David Von Pein

44 minutes ago, Cliff Varnell said:

First Von Pein claims there are "NEVER" a valid and reasonable explanation then he performs a drive-by sneering at two obvious possibilities which are rooted in the historical record:

1)  The autopsists suspected JFK was hit with a high tech weapon which wouldn't leave any detectable metal in the body.

And JFK was hit by TWO such "high tech" missiles, eh Varnell? TWO of them which both vanished, while leaving virtually NO DAMAGE behind in Kennedy's body??

Might as well have used a sling shot. It'd be just as effective as these make-believe "high tech" disappearing bullets that Cliff is offering up.

Plus----why wasn't the HEAD SHOT a "high tech" round also? And the round that hit Connally's wrist? Those bullets left behind metal fragments. So the assassins used two different types of bullets, eh? All the while trying to "frame" a patsy (who owns a CARCANO) in the Book Depository??

Let's pause for the laughter to die down some.....

Quote

2) The FBI report on the autopsy refers to pre-autopsy surgery to the head -- raising the possibility the rounds were removed prior to the autopsy.

Cliff, of course, surely knows about the explanations given by former FBI agent James Sibert regarding the "surgery" remark made by Dr. Humes. Don't you, Cliff?....

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/07/interview-with-james-sibert.html

"In a 1999 telephone conversation from his retirement home in Fort Myers, Florida, [James] Sibert told me that when the casket was opened in the autopsy room, "The president was wrapped in two sheets, one around his body, another sheet around his head." He said the sheet around the head was "soaked in blood," and when it was removed, Dr. Humes "almost immediately upon seeing the president's head—this was before the autopsy—remarked that the president had a tracheotomy and surgery of the head area." When I asked Sibert what Humes was referring to when he used the word surgery, he said, "He was referring to the large portion of the president's skull that was missing." When I asked him why he was so sure of this, he replied, "Well, if you were there, it couldn't have been more clear that that's what he was talking about. He said this as soon as he saw the president's head. He hadn't looked close-up for any evidence of surgery to the head when he said this. I'm positive that's what he was referring to."" -- Page 1060 of "Reclaiming History" by Vincent Bugliosi

Simple Fact --- JFK conspiracy theorists have NEVER (not once) offered up any kind of a valid and reasonable and sensible and believable alternative to the Warren Commission's Single-Bullet Theory....and they never will, since the SBT is the correct solution (by a mile)----with or without the awful Rydberg drawings.

It's easy to criticize something. Everything is always open to criticism. But when it comes to coming up with an explanation for what DID happen (if it wasn't the SBT), the CTers have NOTHING to offer. All they're able to come up with is: The SBT is BS! But I want to hear their "conspiracy" alternative, step by step and bullet by bullet.

And without a bullet exiting JFK's throat (and nearly 100% of Internet CTers don't think any bullet exited from Kennedy's throat), then the CTers have no choice but to offer up the proverbial "Two Bullets Entered JFK But Failed To Exit And Then Disappeared Or Were Dug Out By Evil Plotters" gambit. (Maybe that silly theory is the main reason I never hear any CTer offer up a detailed explanation of what happened. Because who would want to intentionally embarrass themselves by placing such lunacy on the table for anyone's consideration?)

And if anybody thinks that it's the LNer in the equation (meaning: DVP) who suffered the "embarrassment" at the hands of James R. Gordon and other assorted anti-SBTers in this 2015 discussion, then their denial is even more serious and advanced than even I had thought. Because that discussion illustrates---more than I've ever encountered before---the lengths to which some conspiracists will sink in order to avoid the "SBT" signs that exist in the Zapruder Film. 

The lame excuses I heard from various conspiracy theorists were legendary. I heard "Corrupt frames" and "Connally's merely turning to his left" and "It's only Nellie Connally's shadow that you're seeing". Anything to avoid having to admit that the film is showing John B. Connally reacting to a bullet hitting him at circa Z224. Classic Denial at its finest.

33 minutes ago, James R Gordon said:

DVP...will also tell you that only one fragment was found and retrieved from Connally's hand. Actually, 4 lead fragments were retrieved. I have the NARA official picture of them.

I've never claimed that only one fragment was recovered from Governor Connally's wrist.

I've also posted on my website (and discussed) the NARA photo you mentioned (showing the four Connally fragments)....

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/06/connally-bullet-fragments.html

53 minutes ago, James R Gordon said:

Do you actually read what you write? “We’re only talking about a 2-degree difference.” Suppose CE 903 was configured to 19.72º are you seriously suggesting that would have no affect on the SBT.

Point taken. But the "two degrees" I was talking about is the angle through JBC's chest AFTER the bullet has already entered Connally's body. Since it's been established by Connally's doctors that JBC was struck by only ONE bullet, it's obvious what the ultimate path was for that ONE bullet (regardless of the PRECISE angle through the chest) --- i.e., entering the upper right back, through the chest, exiting below the right nipple, striking the right wrist, and then ending up in the left thigh.

You obviously think that at least 2 bullets struck Connally, even though you don't have enough bullets to support such a theory.

But a few "disappearing missiles" never seem to concern CTers, do they James?

Quote

I mean after all we are “only talking about a 2º difference.” You are an embarrassment to JFK research when you can make a statement like that. 

If I were you James, I wouldn't be scolding another person for being "an embarrassment to JFK research". Not with this "embarrassment" of yours archived for all to see.

20 hours ago, James R Gordon said:

David,

Two questions I would like you to address. ....

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/25012-need-single-bullet-theory-diagram/?page=8&tab=comments#comment-381836

1 minute ago, Cliff Varnell said:

Ray, I'm convinced that if everyone called David Von Pein out for his fraudulent presentation of the clothing evidence, eventually he'd STFU and go away.

No such "fraudulent presentation" exists, of course. Such a thing only exists in the exceptionally fertile (and humorous) imagination of Mr. Clifford "Everything Revolves Around The Clothing And Nothing Else Matters At All" Varnell.

10 hours ago, James R Gordon said:

Did you not see I stated that 27º angle was taken when he was seated in the position he believed he was in when he was shot. Did you miss that??? 

We're only talking about a 2-degree difference. If the true angle through Connally's body after the bullet struck his rib was 27 degrees instead of 25, okay. It's not a big deal to me. (Again see WCR page 107.)

BTW, how many bullets do you think hit the two victims, James? By my rough count, you must think at least 5 different bullets hit JFK & Connally. (And it would be 6 if you think Kennedy suffered two separate head shots.)

Quote

The entrance to the wound was slightly above the right thumb and on the same side of the hand as the right thumb. The exit was on the palm of the hand above the wrist. If you are considering the SBT as the cause of these wounds then because the entrance and exit are essentially horrizontal [sic] even your estimate of downward trajectory angle of approx 17º could not cause these wounds.

John Connally's hand was a MOVABLE object, James. And we can't (and don't) know EXACTLY what position his hand/wrist was in when the bullet smashed into it. Therefore, neither you nor I can say precisely what angle his hand was in (in relation to the descending bullet that was coming at him) at the exact moment of the bullet's impact.

Quote

The SBT might be able to inflict a wound of entrance where the entrance wound is, but it could not replicate it. The actual would of extrance is a channel left to right wound. And if the SBT was able to strike JBC in that location the exit wound would be on the opposite side of the hand. It would not be on the palm.

And you feel comfortable concluding these things even though you really have NO IDEA exactly what position Mr. Connally's right hand/wrist was in at the moment the missile struck him, right? That's incredibly silly, James.

Quote

Until the bullet struck the 5th rib it simply was muscle it encountered. So on entering Connolly's [sic] body there was nothing to change its trajectory. It stuck [sic] no bone on entry. Yet it changed its direction by 9.28º. Something caused that bullet to have a different trajectory and that something was because it was a different bullet. If it was the same bullet - i.e. the SBY [sic] - why is its trajectory angle not 17.72º[?]

Maybe you should read Page 107 of the WCR again....

https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0066a.htm

1 hour ago, James R Gordon said:

When the bullet traveled through John Connallly why was its trajectory angle 27º?

The bullet trajectory through Connally's upper torso was about 25 degrees. The steeper angle through his chest was probably due to the bullet deflecting off the rib. (See WCR, page 107....)

https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0066a.htm

And I see nothing magical about the bullet striking the back of Connally's wrist first. If he's sitting there, holding his Stetson on his lap, with the back of his right hand pretty much facing UPWARD, why can't a bullet exiting his chest strike the back part of that wrist? I never have understood why CTers make that scenario out to be impossible. I don't think it is impossible at all.

19 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

...and the WC solved the FBI difference by ditching their report. It was not included in the volumes.

Why would the WC include something in its report that was so obviously wrong?

Should they have included the incorrect "dead Secret Service agent" story too?

13 minutes ago, Ray Mitcham said:

If the coat and shirt weren't bunched up, then according to your arguments, the rod couldn't line up they way you say it does. You want it both ways David. Your "perfect alignment" is only in your mind.

And you, Ray, being a CTer, require absolute perfect to-the-millimeter perfection in a SBT re-creation before you'll even begin to consider it valid. But, realistically, it's just not reasonable to expect an event like this to be able to be re-created right down to the last inch. IMO, however, CE903 comes very close to SBT perfection (even though I realize that the 17.72-degree angle isn't exactly right, since it's an angle for the equivalent of Z217.5 and not what I believe is the true SBT Z-Film frame of Z224).

So, if you want to say I "want it both ways", OK. But the Z217.5 angle seen in CE903 is so incredibly close to being "perfect", why would I quibble with it and raise hell with Mr. Specter & Company (especially since I fully realize that complete and total "perfection" is not a reasonable expectation)?

11 minutes ago, Ray Mitcham said:

Did Shaneyfelt ensure that the coat and the shirt were bunched up, as DVP insists happened?

No. The stand-in's coat was not "bunched up", which is precisely the point I made a few years ago as a possible explanation for why Specter's rod was a little too high in one of the "opposite angle" photos....

"It would seem as if the chalk mark was also based (at least in part) on the hole in JFK's jacket, which IMO is just totally ridiculous, since we know that the hole in the coat is located well BELOW the hole in JFK's skin (due to the fact that Kennedy's coat was bunched up higher than normal when the shooting occurred). Which means that if the jacket on the JFK stand-in in [this] photo were to be "bunched up" a little bit (and we can see it isn't bunched up at all in that photograph), it would make the chalk mark rise a little higher on the back of the stand-in, which would mean it would almost perfectly line up with where Arlen Specter is holding the metal rod in that picture. That "bunching up" of the jacket could very well be the answer as to why the chalk mark is located below the level of Specter's pointer. If we bunch up the jacket a little bit (like JFK's coat was bunched, per the Croft photo), it's a perfect alignment." -- DVP
 

32 minutes ago, Jeff Carter said:

It is impossible for a presumed bullet to exit directly below the top button of the shirt and then only nick the outside edge of the tie knot. That is the physical evidence, and therefore a bullet did not pass through the front of the shirt or nick the tie. Whatever Dr Perry observed was therefore above the upper edge of JFK’s shirt. No matter how “magic”, a bullet passing through clothing must leave a corresponding track, and what you think you see in a photograph does not cancel that out.

The alleged correspondence of defects in the shirt and tie was a piece of semantic trickery by Hoover, bought into by the Warren Commission and later the HSCA because it allowed a better argument for the trajectory of the SBT. This demonstrates that the need to construct a particular argument overwhelmed the observable features of the physical evidence. 

And you KNOW with 100% certainty that such a tie/shirt configuration is "impossible", eh Jeff? (You've done tests on it, have you?)

A tie is a MOVABLE object, you know. You can easily move it back and forth to the left and right when it is tied. Maybe JFK's tie was situated a little bit askew and off-center to the right when the bullet struck him, which would have placed a smaller amount of the necktie in the path of the bullet, causing the bullet to just nick the left side of the tie instead of hitting squarely in the center of the tie knot.

But such a scenario involving a SLIGHTLY OFF-CENTER NECKTIE is not even on a conspiracy theorist's radar, is it Jeff? You like the "semantic trickery" explanation much better, don't you?

2 hours ago, Jeff Carter said:

The alleged bullet hole was created by a nurse's scalpel.

I disagree. But even if you're correct, I don't see where conspiracy theorists can go with that conclusion, because CTers are still in the same boat that I (as an LNer) am in --- that is, LNers and CTers alike think there WAS, indeed, a bullet hole in the lower portion of JFK's throat. And apparently you, Jeff, must believe the bullet (regardless of where it came from) completely missed both JFK's shirt and tie. (Correct?) Therefore, from my LN POV, why couldn't the bullet have also missed the shirt and tie if the wound had been an EXIT wound as well?

Let's have a look (below) at a photo montage I created. Do you think a bullet (regardless of directionality) could have possibly missed the entire shirt and necktie of John F. Kennedy given the location of the wound seen on the right? My answer to that question would be --- No, it could not have. ....

Well then, Jeff, how did the bullet that CTers think came from the FRONT manage to get into Kennedy's throat without going through the same shirt and tie? Do you think the alleged "bullet from the front" completely missed the entire shirt and tie? How did that happen?

And, btw, the bullet did very likely leave behind a bullet hole in the front of the shirt. [WR; p.92]

https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0058b.htm

Oh, for Pete sake, James G., you know you can't just draw lines on a 2D image and expect to extract 3D information. Why did you even try? Can't be done.

In short, the blue and red lines on your image above are pretty much worthless.

In addition, you don't have Connally turned to his right at all in that image. Your picture is depicting a point in time which is several frames AFTER the bullet struck both victims. Why on Earth did you choose that Z-frame for your worthless line-drawing demonstration? Connally was turned to his RIGHT when the bullet struck him, as the Z-Film shows....

8 hours ago, James R Gordon said:

Citing the damage to the tie, he [DVP] comments that it was caused by the bullet as it passed on [its] way through. You and I both know it was the result of damage caused by nurses as they cut [JFK's] clothing off him. 

We had a discussion about the necktie in April of 2017, James. (Did you forget?)

And it's very unlikely that the small "slit"-like tear in JFK's tie was caused by the nurses cutting off the tie at Parkland.

I archived last year's "necktie" discussion at my website below....

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2017/04/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-1244.html#JFK's-Necktie

And given the way Governor Connally was turned to his RIGHT when the SBT bullet struck him, I don't see anything magical about the bullet proceeding on a slight Right-to-Left trajectory and being able to strike all three items in question ---

1.) JFK's upper right back (14 cm. below the tip of his mastoid process),

2.) the left side of JFK's necktie,

3.) and John Connally's far-right upper back.

[Note --- This photo montage below is not an "official" photo of any kind. The blue circle was put there by me, DVP.]

59 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

The trajectory rod in CE 903 passes inches higher than the entry wound location used in the re-enactment.

You don't know that for certain, Pat. We can't even see the chalk mark in CE903. It'd be nice if we could see it, but we can't.

And I want to stress the following points once again, as I said to you seven years ago....

"That particular measurement [the 17-degree angle depicted in CE903], keep in mind, is only an AVERAGE angle from the Depository's sixth floor to the chalk mark on the back of the JFK stand-in. It's the average angle between Zapruder Film frames 210 and 225, as testified to by Shaneyfelt. If you split the difference between Z210 and Z225, the 17-43-30 angle would actually equate to the SBT shot striking at Z217.5. But it's very unlikely and improbable that the Warren Commission managed to hit the SBT Z-frame squarely on the (half-frame) head at Z217.5. The bullet, in my own opinion, is obviously striking the victims a little later than that--at Z224. Therefore, what we see in Commission Exhibit 903 really isn't the EXACT angle of the bullet that went through Kennedy and Connally. And I'll admit that. So a tiny little bit of slack and margin-of-error needs to be given to Mr. Specter and the Warren Commission concerning the angle of trajectory depicted in CE903. Because, let's face it, if Kennedy and Connally weren't hit at exactly Z217.5 (and they very likely were not hit at that precise moment in time), then the angle and other measurements are going to be just slightly off. Based on the obvious truth about the angles that I just mentioned above, is there any chance that Pat Speer (or any other conspiracy theorist) would be willing to cut Arlen Specter and the Warren Commission just a tiny bit of slack when it comes to the Single-Bullet Theory? .... The other (opposite angle) pictures WERE taken and DO exist, granted. But we can't know for what exact purpose those photos were taken. But CE903 is the official photo that appears in the Warren Commission's volumes. And that picture definitely does not require a wound to be placed up in the neck of JFK." -- DVP; 12/22/2011

32 minutes ago, Ron Bulman said:

David, what part of stand in and approximating don't you understand?

The word "approximating" is a two-way street, Ron. It applies to CTers as much as to LNers.

And, again, since CE903 is showing only the average angle between Z210 and 225, then quite obviously the 17d43m30s angle depicted in CE903 is NOT 100% accurate (unless you really do want to believe that the SBT shot occurred at precisely Z217.5). It's an "approximate" angle. And yet that "approximation" has two things that we know are spot-on accurate in CE903 (even though it is just an "approximation" and an "average angle") --- the exit wound location in JFK's throat (right at the tie knot) and the entry hole in John Connally's suit coat.

But, for some reason, those things being PERFECT (even via the "approximation" we see in Commission Exhibit 903) don't faze an anti-SBTer in the slightest. Go figure.

29 minutes ago, Cliff Varnell said:

Thank you for repeating claims you never back up. 

If you think Specter's rod is "3 inches" higher than the actual JFK back wound, I'd beg to differ. Looks just about right to me. [See pics below.]

And I guess you think the WC got Lyndal Shaneyfelt to lie through his teeth when he said....

MR. SHANEYFELT -- "The rod passed through a position on the back of the stand-in for the President at a point approximating that of the entrance wound, exited along about the knot of the tie or the button of the coat or button of the shirt, and the end of the rod was inserted in the entrance hole on the back of Governor Connally's coat which was being worn by the stand-in for Governor Connally."

2 hours ago, David Von Pein said:

Has any conspiracy theorist in history ever made this basic observation?....

Boy, those assassins were sure a bunch of lucky sons of bitches when the guy who shot JFK in the throat from the front managed to hit Kennedy in exactly the right spot on his body so that (later on) the official investigators could utilize that entry wound in the throat as the point of exit for the SBT bullet. And then the multiple assassins got even luckier when the upper-back bullet and the bullet that entered the throat both decided not to exit the body and then both of those bullets vanished into puffs of smoke before either of those bullets (which obviously were still inside JFK's body when he was inside Trauma Room No. 1 at Parkland Hospital) could be seen by any non-conspirator.

Can anyone truly believe that such incredible good fortune could possibly have existed amongst the (alleged) multiple shooters who were (allegedly) firing bullets at President Kennedy on 11/22/63?

Addendum....

My above comments reminded me of this great observation made by an LNer named Bud yesterday at another forum....

"The retards [i.e., conspiracy theorists] hate Occam's Razor, because in almost every case they opt for complex and fantastic explanations. Not once or twice. Not even dozens of times. HUNDREDS of times. This is why they won't put their ideas out there. Think I'm exaggerating? Just look at one thing, the BY [backyard] photo. Two possibilities, fake or genuine. They opt for the fantastic one. Now "faked" comes with a whole truckload of fantastic subsets --- getting competent people on board, acquiring a suitable "head" to use, etc. Now there are two possibilities why it was among Oswald's possessions, a simple one, it was one of his possessions or a fantastic one, it was planted. Again, the tards opt for the complex fantastic one. Marina said she took a photo of Oswald holding the rifle. The simple answer is that this is true, the complex and fantastic one is that someone put her up to lying about this. Again the tards go for the fantastic. Before they are done with this single issue they have posited an impossibly fantastic scenario involving dozens of people." -- Bud; June 30, 2018

More....

1 hour ago, Cliff Varnell said:

Specter's METAL ROD missed the back wound by 3 inches.

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2011/12/ce903-part-3.html

BTW / FWIW....

This portion of the webpage linked above (which has been there for all to see for 6.5 years now) demonstrates that the comment below made by James DiEugenio two days ago is nothing but a lie....

"See, in that phony photo [CE903]--of which DVP never shows the reverse angle..." -- J. DiEugenio; 6/29/2018

1 hour ago, Cliff Varnell said:

Either the rounds were removed prior to the autopsy, or the autopsists were correct when they speculated JFK was hit with a high tech round that wouldn't show up in the autopsy.

Or....

The bullet simply went right through the victim.*

* And isn't it amazing that there just happened to be another bullet hole on the opposite side of JFK's body to meet the "SBT" needs of Mr. Specter, et al?

Has any conspiracy theorist in history ever made this basic observation?....

Boy, those assassins were sure a bunch of lucky sons of bitches when the guy who shot JFK in the throat from the front managed to hit Kennedy in exactly the right spot on his body so that (later on) the official investigators could utilize that entry wound in the throat as the point of exit for the SBT bullet. And then the multiple assassins got even luckier when the upper-back bullet and the bullet that entered the throat both decided not to exit the body and then both of those bullets vanished into puffs of smoke before either of those bullets (which obviously were still inside JFK's body when he was inside Trauma Room No. 1 at Parkland Hospital) could be seen by any non-conspirator.

Can anyone truly believe that such incredible good fortune could possibly have existed amongst the (alleged) multiple shooters who were (allegedly) firing bullets at President Kennedy on 11/22/63?

(And yet CTers have the gall to tell me that I'm the one who believes in "Magic Bullets". Oy vey!)

3 hours ago, Eddy Bainbridge said:

You have chosen one line of argument, your argument lends weight to the premise, about the weight of a grain of sand.

You must be joking with the "grain of sand" comment.

Everything points to the SBT being correct. Why CTers refuse to acknowledge this "SBT pattern" only leaves me scratching my head. (After all, as I've said many times before, even WITH the SBT in place, those same CTers can still pretend that their "conspiracy" existed, via their make-believe shot to JFK's head, the "Double Oswalds" all over the place, the "fake" backyard photos, etc., etc. to CT infinity.)

....There's the incredible "SBT-like" pattern of the wounds on the two victims.

....No bullets inside JFK's body.

....CE399 (from LHO's rifle) found on Connally's stretcher. (http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2011/04/index.html#CE399)

....The Z-Film shows the victims reacting at precisely the same time. (http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2015/01/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-887.html)

....Both the WC and HSCA endorsed the SBT, plus the 3 autopsy surgeons got the ball rolling by concluding, without any hesitation via the wording in the autopsy report, that the bullet "made its exit through the anterior surface of the neck".

"Grain of sand" indeed. Don't make me laugh. It's more like a tsunami of pro-SBT common sense and evidence (when assessing ALL of the facts surrounding the shooting of JFK and Governor Connally).

12 hours ago, Ray Mitcham said:

So you believe that in 903, the pointer that Specter is holding is placed at the neck, David?

Huh?? When did I ever say that? (Geesh.)

I just said this in the post you're responding to, Ray....

"The Rydberg drawings are trumped (and always will be) by the "live action" scene demonstrated in CE903 that you hate so much, which PROVES that Specter & Co. did NOT raise the back wound into JFK's "neck"."

1 hour ago, Pat Speer said:

They [Burt Griffin & Howard Willens] just refuse to believe the WC investigation was tainted by the actions of the WC or its staff...NO MATTER what the facts show...)

But the long and short of it is....

It doesn't really matter what the awful Rydberg drawings depict, and it doesn't really matter whether Arlen Specter said "neck" 3000 times in his lifetime, because the Rydberg drawings are trumped (and always will be) by the "live action" scene demonstrated in CE903 that you hate so much, which PROVES that Specter & Co. did NOT raise the back wound into JFK's "neck".

And I don't see how anyone can say the CE903 photo is rigged or "phony" in some fashion. It shows the angle that leads back to the 6th floor (17d 43m 30s), and it shows the bullet exiting exactly where everyone agrees a bullet wound was located on JFK's body (the tie knot/trach wound area), and it shows the rod being placed into the known bullet hole in JBC's jacket.

Pat, don't those THREE things lining up perfectly in an "SBT" fashion (forgetting for the moment the precise "back wound" location seen in CE903) strike you as being rather amazing and incredible IF, as you assert, the Single-Bullet Theory is a pure fairy tale INVENTION of the Warren Commission?

How did Specter manage that amazing SBT-like trickery and how did he manage to manipulate his METAL ROD (which has no "zig-zag" attachment on it that I can see) so that it could be placed in a 17.72-degree downward angle and have it go straight from Kennedy's throat wound directly into Connally's bullet hole in his jacket?

You must admit that those THREE "SBT"-like things I just talked about are impressively duplicated in CE903....wouldn't you agree, Pat?