HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: keegan@ukulele.crd.ge.com (James G Keegan Jr)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: another d a r c y false allegation? (was Re: Kevin Welch: An ethics question.)
Date: 12 Apr 92 01:36:36 GMT
Reply-To: james g keegan jr <keegan@crd.ge.com>
Organization: T.S.A.K.C.

kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy) writes:
-> keegan@rosebud.crd.ge.com (James G Keegan Jr) writes:
-> >kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy) writes:
-> >-> keegan@sunroof.crd.ge.com (James G Keegan Jr) writes:
-> >-> >-> >>>and isn`t harassment against the law, sonny?
-> >-> >-> >>
-> >-> >-> >>Certain forms of harrassment, yes. But, since YOU
-> >-> >-> >>are making this allegation of law-breaking, don't
-> >-> >-> >>you think it's incumbent on you to SPECIFY exactly
-> >-> >-> >>what laws Welch has supposedly broken? Chapter and
-> >-> >-> >>verse, I mean.
-> >
-> >-> >-> > but heck, let's pretend for a moment that this
-> >-> >-> > particular thread isn't just another continuation of
-> >-> >-> > your net.vendetta.  so, you stated "since YOU are
-> >-> >-> > making this allegation of law-breaking.."  see it?
-> >-> >-> > it's included above. now, do be precise in your
-> >-> >-> > answer to this question. where did i allege
-> >-> >-> > law-breaking? the post reads to me, and i imagine to
-> >-> >-> > just about everyone else, like i asked a question,
-> >-> >-> > "isn't harassment against the law, sonny?" does that
-> >-> >-> > look like a question to you?
-> >
-> >-> >-> Given that Welch had admitted to harrassment, your
-> >-> >-> question amounts logically to the same thing:
-> >-> >-> 
-> >-> >-> "admits to harrassment" + "harrassment is illegal" =>
-> >-> >-> "admits to law-breaking"
-> >
-> >answer the question kevin: where did i allege law-breaking?
-> 
-> Refer to my previous article. You know, the one you HEAVILY
-> edited to make it appear like I didn't already answer your
-> question.

answer the question kevin: where did i allege law-breaking? or
this just another of your false allegations?

--
----
charter member   ...   T.S.A.K.C.
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy)
Subject: Re: The Value of a Man (repost)
Organization: Who, me???
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 92 04:23:41 GMT

In article <1992Apr12.165827.27855@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> kcochran@isis.cs.du.edu (Keith A. Cochran) writes:
>In article <1992Apr11.154047.7856@rotag.mi.org> kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy) writes:
>>In article <k85tvzl@rpi.edu> cookc@aix.rpi.edu (rocker) writes:
>>>
>>>... I have seen many pro-"life" males on this
>>>    group smugly assert that they believe in the sanctity of ALL
>>>    life.  In that case, why should they balk at the opportunity
>>>    to help a stranger?  It couldn't be that they feel that donating
>>>    a kidney is INCONVENIENT?  How horrible, not to physically
>>>    support someone else because of one's own CONVENIENCE!
>>
>>Gee, the pro-choice Peanut Gallery keeps ripping up Kellmeyer for telling
>>them what they think. Aren't you doing EXACTLY the same thing here wrt
>>"pro-life logic", Cathi?
>>
>>Double delicious, double-standard...
>
>Kevin, what kind of drugs are you on?  Rocker's post has absolutly *NO*
>similarities to Steven's lies.  

Kellmeyer sez:
	All "pro-aborts" _obviously_ support weakening of child-support laws

Cathi sez:
	All "pro-lifers" _obviously_ support being visibly tagged and being
	required to put their vital organs up for raffle

(Paraphrases, of course)

Nah, I don't see any parallel there, Keith...

								- Kevin
From: bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ronald Bense)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Mommy! They Called Me Names! (Was: Implications of Abortion...)
Date: 15 Apr 92 13:52:44 GMT
Reply-To: bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ronald Bense)
Organization: Carderock Division, NSWC, Bethesda, MD

In talk.abortion, mal11@po.CWRU.Edu (Matthew A. Lewis) writes:
>In a previous article, kcochran@isis.cs.du.edu (Keith A. Cochran) says:

>>This from somebody who has just admitted he's 19.  Hire a teenage while they
>>still know everything...

>>Somebody who is 19 and trying to tell women how to run their lives?  The one
>>who "can see the fetus as the child"???

>gee......all you "much wiser" adults have shown everyone that YOU
>know everything.

And such wonderful reading comprehension....

>Please, name one problem besides fixing the lawn mower that you have
>fixed in you lifetime?

Oh, let's make a list, we do love lists:
    my car - after hitting a pick-up at 50 mph
    my cd player - the disc wouldn't spin
    my power windows - the wires broke
    my transmision in a Renault (piece of ..) - counter-rotating shaft
	 broke.

........

    my reading of your asinine articles - ooops guess I slipped by reading
this one. Oh well, time to do the kill file thing.

Ron
From: kwelch@eniac.seas.upenn.edu (Lester Bangs)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Kill file, eh?
Date: 14 Apr 92 05:04:56 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Pennsylvania


I guess since you choose not to respond to me, I am either in your
killfile or you just choose to ignore me.  Fine.  I accept your
ignorance as my victory.

Kcw:
Pro-life (and I love it)
Pro-choice
Anti-Abortion
Pro-woman
Pro-man
pro-humanity

end of line............

--
(=- Mr. Kevin C. Welch to you -=)		Science wiLl Be truth for Life
(  kwelch@eniac.seas.upenn.edu	)		TechNology as Nature
						In foRtran tongue the Answer
10000 Maniacs ->				with weAlth and pRominence
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: rivk@quads.uchicago.edu (nora gayle rivkis)
Subject: Re: Yea, SURE IT'S VERBATIM!  (Was:  What pro-lifers don't tell you)
Reply-To: rivk@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Sun, 5 Apr 1992 08:01:38 GMT

In article <1992Apr3.012204.6777@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> kcochran@isis.cs.du.edu (Keith A. Cochran) writes:
>In article <1992Apr2.224755.14728@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> slkg9733@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Steven L. Kellmeyer) writes:

>[Deleted:  Steven shows how he never learns, and expects up to believe 40+
>lines of "verbatim" articles.  Then...]

>And, just to make sure that everybody understands my position on this, GET THE
>FUCKING HITLER/NAZI/HOLOCAUST "ANALOGIES" OUT OF TALK.ABORTION.  NOW!

Just to make sure everyone understands *my* position on this, the reason
I have flamed everyone BUT Kellmeyer on this one is that my purpose is to
get the references stopped; I care not how. They get stopped quicker if you
ignore Kellmeyer's 198+ lines of total bullshit than if you flame him; he's
either way too stupid to get the hint or he's a genuine Nazi who's trying to
have the effect of causing immediate heartache and future destruction to the
people the real Nazis were trying to kill. I don't know which and I don't
care, but if I take the issue up with him again it'll be over a piece of
middle-eastern desert with a rifle in my hands.

>=kcochran@nyx.cs.du.edu   

	-Nora
-- 
Oseh shalom b'imromav, hu ya'aseh shalom aleinu v'al kol yisrael.
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.abortion.inequity
From: kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy)
Subject: Re: A question for any MALE prolifer
Organization: Who, me???
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 92 13:39:11 GMT

In article <#=6tgbp@rpi.edu> cookc@aix.rpi.edu (rocker) writes:
>kevin@liebe.uucp (Kevin Brawley) writes:
>
>>cookc@aix.rpi.edu (rocker) writes:
>
>>>to answer:
>
>>>What equivalent responsibility (if any) do you propose for the
>>>MALE who got the potentially aborting woman pregnant?
>
>>The reason for so little response would be self-evident to the rational
>>person.  
>
>And indeed, the reason is in fact self-evident.  They have no response
>to this.  Most, in fact, have probably never even considered the male
>responsibility, beyond some nebulous concept of "well, he should
>probably have to pay child support".  For the woman: health damage
>and possible death.  For the man: a few bucks to buy his way out.

BZZZTTT!!! WRONG!! Child support is not premised as "compensation for
pregnancy". I don't believe your statement above has any basis in legal 
fact.

Besides, if the woman has the child VOLUNTARILY and against the man's
wishes, when abortion is a safe and legal option for her, any damage 
incurred or risk taken is "self-inflicted" anyway. People are generally 
_not_ entitled to compensation for the results of their own gross negligence, 
and failure-to-act-when-the-circumstances-call-for-action CAN constitute 
gross negligence, as I understand it. I see no reason to carve out a special
exception in this case, do you?

>>In preparing for this "debate" you force the respondent to 
>>automatically take up the defensive position.  
>
>Why on earth should a simple question make you feel so defensive?

So, have you stopped beating your SO/spouse?

								- Kevin
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: rescorla@rtnmr.chem.yale.edu (Eric Rescorla)
Subject: Re: Sorry, did I miss anything?
Organization: Rescorla for himself.
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1992 18:35:00 GMT

In article <17621@oasys.dt.navy.mil> bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ronald Bense) writes:
>In talk.abortion, margoli@watson.ibm.com (Larry Margolis) writes:
>
>>Why is everyone looking for / volunteering to be *ex*girlfriends; I
>>need a *current* girlfriend...  :-)
>
>Second that :]
Third that.
And I don't want to hear any crap about how if I weren't such an asshole
I could get a girlfriend.

-Ekr



-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric Rescorla, DoD#431, Honda CM400 rider          rescorla@rtnmr.chem.yale.edu
Yale University Department of Chemistry            We hack anything.
My mind is now for rent: C/Unix,Vacuum Tech,Machining,P-Chemist. Hire me, eh? 
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: emarsh@hernes-sun.Eng.Sun.COM (Eric Marsh)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: The March in D.C. (NEW SIGNATURE!)
Date: 13 Apr 92 22:59:01 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mt. View, Ca.
NNTP-Posting-Host: hernes-sun

In article <1992Apr13.212509.20522@cs.dal.ca> franklin@ug.cs.dal.ca (Steve Franklin) writes:

>-------------------- Muriel's new .sig ----------------------------------
>Muriel
>Anything I say or do should not make sense.
>I sometimes let my pet hamster type some of my talk.abortion posts.
>I had a lobotomy and they removed my cerebral cortex.
>My employer is not responsible for my opinions, nor would he want to
>   be because of their embarassingly idiotic nature.
>Any posts of mine you don't like aren't by me anyways, but by the
>   infamous Dennis Hall.
>I will some day be lucky enough to compose eloquent arguments of logic
>   like Steve Franklin who I admire so grealy.
>I don't even type my posts. I write them up in nice orange crayon and
>   then my mommy types them up for me (when my pet hamster is busy)
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well, well, well. It looks like we have a new candidate for the David
Rasmussen look-alike contest. 

So tell us all, Stevie, do you read minds too?

>   steve

Eric
--
*  Eric Marsh   ---   email: emarsh@sun.com / standard disclaimers apply  *
*  DoD # 1332                                    dragbike pilot for hire  *
*  986cc Ninja street scooter   ----   GS1260 Suzuki Pro-Stock drag bike  *
From: keegan@scoobiedoo.crd.ge.com (James G Keegan Jr)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: from bad to very bad (was Re: RIs this guy pro-control, or what?)
Date: 14 Apr 92 21:21:36 GMT
Reply-To: james g keegan jr <keegan@crd.ge.com>
Organization: T.S.A.K.C.

garvin+@cs.cmu.edu (Susan Garvin) writes:
-> Anyone else think that Franklin is purposefully mimicking the
-> worst characteristics of the talk.abortion hall of shame
-> members?  I saw the Rasmussenlike attack on Muriel, and
-> here he is copying Darcy.

so he's going from bad to very bad, eh?

--
----
charter member   ...   T.S.A.K.C.
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: wdo@IEDV4.acd.com ( Bill Overpeck (TE)  )
Subject: Re: Clarifications, further comments (LONG)
Organization: Applied Computing Devices, Inc., Terre Haute IN
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 13:30:36 GMT

In <1992Apr1.005034.1010@cs.yale.edu> rescorla@rtnmr.chem.yale.edu 
   (Eric Rescorla) writes: >
In article <1992Mar31.211345.25643@acd4.acd.com> wdo@IEDV4.acd.com 
   ( Bill Overpeck (TE)  ) writes: >>

>>On the other hand, numerous studies have documented the negative effects 
>>of divorce on children.  Academic performance has been found to be sig-
>>nificantly lower in children of divorce (for at least five years after
>>the divorce).  Children of divorce experience more depression and anxiety
>>than their counterparts from intact families.  In general, the presence
>>of both parents in the home produces children who are more well adjusted,
>>i.e. have fewer social and emotional difficulties, and better academic
>>performance. 

>And surely your studies have controlled for family discord which
>is most likely highly correlated with divorce? 

Significantly lower academic performance was measured *five years* 
subsequent to divorce in one study (Mulholland, Watt, Philpott, and 
Sarlin, 1989).  The acute effects of parental conflict would likely 
be significantly reduced by then.  That seems to suggest that the 
absence of a parent, rather than family discord, is a legitimate 
factor in poor academic performance.  

Bill
From: keegan@rosebud.crd.ge.com (James G Keegan Jr)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: A question for any MALE prolifer
Date: 10 Apr 92 20:58:35 GMT
Organization: T.S.A.K.C.

kevin@liebe.uucp (Kevin Brawley) writes:
-> cookc@aix.rpi.edu (rocker) writes:
-> >What equivalent responsibility (if any) do you propose for
-> >the MALE who got the potentially aborting woman pregnant?
-> 
-> >And people wonder why I have little respect for pro-"life" males.
-> 
-> The reason for so little response would be self-evident to the
-> rational person.

that's true. that's why it's so easy to use rocker's tale to poke
fun at the pro-force mentality.

-> Kevin Brawley (not afraid to use my real name)

personally, i think it must be the name "kevin" that does it.


--
----
charter member   ...   T.S.A.K.C.
From: kwelch@eniac.seas.upenn.edu (King of Birds)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Pro-Abortion Airheads
Date: 10 Apr 92 15:08:21 GMT
Organization: University of Pennsylvania

Mathew "Biology Master Refuter" Zank muses:

>Pro-Abortion Airheads? that sould be Pro-life airheads!
>anyone who thinks that a Zygote (Which has just 23 more 
>chromosomes then a ova) is life,

I think it is a life.  I think it is alive.  Do you think it is dead
Matt?  Does it reside in suspended animation until birth?  Does it 
suddenly go from dead to alive once born?

Schaw, right.

>and it has the same rights
>as the woman who has it inside her, is a airhead.

IYHO.

>If you do not know what a Zygote is well this is 
>from Taber's Medical Dictionary:(Zygote Cell produced
>by a union of two gametes. The fertilized ovum) you see
>it is a cell, not life.

Correct, it is a cell.  "not life" ---> egregious ignorance.

It is quite alive.  It is very much a life.  If you are so keen on
looking up medical terms, check out the biological definition of life.

Ooops.  I just killed myself there.  One of those qualifications for life
is reproduces.  Most of us haven't reproduced and had offspring as of yet.
I guess we're all dead.

>It can become life,
It already is, moron.

>but so
>can the spermatozoa that are in my body now also become life.

Your sperm are alive.  Go back to high school.

>Maybe the prolifers sould have a new name Pro-Zygotes!

And maybe pro-choicers should have a new name:  Pro-ripped out fetus.

>I think if americans understand biology more,

Ha hahah hahaha <gasp> <snort> <wheeze> a hahahhahahahhaha.

Americans like you, perhaps.  hahhahahah.

>the pro-life
>or the pro-zygote movement be dead in the water.

sort of like your mentality and biological assumptions.


>Matthew Zank * Eau Claire, Wisconsin

kcw


--
                          -*-  Kevin C. Welch -*-
                    -*- kwelch@eniac.seas.upenn.edu -*-
     And all you have to do is catch me, when I'm back on the real scene.
And all the things that I don't do just make me laugh 'cause they irritate you.
From: franklin@ug.cs.dal.ca (Steve Franklin)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: The March in D.C.
Date: 14 Apr 92 12:41:18 GMT
Organization: Math, Stats & CS, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada

In <1992Apr14.005534.18330@rice.edu> patrick@is.rice.edu (Patrick L Humphrey) writes:

>In article <1992Apr13.222640.11768@odin.corp.sgi.com>, cj@eno.corp.sgi.com (C J Silverio) writes:

>|> Is this why you called Keith Cochran a "fils du pute"?
>|> Clearly you are using a definition of "respect" unlike
>|> any one I've ever seen.
>It looks to me like in Matthew's little convoluted reality, anyone not as
>violently "pro-life" as himself simply isn't considered a person...

   No Pat... I think Matt was saying anyone who says stupid
things and lashes out at the other group with mental violence and 
insult is a fils du pute. Not that I agree with wrong + wrong = right,
but you misinterpreted what he had to say most heinously.
   steve
-- 
aasdSteveFranklin-Subliminal Psychology Major.ks;dlasBlueJaysRULEkasdfeahsdbfl
sd;lfaswoq[eBuyMeAQuadra!!!mbnZMXCNdfsba;KdSPAMiuroqiyetIBMSuxiweuryth'ewr;mxn
qpuepriuPartyOneqtuj;,n.,xnc,kjasFlameMeNot!;lkj;lkgkjd;askElvisLivesjhfquweru
zx.cfranklin@ug.cs.dal.ca,sk;t;lrut[Superboy@ac.dal.cav.zx,Physics!eq3rwkh;oHA
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
From: kcochran@isis.cs.du.edu (Keith A. Cochran)
Subject: Re: The Natives Are Restless... (Was: The March in D.C.)
X-Disclaimer: Nyx is a public access Unix system run by the University
	of Denver for the Denver community.  The University has neither
	control over nor responsibility for the opinions of users.
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 92 18:23:57 GMT

In article <1992Apr12.204155.28349@cs.dal.ca> franklin@ug.cs.dal.ca (Steve Franklin) writes:
>In <1992Apr12.191044.1137@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> kcochran@isis.cs.du.edu (Keith A. Cochran) writes:
>>In article <1992Apr12.163843.17077@usenet.ins.cwru.edu> mal11@po.CWRU.Edu (Matthew A. Lewis) writes:
>>>In a previous article, gordons@coopsol.com (Gordon Storga) says:
>
>>You mean like my sister, who had a miscarriage during the fourth month of her
>>first pregnancy???
>>Well, gee, Cheryl's concern wasn't that she had "lost a child", it was that 
>>she wouldn't be able to have a child.
>   You are goin to tell me that your sister Cheryl didn't give a shit
>about the kid she had lost? She just said "oh well, it's only a fetus..."
>But then again, it shouldn't be surprising that you two share the same
>mentality.

Can't you understand anything, Pro-Forced-Birther?  Cheryl did NOT get upset
"because she lost her child".  Cheryl DID get upset because she WASN'T GOING
TO BE HAVING HER CHILD.  Pregnancy is NOT the same thing as motherhood.

>
>>(Here we go again:  Yet another pro-life-male-virgin-without-even-half-a-clue
>>is going to try and tell women how to run their lives...)
>
>  ( Here we go again: yet another pro-choice-boy-anti-family-who-thinks-he
>-has-half-a-clue...)
>
>>=B(0/1/2/3) f- t w- c- d- s++(+) m e++ r(-) p k(+) <--My BearCode, if you care=
>Nope. I don't get it. Why not explain this for us? I don't find it funny.

It's not supposed to be funny.  It's BearCode, as anybody with half-a-clue
would understand...
--
=kcochran@nyx.cs.du.edu   |  !uunet!nyx!kcochran  |  kcochran@isis.cs.du.edu  =
=B(0/1/2/3) f- t w- c- d- s++(+) m e++ r(-) p k(+) <--My BearCode, if you care=
=My thoughts, my posts, my ideas, my responsibility, my beer, my pizza.  Ok???=
=Ex-Girlfriend of Rocker, Susan, and Linda, and Damm Proud Of It!! And, FWA!!!=
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.flame
From: kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy)
Subject: Re: kebbie wants a "neutral adjudicator" to control women's bodies (was Re: Multi-lateral Abortion Decision (was Re: Women in bondage?))
Organization: Who, me???
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 92 04:40:44 GMT

In article <1992Apr14.155833.5142@crd.ge.com> james g keegan jr <keegan@crd.ge.com> writes:
>kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy) writes:
>-> james g keegan jr <keegan@crd.ge.com> writes:
>-> >kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy) writes:
>-> >-> james g keegan jr <keegan@crd.ge.com> writes:
>-> >-> >kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy) writes:
>-> >-> >-> james g keegan jr <keegan@crd.ge.com> writes:
>-> >-> >-> >kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy) writes to larry margolis:
>-> >-> >-> >-> It's not "obvious" [sic] at all. As long as the
>-> >-> >-> >-> possibility exists that the potential father, and/or
>-> >-> >-> >-> the state, might get an abortion veto-power, then
>-> >-> >-> >-> certainly the LESS RADICAL possibility of giving this
>-> >-> >-> >-> power to a neutral adjudicator is far more likely, as
>-> >-> >-> >-> a compromise position.
>-> >-> >-> >
>-> >-> >-> >this is a bit excessive, even for a pro-control freak
>-> >-> >-> >like you kevin. now you seem to want so badly to
>-> >-> >-> >lessen women's control of their bodies that you want
>-> >-> >-> >to give that control to a "neutral adjudicator."
>-> >-> >-> 
>-> >-> >-> Keegan, do you understand the difference between
>-> >-> >-> 	"X is a possibility"
>-> >-> >-> 		and
>-> >-> >-> 	"I support X"
>-> >-> >
>-> >-> >why do you call for a "neutral adjudicator" to make
>-> >-> >decisions for what a woman can and can not do with her
>-> >-> >body and it's contents, kevin? don't you think that
>-> >-> >decision should be left to the woman?
>-> >-> 
>-> >-> I did not and do not "call for" [sic] this to happen. But,
>-> >-> as long as it is a POSSIBILITY (and I think it is), we as
>-> >-> pro-choicers should have answers ready as to why it's such
>-> >-> a bad idea.
>-> >
>-> > [...]
>
>-> >now, on to your "POSSIBILITY." kevin, stop being ridiculous.
>-> >you are not empowered to trade-off or barter away a woman's
>-> >right to her body, not even to your "neutral adjudicator, not
>-> >to anyone.
>-> 
>-> I'm NOT "calling for" anything. I'm NOT supporting anything.
>-> I'm acknowledging the possibility, like a weatherman
>-> acknowledges the possibility of rain tomorrow.
>
> [...]
>
>whose rights do you want to compromise away, kebbie?

Please point out the part where I claimed the authority to make such a
compromise.

A possibility is a possibility, Keegan. It may rain tomorrow. It may not.
I don't "support" either outcome. Whatever will happen, will happen. I'm 
merely making speculations and trying to explore issues, some of them 
hypothetical. Why does this bother you so much?

>-> Talking about _issues_ is what we do here, 
>
>kevin, you don't talk about issues. you lie about people. you
>carry on net.vendettas. you accuse people of doing what you do.

A clear case of projection if I've ever seen one.

							- Kevin