DVP has been busy spewing out his usual B/S
John Canal
****************
DVP's revised position is that the 6.5 mm thing:
1. is not a bullet fragment
2. Was there on 11-22-63
3. wasn't added or planted
TO WHICH HE SHOWS HOW UNFAMILIAR HE IS WITH REGARD TO THE MEDICAL EVIDENCE.
First of all, all three autopsy doctors testified they either cannot recall
seeing and/or recovering that opacity on 11-22-63....and something that
obvious/size, you'd think at least one of them would have remember seeing and/or
recovering it. ### Point being, it wasn't there on 11-22-63!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Now, it doesn't take much common sense to figure out that if that thing got
there AFTER 11-22-63 and it was:
1. the same diameter (6.5 mm) as the ammo LHO used, and.....
2. the same distance right of midline (2.5 cm) as the autopsists' entry,
and.....
3. just under the alleged cowlick entry, then it DID NOT "ACCIDENTLY" GET
THERE!!!!!!!!
This is not rocket science...it's simple common sense which DVP is lacking.
Oh, BTW, DVP says it's not a bullet fragment but Baden testified it was, so he's
agreeing that baden either lied or had a serious memory lapse when he testfied
about it---either way, DVP is taking a shot at the credibiity of his best
witness, Baden....whom I've made a solid case for being one of the worst liars
to testify in this entire case.
Now, as far as the other threads where knucklhead has tried to bring McAdams
into the argument, MAdams knows even less about the medical evidence as he
does...which isn't saying much.
McAdams mistakenly once said that "what I think is the entry in F8 is deep
inside the crainial cavity". In effect, he was admitting that the HSCA's entry
was not in the cowlick BECAUSE "WHAT I THINK IS THE ENTRY IS WHAT THE HSCA SAID
WAS THE ENTRY"!!!!!!!!!!!!
Also, DSP should notice that McAdams doesn't argue with Barb J., Paul Seaton, or
myself anymore.....nope, he's smart enough to stay out of the fray and let DVP
make an ass out of himself arguing against the obvious, i.e. there was indeed a
BOH wound.
John Canal
David Von Pein
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/browse_thread/thread/94cc3571df916c7b
>>> "There was indeed a BOH wound [in addition to the entry hole]." <<<
Nope, there wasn't. And these photographic items (in perfect unison!)
prove that there wasn't any kind of a large BOH wound in Kennedy's
cranium:
http://www.jfklancer.com/photos/autopsy_slideshow/images/BE4_HI.jpg
http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z317.jpg
Incredibly, John A. Canal thinks that ALL OF THE ABOVE PICTURES are
telling a FALSE TALE with respect to the head wounds in John Kennedy's
head--ALL FIVE OF THEM, IN TANDEM are somehow lying to us! (And John
C. agrees with me and the HSCA that none of the photographic items I
linked above has been faked in any way.)
And yet John C. calls ME "delusional". Pot meets Kettle.
You've gotta love these conspiracy theorists for the laughs they
constantly provide (even a CTer masquerading as an LNer like Johnny
C.).
John Canal
David Von Pein says...
>
>
>
>>>> "There was indeed a BOH wound [other than the bullet's entry hole]." <<<
>
>Nope, there wasn't. And these photographic items (in perfect unison!)
>prove that there wasn't any kind of a large BOH wound in Kennedy's
>cranium:
NO, WHAT THEY DO PROVE IS WHAT WE KNEW ALREADY--THAT YOU'RE A DELUSIONAL IDIOT!
The X-ray was taken after Boswell put back pieces of rear skull--he testified
accordingly....and you have been told this countless times.
The BOH photo was not taken when the body was first received--this has been
proven to you--, therefore it does not reflect the status of JFK's BOH when his
body was first received.
The Z-film would not necessarily show a BOH wound, unless it was a "blow-out"
type wound, which it wasn't.
You are really making an ass out of yourself...you ought to give this futile
argument up.
John Canal
John Canal
>
>Nope, there wasn't. And these photographic items (in perfect unison!)
>prove that there wasn't any kind of a large BOH wound in Kennedy's
>cranium:
NO, WHAT THEY DO PROVE IS WHAT WE KNEW ALREADY--THAT YOU'RE A DELUSIONAL IDIOT!
David Von Pein
>>> "NO, WHAT THEY DO PROVE IS WHAT WE KNEW ALREADY--THAT YOU'RE A DELUSIONAL IDIOT! The Z-film would not necessarily show a BOH wound, unless it was a "blow-out" type wound, which it wasn't." <<<
John Canal thinks that the type of massive carnage that the Parkland
people swore they saw in the ER on November 22 (and these are Parkland
people that Canal thinks are telling the truth, mind you!) would have
resulted in absolutely NO BLOOD AT ALL being visible at the back of
JFK's head in the post-Z313 frames of the Zapruder Film! None! Not
even a hint of REDNESS in the back (occipital) part of Kennedy's head!
Nada!
Just look....
www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z317.jpg
And yet I'M supposedly the "delusional idiot" in this conversation.
That's a howl-and-a-half.
I think it's close to being official now -- Mr. Canal has left the
rails of reality.
John Canal
David Von Pein says...
>
>
>
>>>>"NO, WHAT THEY DO PROVE IS WHAT WE KNEW ALREADY--THAT YOU'RE A DELUSIONAL IDIOT!
>>>>The Z-film would not necessarily show a BOH wound, unless it was a "blow-out"
>>>>type wound, which it wasn't." <<<
I stand by all of that!
>John Canal thinks that the type of massive carnage
"Massive carnage"? How many of them said that? I think you have that kind of
damage to your brain.
>that the Parkland
>people swore they saw in the ER on November 22 (and these are Parkland
>people that Canal thinks are telling the truth, mind you!) would have
>resulted in absolutely NO BLOOD AT ALL being visible at the back of
>JFK's head in the post-Z313 frames of the Zapruder Film! None! Not
>even a hint of REDNESS in the back (occipital) part of Kennedy's head!
>Nada!
Good grief man, use your head...there were 20+ PH witnesses and several at
Bethesda who said there was a BOH wound....DO YOU SERIOUSLY THINK THEY WOULD ALL
DESCRIBE THE BOH WOUND THE SAME?????????
Earth to DVP...we'll never know the precise natue of the BOH wound because no
one photographed it!!!!!!!!!!!!
Pleeeese let that sink in.
The bottom line is that there obviously was a BOH wound (20+ witnesses) with
cerebellum showing (11 witnesses), but we can only guess at is true nature. I've
told you before, and it's like talking to a wall, that the dislodged rear skull
pieces probably worsened when he was transferred from the limo to the gurney.
I've also told you that it's obvious that blood and brain matter gravitated
towards the opening in his BOH (from the time he was transferred from the limo
through to when the body arrived at Bethesda), surely making the BOH wound
appear to be worse than it actually was.
John Canal
[...]
David Von Pein
Earth to Johnny Canal --- The type of large "gaping" BOH wound that
was described by the majority of the Parkland Hospital witnesses would
certainly have resulted in some BLOOD being seen in that "BOH" area of
JFK's head in the Z-Film, including Z317 below.
But, amazingly, there's not a HINT of blood or redness in the BOH.
Doesn't that fact upset John Canal's BOH applecart just a tad bit? If
not, why not? .....
John Canal
David Von Pein says...
>
>
>Earth to Johnny Canal --- The type of large "gaping" BOH wound that
>was described by the majority of the Parkland Hospital witnesses would
>certainly have resulted in some BLOOD being seen in that "BOH" area of
>JFK's head in the Z-Film, including Z317 below.
NOT IF THE WOUND WAS WORSENED DURING THE TRANSFER FROM THE LIMO TO THE GURNEY
AND IF THE MAJORITY OF THE BLOOD AND BRAIN MATTER GRAVITATED TOWARDS THE BOH
OPENING AFTER HE WAS
PRONE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Linton and Marsh make more sense than you!
David Von Pein
Canal lives inside a world filled with the words "if", "maybe", "might
have been", and "could be", and "everybody on the Clark and FPP panels
were liars".
Incredible.
John Canal
David Von Pein says...
>
>
Earth to DVP....what do you think the odds are that about 30 total (PH,
Bethesda, and C. Hill) credible witnesses were wrong when they said they saw a
BOH wound. My guess is the odds would be incredibly long against them all being
wrong.
Now, what do you think the odds are against Fisher being mistaken and, then,
because Fisher was an icon in the world of forensic pathology, the other
forensic pathologists agreed with him?
I'd say a hell of a lot less than all those witnesses being wrong.
Of course, you think the reverse. That figures.
David Von Pein
>>> "What do you think the odds are that about 30 total (PH, Bethesda, and C. Hill) credible witnesses were wrong when they said they saw a BOH wound[?]" <<<
The odds are very, very good that (amazingly) those witnesses WERE all
wrong about seeing a BOH HOLE in Kennedy's head, based on the fact
that the BEST EVIDENCE (the autopsy photographs and X-rays) is proving
that they WERE all wrong.
Dr. Baden:
"The head exit wound was not in the parietal-occipital area, as
the Parkland doctors said. They were wrong. Since the thick growth of
hair on Kennedy's head hadn't been shaved at Parkland, there's no way
for the doctors to have seen the margins of the wound in the skin of
the scalp. All they saw was blood and brain tissue adhering to the
hair. And that may have been mostly in the occipital area because he
was lying on his back and gravity would push his hair, blood, and
brain tissue backward, so many of them probably assumed the exit wound
was in the back of the head. .... There was no defect or wound to the
rear of Kennedy's head other than the entrance wound in the upper
right part of the head." -- DR. MICHAEL M. BADEN
John Canal
David Von Pein says...
>
>
>>>>"What do you think the odds are that about 30 total (PH, Bethesda, and C. Hill)
>>>>credible witnesses were wrong when they said they saw a BOH wound[?]" <<<
>
>The odds are very, very good that (amazingly) those witnesses WERE all
>wrong about seeing a BOH HOLE in Kennedy's head, based on the fact
>that the BEST EVIDENCE (the autopsy photographs and X-rays) is proving
>that they WERE all wrong.
I've printed that statement out and nominate it for the Newsgroup's most
outrageous and idiotic statement of the year...or ever.
David Von Pein
DVP SAID:
>>> "The odds are very, very good that (amazingly) those witnesses WERE all wrong about seeing a BOH HOLE in Kennedy's head, based on the fact that the BEST EVIDENCE (the autopsy photographs and X-rays) is proving that they WERE all wrong." <<<
JOHN CANAL SAID:
>>> "I've printed that statement out and nominate it for the Newsgroup's most outrageous and idiotic statement of the year...or ever." <<<
DVP NOW SAYS:
Why on Earth does that statement by me come as such an apparent
surprise to John Canal? Has he been in a cave for 40+ years?
In fact, of course, nearly EVERY "LNer" on the planet has the very
same opinion about the Parkland witnesses -- i.e., those Parkland
witnesses were positively wrong about seeing a gaping HOLE in the back
of JFK's head.
Here's a short list of people who (quite obviously) believe(d) the
same thing I do regarding the Parkland witnesses:
Vincent Bugliosi
John Lattimer
Dale Myers
Jim Moore
Gerald Posner
David Belin
John Fiorentino
Steve Barber
Michael Baden
Charles Petty
The entire HSCA
The entire Clark Panel
The entire Warren Commission
Evidently all of the above people are "idiots" too, per John "LN/BOH/
EOP" Canal.
Incredible.
David Von Pein
Poll.....
For the record, is there a single "LNer" posting here at this acj
forum who actually thinks there WAS a large hole in the back of JFK's
head on 11/22/63 (not counting John Canal, who is actually more of a
conspiracy theorist)?
If there's even ONE LNer who answers "Yes" to the above question I'll
be very VERY surprised (and shocked....and completely bewildered).
John Canal
David Von Pein says...
>
>
Heck of a list, there...but all the individuals I can list that say there was a
BOH wound saw it on the body...how many on your list saw the
body????????????????
Can you try real real hard to see the difference?
I didn't think so.
John Canal
David Von Pein says...
>
>
>
Paul Seaton doesn't post here very often but he's a LNer that certainly believes
there was a BOH wound....you do remember him from the thashing he gave you
recently, don't you? If you don't think he knows the medical evdence, try going
to his website.
lazu...@webtv.net
Dr. McClelland, or Dr. Crenshaw,etc...mighty impressive...and they are
very detailed in their recollections, along with the nurses and Bethesda
staff. When they all corroborate each other..how could they all be
wrong? What you don'twanna admit is the HSCA relied upon falsfied data.
As John Canal keeps telling you the BOH Photos were taken after the
brain is removed..in fact Doug Horne has said that when you see the
uncropped pic( we have yet to see it in full, still in archives) showing
the back wound & latex gloved hands near the top of the head that" both
hands could fit inside the head wound"...Also, the flap on right side of
head appears larger than what we see in the stare of death....because
the brain has been removed.
Gil Jesus
> In article <3a7b94ac-c2e3-47c6-ba31-f350b2e0f...@b1g2000vbc.googlegroups.com>,
===================================
HERE ARE SOME CLASSIC "VONPEINISMS"
===================================
"Moving" the back wound to the "neck" doesn't aid the SBT....it ruins
it.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/f020a0f0b3459dc9
------------------------------
WHAT DOES "BACK AND TO THE LEFT" PROVE? ANYTHING?
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/422b8ff853bebd3e
-------------------------------
It's not possible for Craig to be correct about Tippit being shot at
"1:06 PM", because Lee Harvey Oswald is the person who shot Officer
Tippit.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/bf389b5a7ca5ee81
-------------------------------
But, let's assume.....there were/are several different MC 91/38 rifles
with the exact same serial number on them..........So what?
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/dc1d90f0571b73f0
-------------------------------
(Autopsy photo) F8 is worthless and useless
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/39fccc227ae707eb
===============================
VON PEIN'S CLAIMS FOR WHICH THERE IS NO EVIDENCE:
==============================
TROY WEST WAS IN THE BATHROOM WHEN OSWALD "SWIPED" THE TAPE AND PAPER
FOR THE "GUN SACK"
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/52e69edf4a893d6d
-------------------------------
OSWALD SHOT JFK IN HIS T-SHIRT AND USED HIS "BROWN SHIRT" TO WIPE THE
FINGERPRINTS OFF THE RIFLE
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/52e69edf4a893d6d
-------------------------------
RFK ORDERED JFK'S BRAiN AND TISSUE SAMPLES TO BE DESTROYED IN APRIL
1965
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/6b5c4f78540f883d
===========================================
VON PEIN DEBATES THE EVIDENCE
Sergeant Hill had originally put out a broadcast over the DPD police
radio
stating that the killer was probably carrying an "automatic" type of
weapon. But in 1986, Hill tried to clear up the confusion about the
gun
with these comments:
"I assumed that it was an automatic simply because we had found all
the
hulls in one little general area. .... If you find a cluster of
shells,
you have to assume that they were fired from an automatic." -- Gerald
Hill
quote (Via Dale K. Myers' book, "With Malice: Lee Harvey Oswald And
The
Murder Of Officer J.D. Tippit"; Pp. 260-261)
An automatic ejects shells in a closer "cluster" than manually
unloading a revolver ?
Sgt. Hill's broadcast indicated that he had identified the shells by
the stamps on the base:
(CE 705, pg 28 )
=============================================
THE CLUELESS CHIME IN TO PRAISE VON PEIN:
==================================
PAUL MAY ( "YoHarvey"/"Spiffy One" )
David has been a dogged researcher and seeker of the truth for many
years. I have the utmost respect for his achievements in determing the
truth
about 11/22.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/fb1829a6788b3200
--------------------------------
JUSTME1952:
His posts are continuously informative with facts, not fiction.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/4452ccdbcf2d1281
--------------------------------
David Von Pein
Thanks (again) for the advertisement, Gil.
You are helping me...not hurting me. Funny you don't realize that fact.
David Von Pein
>>> "As John Canal keeps telling you, the BOH Photos were taken after the brain is removed." <<<
Sure, that's quite possible. I've always admitted that. But the
lateral X-ray that we've been arguing about in many posts (which is an
X-ray that shows no BOH damage) was certainly not taken after the
brain was removed. It was taken prior to brain removal.
But even if some of the photographs were taken after JFK's brain was
taken out of his head -- so what?
John Canal thinks that the huge hole described in the right-rear SCALP
of JFK's head was completely invisible in this picture:
And this picture:
http://www.jfklancer.com/photos/autopsy_slideshow/images/BE4_HI.jpg
And this picture:
If the Parkland witnesses were correct about the condition of the back
of JFK's head, how can the above pictures (which Canal and the HSCA
know have not been "altered" by plotters) possibly not show a HINT of
that major BOH/Occipital damage?
In short -- The BEST EVIDENCE concerning the "BOH Wound" issue is not
the Parkland Hospital witnesses. The best evidence in that regard are
the photos and X-rays. And those things are screaming: "No Big BOH
Hole".
John Canal
David Von Pein says...
>
>
>>>>"What you don't wanna admit is the HSCA relied upon falsfied data. As John Canal
>>>>keeps telling you the BOH Photos were taken after the brain is removed." <<<
>
>
>Sure, that's quite possible. I've always admitted that.
Then, why, idiot, do you keep posting it as some sort of proof there was no BOH
wound? If it wasn't taken when the body was first received, then you have no
idea what was done to the scalp prior to those photos being taken.
>(But the
>lateral X-ray showing no BOH damage was certainly not taken prior to
>brain removal).
And Boswell said he replaced rear bone prior to those x-rays. Sure, you think
because he said he replaced one that fell out, that's not true. But you tell me
right now how he possily could have relace a piece of bone that fell out before
any x-rays or photos?
Put you answer here_______________
If you can't then let it sink in that he misspoke about him replacing any bone
that fell out prior to the x-rays.
John Canal
"What do you think the odds are that about 30 total (PH, Bethesda, and C. Hill)
credible witnesses were all wrong when they said they saw a BOH wound[?]"
DVP's answer below demonstrates the kind of delusional mentality he possesses:
"The odds are very, very good that (amazingly) those witnesses WERE all wrong
about seeing a BOH HOLE in Kennedy's head, based on the fact that the BEST
EVIDENCE (the autopsy photographs and X-rays) is proving that they WERE all
wrong."
He needs a psychiatrist really bad.
David Von Pein
>>> "He [the "delusional idiot" named David Robert Von Pein] needs a psychiatrist really bad." <<<
Which means that 99.99% of all LNers need that same shrink as well
(per Mr. Canal), because 99.99% of all LNers think just as I do re.
the Parkland "BOH" witnesses.
Mr. Canal is amazing.
John Canal
David Von Pein says...
>
>
>
>>>>"But you tell me right now how he possi[b]ly could have re[p]lace a piece of
>>>>bone that fell out before
>any x-rays or photos?" <<<
>
>
>Boswell ARRB testimony....because YOU seem to enjoy citing that
>Boswell testimony in order to to prop up the theory that Boswell DID
>"replace rear bone" BEFORE the lateral X-ray was taken.
Duh! So he lied when he said he did? I see the way your delusional mind
works--he misspeaks because he said he replaced a piece that fell out (as
opposed to just being dislodged), so that means he didn't replace any pieces
before the x-rays? Good grief man, get real.
You think it's more likely that about 30 witnesses were wrong than it is that he
replaced rear pieces of skull before the x-rays.....that's insane!
David Von Pein
>>> "But you tell me right now how he [Dr. Boswell] possi[b]ly could have re[p]lace[d] a piece of bone that fell out before any x-rays or photos?" <<<
Well, Mr. Canal, that was kinda my whole point of emphasizing that
Boswell ARRB testimony....because YOU seem to enjoy citing that
Boswell testimony in order to prop up the theory that Boswell DID
"replace rear bone fragments" BEFORE the lateral X-ray was taken.
Duh!
John Canal
David Von Pein says...
>
>
>
Your delusional mind thinks 99% of all LNers think there was no BOH wound, eh?
They used to say that about the entry location, but more and more are coming
forward saying the autopsists were right on that. Have you asked each one? How
do you now that?
>Mr. Canal is amazing.
David Von Pein
>>> "So he [Boswell] lied when he said he did? I see the way your delusional mind works--he misspeaks because he said he replaced a piece that fell out (as opposed to just being dislodged), so that means he didn't replace any pieces before the x-rays?" <<<
Huh???
Have you forgotten your own theory here, John?!
It's YOU who are insisting Dr. Boswell did replace REAR bone BEFORE
the lateral X-ray was taken.
But at the SAME TIME you also readily acknowledge the fact (and I
think it's a fact too; common sense would dictate it is) that that
lateral X-ray was definitely taken BEFORE the scalp was reflected back
on JFK's head....i.e., it was taken BEFORE Boswell (or anyone) could
have possibly had access to any REAR bone fragments on JFK's head.
Main Point Being --- If Boswell replaced any loose skull fragments
BEFORE the lateral X-ray was taken, it COULD NOT have been bone from
the REAR OF JFK'S HEAD. It must have been bone from the gaping exit
wound at the Right/Front/Top portions of the head.
David Von Pein
Mr. Canal actually believes (apparently) that a good-sized pct. of
"LNers" believes there WAS a Large BOH wound in JFK's head.
I guess maybe John HAS been living in a cave since 1964.
A-ma-zing.
John Canal
David Von Pein says...
>
>
>
>>>>"So he [Boswell] lied when he said he did? I see the way your delusional mind
>>>>works--he misspeaks because he said he replaced a piece that fell out (as
>>>>opposed to just being dislodged), so that means he didn't replace any pieces
>>>>before the x-rays?" <<<
>
>Huh???
>
>Have you forgotten your own theory here, John?!
>
>It's YOU who are insisting Dr. Boswell did replace REAR bone BEFORE
>the lateral X-ray was taken.
And he did....he shoved he scalp with attached rear bone pieces back into place
before the x-rays were taken...the alternative to that is that about 30
witnesses were wrong about seeing a BOH wound.
Of course an idiot like you thinks the alternative is more likely.
And I'm an idiot for dignifying your ridiculous arguments by responding to them.
>But at the SAME TIME you also readily acknowledge the fact (and I
>think it's a fact too; common sense would dictate it is) that that
>lateral X-ray was definitely taken BEFORE the scalp was reflected back
>on JFK's head....i.e., it was taken BEFORE Boswell (or anyone) could
>have possibly had access to any REAR bone fragments on JFK's head.
>
>Main Point Being --- If Boswell replaced any loose skull fragments
>BEFORE the lateral X-ray was taken, it COULD NOT have been bone from
>the REAR OF JFK'S HEAD. It must have been bone from the gaping exit
>wound at the Right/Front/Top portions of the head.
So he lied or was delusional like you when he said, "and I think some of these
smaller pieces at the base of the drawing were put back"?
John Canal
David Von Pein says...
>
>
>
Does misrepresenting what a person thinks come natural to you or do you have to
practice that? When did I ever say that a good-size pct. of "LNers" believes
there was a large BOH wound? You said 99% didn't and I said there were more than
that.
David Von Pein
Name more than five LNers in the entire WORLD who believe there was a
Large-ish BOH wound in JFK's head?
David Von Pein
>>> "So he [Dr. Boswell] lied or was delusional like you when he said, "and I think some of these smaller pieces at the base of the drawing were put back"?" <<<
He didn't lie. He was simply wrong about the exact location on JFK's
head where the loose skull fragments came from. That's quite obvious
by taking just one good look at the lateral (right side) X-ray.
Dr. Boswell could not possibly have "replaced" any REAR (OCCIPITAL)
BONE FRAGMENTS THAT WERE SITUATED LOW ON JFK'S HEAD .
Top or right side fragments? -- Yes.
Rear (OCCIPITAL) fragments? -- No way.
And the lateral X-ray proves that fact.
Also notice how Canal likes to ignore Boswell's indefinite term -- "I
think".
For Pete sake, Boswell wasn't even sure (as his "I think"
demonstrates). But Mr. Canal is evidently POSITIVE, even though
Boswell didn't seem to be.
aeffects
> Thanks (again) for the advertisement, Gil.
>
> You are helping me...not hurting me. Funny you don't realize that fact.
son, you're a legend in your own mind..... Carry on! ROTFLMFAO