ask the DoD about the conflicts in their records and in turn the DoD lying about what happened? (f) No direct or indirect relationship between Lee Harvey Oswald and Jack Ruby has been discovered by the Commission, nor has it been able to find any credible evidence that either knew the other, although a thorough investigation was made of the many rumors and speculations of such a relationship The Secret Service also concluded that Oswald had no connection to 544 Camp. Until Authenticated, nothing in evidence can be accepted at face value... and in fact, in the black is white world, it usually is 180 degrees from what reality actually was...

Well done Mark... The encounter that Fritz says "our investigation shows" he was in the lunchroom and not on the stairs (as was written in Baker's affidavit) is complete crap - the lunchroom encounter never happened that way and the WC testimony of Baker and the backflips done to stay away from that affidavit is classic. One needs to examine why putting Oswald 2 flights up, coming down the stairs at the time of the encounter is WORSE than putting him farther away in the lunchroom. "The man I saw was a white man approximately 30 years old, 5'9", 165 pounds, dark hair and wearing a light brown jacket" - is not the same as a 130lb 24 year old drinking a coke in the lunchroom. The transition from one story to the other is one of the greatest Evidence IS the Conspiracy examples we have... Who could this have been that Truly and Baker could NOT state it was Oswald while pushing his location farther from the 6th floor window? With regards to the opinion of "Holmes the inspector" being reliable for anything but the lies he created/corroborated to incriminate Oswald, it is obvious the opinion remains in line with the belief that the FBI was honest and the SS truthful in all their JFK dealings and reports... It's sad when we see researchers believing the word of men like Holmes... some simply can't see the forest for the trees. Pat, you are 100% correct. We cannot rely on Holmes for anything but to illuminate the conspiracy. It was under his watch that the Postal Money order was "created" to associate the rifle with Oswald and then he tells a whopper of a story as to how it really happened. Problem being that his name does not come up in ANY SS or FBI reports describing what went down.. Which in themselves are contradictory. Here is every mention of his affidavit which directly contradicts his testimony Mr. BAKER - Yes, sir. I had occasion to see him in the homicide office later that evening after we got through with Parkland Hospital and then Love Field and we went back to the City Hall and I went up there and made this affidavit. Representative BOGGS -After he had been arrested? Mr. BAKER - Yes, sir. Mr. BAKER - I never did have a chance to see him in the lineup. I saw him when I went to give the affidavit, the statement that I saw him down there, of the actions of myself and Mr. Truly as we went into the building and on up what we are discussing now. (At this point Senator Cooper entered the hearing room.) Mr. BELIN - Officer Baker Mr. DULLES - I didn't get clearly in mind, I am trying to check up, as to whether you saw Oswald maybe in the same costume later in the day. Did you see Oswald later in the day of November 22d? Mr. BAKER - Yes, sir; I did. Mr. DULLES - Under what circumstances? Don't go into detail, I just want to tie up these two situations. Mr. BAKER - As I was in the homicide office there writing this, giving this affidavit, I got hung in one of those little small offices back there, while the Secret Service took Mr. Oswald in there and questioned him and I couldn't get out by him while they were questioning him, and I did get to see him at that time. Mr. DULLES - You saw him for a moment at that time? Mr. BAKER - Yes, sir. Mr. BELIN - Officer Baker, you then left the second floor lunchroom with Mr. Truly, is that correct? Mr. BAKER - That is right, sir. Mr. BELIN - How long did you stay in the lunchroom after Truly identified this person as being an employee? Mr. BAKER - Just momentarily. As he said, "Yes, he works here," I turned and went on up the stairs.

David... As we remain cordial and cooperative can you please look at these two FBI reports related to the Klein's Microfilm.. Which one is telling us what happened? They are both dated the same, both numbered the same, and while Dolan is one of three reporting Agents in the first, he is alone in the second. This is the FBI at work on the Evidence. So based on this, were was the microfilm when the FBI left that morning? This is from CD7 page 187, 188, & 189. https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=10408#relPageId=194&tab=page And just so we are not mistaken... here is a blowup of page two of the first report describing where the film was when they left

When and if you ever get around to asking a real question instead of posting what you THINK I am "admitting" or not we can proceed. "I'm going to take your latest as an admission you know I am right but would prefer to protect your theory at all costs.", believe it or not is you making assumptions again that have no basis in fact. You know, like the rest of your work. I've been to ROKC, I know exactly what a "disgrace" looks like as does anyone else who'se ever been there and left covered in muck. So, Mr. Kettle, before you call everything around you black... look in the mirror.

Thanks David... I knew if anyone had that info it would be you... Maybe you can help explain something then... The FBI and SS both knew the order date was the 12th and that Klein's stamped the 13th at the top of the order blank. March 20th is when they shipped the rifle. Was this just Curry's generality or do you think he was told the 20th by the FBI/SS... ? Thanks again for the assist - if nothing else you have one of the best collections of video and ability to recall what's on them around... Now if I could only appeal to you to use them for good instead of evil...

You would Greg. Knowing what the other person's intentions are comes with your faith in Radionics and Witchcraft... You KNOW cause you can read minds, right mate? Tell you what Greg... since you are so good at playing with yourself, how about you post both sides of the discussion and save us all some valuable time? I've been to ROKC and know from experience that's how your threads usually go... 50 posts by you and a few back slap posts by the minions... Hoorah!! Shouldn't you been working on that book already... or will it be another few years of "coming attractions" that are neither coming or attractions... Perfect

Except the order was sent March 12th. Klein's deposit is March 13 and only on the Order Blank do we see the date March 20, 1963. We have no idea what day the rifle was supposedly picked up and transported home. Does anyone have any proof that the date MARCH 20, 1963 was broadcast related to the rifle purchase date? I can't imagine them broadcasting THAT date this given the timeline and who had what info. Only the FBI had access to that item of evidence until later in the afternoon on the 23rd when the SS arrives at Klein's. I will continue looking yet some of you are very intuned with what was broadcast - if you could help out, I think we can prove here that Ruth knows something on the 23rd that no one could know... But I'm not sure DJ ps... if you look at all the other days like the 19th and 21st which are filled with info, claiming she did not have the room to write "LHO - purchase of rifle" is a bit far-fetched... Mr. JENNER - Now, I turn to March, and I direct your attention to the upper left-hand corner of that card, and it appears to me that in the upper left-hand corner are October 23, then a star, then "LHO" followed by the words "purchase of rifle." Would you explain those entries? Mrs. PAINE - Yes. This was written after. Mr. JENNER - After? Mrs. PAINE - This was written indeed after the assassination. Mr. JENNER - All right. Mrs. PAINE - I heard on the television that he had purchased a rifle. Mr. JENNER - When? Mrs. PAINE - I heard it on November 23. Mr. JENNER - Yes. Mrs. PAINE - And went back to the page for March, put a little star on March 20 as being a small square, I couldn't fit in all I wanted to say. I just put in a star and then referring it to the corner of the calendar. Mr. JENNER - That is to the entry I have read? Mrs. PAINE - Put the star saying "LHO purchase of rifle." Then I thought someone is going to wonder about that, I had better put down the date, and did, but it was a busy day, one of the most in my life and I was off by a month as to what day it was. Mr. JENNER - That is you made the entry October? Mrs. PAINE - October 23 instead of November. Mr. JENNER - It should have been November 23? Mrs. PAINE - It should have been November 23. Mr. JENNER - And the entry of October 23, which should have been November 23, was an entry on your part indicating the date you wrote on the calendar the star followed by "LHO purchase of rifle" and likewise the date you made an entry? Mrs. PAINE - On the 20th. Mr. JENNER - This is the square having the date March 20? Mrs. PAINE - Yes. Mr. JENNER - Is that correct? Mrs. PAINE - I might point out that I didn't know Lee had a middle name until I had occasion to fill out forms for Marina in Parkland Hospital. Mr. JENNER - That is when you learned that his middle name was Harvey and his initial was H? Mrs. PAINE - Right.

I'll love ripping it a new one Great rebuttal. Tells me you got nada. You being an expert on "NADA" ... I'm sure the work will be extraordinary... and well done Tommy... Can always count on you for that elevated wit, and nose in the arsenal replies... nice view for ya buddy?