Replies

Here’s part 6 of the anti-puma set of articles I’d like to ask you to comment upon.

http://www.yestodemocracy.com/yes_to_democracy_no_to_pu/2008/08/obamas-birth—3.html

Obama’s Birth Certificate - Fake or Myth? (Part 6 - and Final)
(Note: When I wrote this, I didn’t realize it was going to be so involved - or take up so much time. I had the luck to jump in about the point the pond got riled up again. I’ll occasionally post updates from this point, but quite frankly I’d like to discuss other things. I think we’ve presented enough evidence by now to show that “TexasDarlin” and the rest of the wingnuts contributing to this myth are either knowingly pulling a smear campaign, or are so far around the bend that they’re twisting everything to try and make their bet theory fit. In either case, it’s only some PUMAs and some tinfoil hat brigade cranks that are believing it - everyone else thinks it’s a joke.)

4 August - “TechDude” makes an offer of a free trip to Vegas if someone can produce the supposed “original name” on the COLB. I suspect he knows his challenge is safe, because there IS no such “original name”. (Betcha a bag of M&M’s that it will “just happen” to be either Maya Soetoro, Sen. Obama’s half-sister, or her daughter, also born in Hawaii)

What’s funny is that “TechDude kinda coyly hints about is name being “Adam”, saying “A 3rd party finding the same information - particularly one who does not know me from Adam (teehee) - would be the final nail in the COLB’s coffin.” I do suspect he’s right when he says “I am not some sort of genius”.

It really sets off my bullshit detectors when something as important as they CLAIM it is is being treated like some sort of parlor game. The only reason I can think of why they’re acting coy and treating it as a game is that it IS a game to them.

4 August - “TechDude” suffers a 1-2 bodyslam.

The first is from “Koyaan”, who does an analysis of “TechDude’s” exclusive and comments that the “evidence” he sites is actually all over the graphic in question, looking more like artifact noise than a “smoking gun”. At this point, the “smoking gun” is looking more like a leaky water-pistol.

“What’s interesting is that the length of this “very small vertical line” is 8 exactly pixels. What makes this interesting is that the JPEG algorithm processes an image in 8 pixel by 8 pixel blocks.

So is this really a remnant of a line? Well, if it is, then using the same criteria, there are a number of other remnants of small vertical lines very near to the small vertical line that Techdude points out.

Why are these excluded?

The short answer is that they have to be excluded in order for Techdude to make his case.”

Soon after that, Dr. Neal Krawetz weighs in. And by “weigh in” I mean “rips to tiny pieces”. In an article called “BAD SCIENCE: HOW NOT TO DO IMAGE ANALYSIS”, Dr. Krawetz looks at “TechDude’s” methods, claims, and even claimed credentials. And he’s not happy.

“Intentionally misleading research offends me. Real researchers strive to create the best work possible and are willing to have it put up to peer-reviewed scrutiny. They list their methods and provide enough information for other researchers to replicate the experiment. And good science should be able to draw the same conclusion with different analysis methods. In contrast, fake researchers intentionally doctor their data to support their theories. They do not provide their methods and their conclusions are not repeatable. While it is important to understand how real research is done, it is equally important to analyze and understand fake research.”

Some highlights of Dr. Krawetz’s findings:

Conclusion - “(TechDude’s) analysis combines a selective bias with misinterpreted artifacts and false data. His analysis is a work of fiction.”

Critics - “Since (TechDude) won’t give us his name, can he provide the names of his professional reference who are not also anonymous? Saying “some people have vetted me” is like saying “My mother says I’m smart”. To be properly vetted, we need professional references and not vigorous handwaving with anonymous citations.”

Credentials - “...assuming he has the credentials as he stated, I strongly recommend that the courts review each of the cases where TechDude has played any role. If he has shown this kind of biased, misleading, and false analysis in other cases, then each of those cases should be declared a mistrial.”

Dr. Krawetz makes a VERY valid point. If “TechDude” is so serious about his efforts, then he needs to establish his bona fides and submit his evidence for peer review. The fact he (and “TexasDarlin”, et al) are playing games like “trip to Vegas” and only dribbling out bits and pieces tends to lead people to suspect one thing....

The fraud is not on the part of the COLB, but the people promoting this increasingly wild-assed claim.

4 August - Okay, remember my comment that I would bet money that the “mystery name” supposedly found on the COLB that “TechDude” claims would be Sen. Obama’s half-sister Maya Soetoro??

Well, “TexasDarlin” somehow mysteriously feels the need to reprint a post from 19 July because of it’s “possible relevance to current stories” (supposely some “conflicting information” about Maya’s birthdate - which, amazingly enough, happens to be in the time frame “TechDude” claims he “found” on the COLB.)

Hmmmm.....that bet is looking more and more likely.

4 August - Well, someone on Craigslist is fishing too....

“Date: 2008-08-04, 9:34AM HST

Trying to find anyone that can clarify what their parent’s race is listed as on their Hawaiian birth certificate or Certificate of birth from the early 60s.

• Location: honolulu
• it’s NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests
PostingID: 782834334”

UPDATE! Thanks to Sandy, who posted in comments that they were the one who made the Craigslist post. Quote: “I am the person who posted the CL thing in Honolulu. I saw all of the birth certificate crap and wanted to see if someone could finalize what the Father’s Race would say.” So, no, not fishing. Thanks again!)

4 August - And over in the formerly sane “NoQuarter” Larry Johnson himself weighs in on “TechDude’s” supposed “mystery name”. The fact his guess is ALSO Maya Soetoro should come as NO surprise......

Also it’s interesting to note that Larry Johnson is now using “Barack “Barry Soetero” Obama” as well. Echo chamber anyone?

5 August - Damn. I hate being right sometimes.

Just as I predicted, “TechDude’s” supposed “find” in the COLB was indeed Maya Kassandra Soetoro. The “attack the entire family” strategy is now in play. And it’s really freaking transparent - someone “just happened” to discover it and “just decided” to tell “TechDude” to use the Vegas money to “ help retire Hillary’s debt”. And “TexasDarlin” is gushing over her supposed exclusive, telling her rabid readers that “Judah Benjamin, our resident historian and researcher, will be discussing these questions in the coming days.”

And the comments are very much in feeding on their own mode - PUMA Joesph Cannon of Cannonfire dared question “TechDude”, and the politest comment he got back was:

“Joseph Cannon’s marching orders from his beloved Messiah is to try to discredit any attempt to get to the truth behind his COLB by claiming that he could not reproduce the results put out by TD or to try to attack the messenger by attacking his use of a pseudonym. Watch him turn up the volume subsequently and become even more repetitive and boring in hopes that if repeated long enough, his accusations will become more believable.”

They are very, very much pimping the “Barry Soetoro” line, claiming “He did not want his legal name and Indonesian identity to be known.”. You know, this could be useful - if the person who’s telling you the latest Obama tale calls him “Barry Soetoro”, you know for sure they’re a complete and total fruitcake and not to bother trying anything like logic and common sense.

And of course, the formerly sane “NoQuarter’ is just orgasming with delight over this suppposed story.

As I said, it was transparently obvious who the “mysterious name” was going to be. Never mind “TechDude” could have claimed to have discovered “Mouse, Mickey” on that COLB, it would have been JUST AS VALID as anything else he found. But this way they can try for a double-header - attack Sen. Obama’s sister AND pretend she’s another woman that Sen. Obama “has thrown under the bus”.

The people pimping this myth are either delusional, or a pack of liars. I used to think delusional. Now, I’m completely convinced they’re a pack of liars. The sad part is the audience that is so desperate to believe their lies.

And with that comment, I’m wrapping up part 6 of what started to be a 3 part series. I may do the occasional update, but for the most part I’m done with what I set out to do.

It’s been interesting, but there’s something I discovered along the way:

Everytime I came out of researching the PUMA sites pimping this conspiracy, I feel like I just waded though an open sewer. A VERY dirty open sewer, filled with very dirty people.

They’re not the type of internet nutter you can point at and laugh. After a while, you discover it’s the type of internet nutter that makes you more and more angry. Doesn’t matter if you’re left-wing or right-wing, (there are right-wing blogs taking the Birth Certificate nutters apart as well).

It’s the type of insanity and unclean feel one feels when reading the “Westboro Baptist Church” or simular website. There’s not much difference between the Fred Phelps of the world and the “TexasDarlin” types. The only difference is what the focus of their hatred is.

And it’s a type of insanity that threatens to draw you into it. Until the idea of fighting it becomes as much an act of insanity as believing it.

I choose not to fall into that well of crazy. The people who want to believe it WILL believe it, despite all the evidence you find to prove them otherwise. I’ve proved to my satisfaction - and others - that there’s absolutely no credible proof or evidence to support their theory, and I will leave them to their insanity.

Posted by Patrick McKinnion at 04:00 AM | Permalink

Digg This | Save to del.icio.us
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/3070914/32030898

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Obama’s Birth Certificate - Fake or Myth? (Part 6 - and Final):
Comments
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Obama’s mother’s original Social Security Number Application

http://webofdeception.com/obamamother’sssapplication.html

Posted by: Robert Lewis | August 05, 2008 at 08:52 AM

Great findings Patrick. also, great findings R. lewis.

Posted by: Christina | August 05, 2008 at 09:04 AM

Thank you for following along this far! I enjoyed reading your reconstructions.

And I agree...those folks have lost it. The comments section is full of crazy. I wonder if anyone is going to tell them that...MAYA WAS BORN IN INDONESIA. So that means she doesn’t have a Hawaiian birth certificate, no matter how much they wish she did.

Posted by: Jenna | August 05, 2008 at 11:32 AM

It’s a very amateurish HOAX. Obama’s sister’s name couldn’t possibly be seen as a rough outline in his COLB.

It’s impossible for black text on a coloured background in a JPEG to leave a vague outline of the the letters — either the real letters or any previously masked ones because JPEGS have “artifacts” (random looking coloured pixels in a checkerboard rectangle around text which extend up to about 8 pixels from the text to the background - thus PREVENTING any sort of ‘outline’ of letters from ever being visible.

If anyone doubts this - just take a JPEG with text on it and then greatly enlarge it and see for yourself. If the artifacts and the edge of the checkerboard rectangle cannot be seen, just increase the contrast until it can be.

Ray
[Copied from my post on NoQuarter]

Posted by: Ray | August 05, 2008 at 11:38 AM

“And I agree...those folks have lost it. The comments section is full of crazy. I wonder if anyone is going to tell them that...MAYA WAS BORN IN INDONESIA. So that means she doesn’t have a Hawaiian birth certificate, no matter how much they wish she did.”

Oh, I know that. That being said, I expect them to have another “breaking story” about “why did Obama’s sister need to fake her birth certificate??” and claiming it has something to do with the Indonesian citizenship they claim Sen. Obama has.

Posted by: Patrick McKinnion | August 05, 2008 at 11:40 AM

Ray -

“It’s a very amateurish HOAX. Obama’s sister’s name couldn’t possibly be seen as a rough outline in his COLB.”

Expect to be banned from the formerly sane “NoQuarter” - or ripped apart by a pack of angry attack PUMAs. Look at how they’re trying to smear Dr. Krawetz for pointing out that “TechDude” has no proof and incredibly sloppy research.

*You* know it’s a hoax. *I* know it’s a hoax. My neighbor’s yippy toy poodle and my daughter’s cabbage patch kid know it’s a hoax. Anyone with an IQ greater than a vat of plankton knows it’s a hoax.

It won’t stop the “true believers”. Their need to believe this and so justify their hatred is so powerful that if it comes to rejecting this myth and rejecting the truth, they’ll reject the truth. Even if it means creating more and more outrageous conspiracy theories to “prove” the myth.

Last night I compared “TexasDarlin” and the like to groups like “Westboro Baptist Church” and Fred Phelps. The focus of their irrational hatred is different - but the OBSESSION to hate something that much is still the same.

This isn’t about Democrat or Republican. It’s not about right-wing or left-wing. It’s not about Sen. Clinton (no matter what their excuses are). It’s not even about the truth. It’s about destroying this illusion they’ve created that they think is Sen. Obama, and everything and everybody associated with him because of that illusion.

Posted by: Patrick McKinnion | August 05, 2008 at 11:49 AM

The best part is the disclaimer:

DISCLAIMER/COPYRIGHT: This article presents draft and preliminary viewpoints and information, all of which is subject to change. It is intended to be strictly theoretical and hypothetical, in an effort to examine and vet the background, qualifications, and eligibility for U.S. President of a serious candidate and public figure who is standing for that office. The assertions made herein are believed to be true by the author based on good-faith efforts to research the facts related to a public figure running for public office. In the event that documentation deemed to be reliable by the author comes to the author’s attention disproving one or more of the assertions made herein, corrections will be published.

Nothing herein should be quoted, cited, copied, or otherwise used or shared in whole or part without providing a link to the original source on the No Quarter or TexasDarlin blog, and acknowledging the author, TexasDarlin, which is a pseudonym. Nothing in this article should be used in a way that misrepresents the author’s meanings.

...yep, they’re living in fantasy camp.

Posted by: Jeff | August 05, 2008 at 12:35 PM

I am the person who posted the CL thing in Honolulu. I saw all of the birth certificate crap and wanted to see if someone could finalize what the Father’s Race would say.

There had been some previous argument that it would have said Negro or Black, not African. So I was just trying to see if someone would once and for all clarify it so it would nix that argument. Funny enough I did get a response but it was someone screaming that I was a racist and trying to oppress the black man.

I am technically a “puma” but only because I want a fair convention. I just want the open roll call and then once the nomination is squared away openly, I will fall in line with whomever the nominee is name to be. I enjoy reading your stuff because I feel like you represent the facts for the most part. I also have a blog that I attempt to do the same. Often the Puma sites are riddled with random conspiracy “stories” that are supposed to be “breaking news” the next day that “will finish Obama.” It is silly. Sadly, I get grouped with those people.

Just wanted to fess up as the CL poster. I wasn’t fishing to support Texas Darlin’s theory, but instead to end the Father’s Race question.

Posted by: sandy | August 05, 2008 at 01:21 PM

p.s. Did you see their comments about the “Big Dawg” aka Bill Clinton being aware of the faux COLB? Supposedly his comment about anyone who is qualified under the constitution means he knows Obama’s COLB is not legit. haha

Posted by: Sandy | August 05, 2008 at 01:25 PM

Sandy -

“Just wanted to fess up as the CL poster. I wasn’t fishing to support Texas Darlin’s theory, but instead to end the Father’s Race question.”

Thanks! I’ll edit it to reflect that news.

- Patrick

Posted by: Patrick McKinnion | August 05, 2008 at 01:31 PM

They really need some kind of counseling, don’t they?

Posted by: Ripley | August 05, 2008 at 02:04 PM

Jeff re: The best part is the disclaimer

I still like my version better:

I don’t have any evidence, so I am reduced to making shit up. Some of my theoreticals are pretty lame, so don’t be surprised if I change my story as soon as someone questions my logic - or rather, lack thereof. But that’s okay, because I believe very strongly that the things I’ve made up - in my mind - are actually true. If someone offers evidence that debunks the root of my argument - say, if the Hawaii Department of Health verifies that the birth certificate on Obama’s website is genuine - I will ignore it. Everyone knows they’re in the tank for him anyway. Oh, and I might delete this entire post with no warning if ya’ll make fun of me too much.

Posted by: Wonk | August 05, 2008 at 06:24 PM

I’m now trying to visualise how all of this is going to end. Will there be a riot at Texasdarlin if TechDUD claims a dog got into the asylum and ate all of his COLB homework?

There’s a good post that has just come in on this blog where someone pointed out that other presidents didn’t need to produce their COLB’s.
http://www.hackerfactor.com/blog/index.php?/archives/210-Bad-Science-How-Not-To-Do-Image-Analysis.html

Ray

Posted by: Ray_in_Aus | August 05, 2008 at 10:00 PM

“I’m now trying to visualise how all of this is going to end. Will there be a riot at Texasdarlin if TechDUD claims a dog got into the asylum and ate all of his COLB homework?”

I think I liked “Obama’s mother born at Roswell base in 1947” and “Techdude’s ‘dead rabbit’ was the Easter Bunny!” as well :-)

Posted by: Patrick McKinnion | August 05, 2008 at 11:37 PM

Dear yes to democracy denizens,

Cheers.

I appreciate the opportunity to comment on the points and allegations that are raised in this blog, in particular because a blog named “yes to democracy” should be like a second home to me.

I am not qualified to comment upon the technical issues related to the birth certificate. I see them as a distraction from the more significant issues related to choosing someone worthy to be president in these ever-increasingly difficult times. To each their own.

I am qualified, however, to comment on the intellectual and moral quality of the assertions that are made on this site about the denizens of No Quarter. If anything, my survey of your denizen’s views upon this topic, let alone the reputed Dr. Krawetz’s commentary, will demonstrate that we are all imperfect vessels who would do well to consider our own sins before we cast stones. Doing so does not prohibit us from throwing, nonetheless.

Koyaan offers technical info I cannot comment upon. I liked that Ray gave NQ the cut and paste.

The reputed [ lists.immunitysec.com/pipermail/ dailydave/2007-April/004276.html ] Dr. Krawetz says, “An anonymous racist who goes by the nickname “Texas Darlin”, and two anonymous “researchers” named Polarik and TechDude.” Interestingly, he cannot pin point who this person is, so he provides some possibilities. Even more interestingly, the person he lists who could be construed as having said something racist, is not a possible candidate. To think Harriet Christian is Texas Darlin’ is equivalent to thinking Barack Obama is a sleeper cell Muslim.

The point to take here is that Dr. Krawetz uses the term racist so freely that he loses his claim to moral authority because he has abandoned the field upon which he can make the claim about the motivations of others. If you say people are racists, then you’d better have evidence because the words are not only slanderous, but they are the type of ad hominem rhetoric that undermines civil social intercourse. The state of the Democratic party after the false accusations of racism made by people, such as James Clyburn, stands as evidence.

This does not, however, undermine Dr. Krawetz’s technical conclusions. It might point to him falsely reifying the conclusions of his employers, however.

As to the comments, I agree as to the curiousness of the Indonesian sister’s birth certificate being in Hawaii.

With regard to the blog, it’s nice that Patrick McKinnon recognizes that only some PUMAs are enticed by the birth certificate line. Curiously, Patrick becomes illogical when he states:

“The people pimping this myth are either delusional, or a pack of liars. I used to think delusional. Now, I’m completely convinced they’re a pack of liars. The sad part is the audience that is so desperate to believe their lies.”

Though it is the case that people can be both delusional and liars, people can only be liars about things upon which they are not delusional. True believers are delusional, even if they promulgate a truth, if they do so without knowledge. People who desperately believe lies feed a delusion.

“Everytime I came out of researching the PUMA sites pimping this conspiracy, I feel like I just waded though an open sewer. A VERY dirty open sewer, filled with very dirty people.”

Was Patrick McKinnon in a dirty sewer? He certainly was not in a well-editted collective stream of consciousness, but, after all, democracy is messy. It contains all the scents, sounds, touches, tastes, and sights of an open air market of the mind. Voltaire and Churchill said as much and more, to name two people who respect the importance of allowing differing perspectives, no matter how repugnant they might be. If you want clean, make the USA like Singapore. I like NQ partially because I don’t like some of what I find there. “Insanity” and “well of crazy”. Those are thoughts of people who think that the motivations of others cannot possibly have justification and, therefore, that they do not have to seek understanding, as Jessica Stern notes in Terror in the Name of God. If we think that the 9/11 jihadis are madmen, then we cannot think they have reasons behind their actions and, therefore, there is no reason for us to examine our actions.

People are passionately involved in this election for good reason. It’s hard to step out of our perspectives and see the views of others.

You have chosen to engage a refugee blog of which I am a member. Because many of us are refugees from Democratic blogs, we are diverse in our perspectives. Obama supporters assaulted many people in many ways. Accordingly, the ways and means we employ when encountering Obama supporters differ with our previous experiences.

Welcome to your association with No Quarter. I look forward to your responses.

Yours,
Steven

Posted by: steven Mather | August 06, 2008 at 12:42 AM

“You have chosen to engage a refugee blog of which I am a member. Because many of us are refugees from Democratic blogs, we are diverse in our perspectives. Obama supporters assaulted many people in many ways. Accordingly, the ways and means we employ when encountering Obama supporters differ with our previous experiences.

Welcome to your association with No Quarter. I look forward to your responses.”

I say the “formerly sane No Quarter” for a reason.

I used to enjoy it, having enjoyed Larry Johnson when he was doing the “ask the spy guy” bits on the Stephanie Miller show. I liked the way he was supporting Valerie Plame as well.

That was then. Now, No Quarter is a cesspool. The sane people ran off, and the ones that are left are all feeding Larry’s obsessive hatred of Sen. Obama. The No Quarter I knew is dead. What remains is a twisted zombie where dissent is squashed, deviation from the party line is not allowed, and every new slander or attack is carefully nurtured in an echo chamber.

Neither campaign - either Sen. Clinton’s campaign OR Sen. Obama’s campaign, has clean hands. Supporters on both sides did and said things that did the person they supported no honour at all.

You say “Obama supporters assaulted many people in many ways”. It is JUST as accurate to say that “Clinton supporters assaulted many people in many ways. Accordingly, the ways and means we employ when encountering Clinton supporters differ with our previous experiences.”

You say it’s full of “refugees from Democratic blogs”, let me tell you I know of several “Democratic blogs” that Obama supporters were forced out because of the terrible way Clinton supporters treated them. So don’t even go there.

Neither side has their hands clean.

That being said, I cannot see how anyone can look at “No Quarter”, (or any of the PUMA sites, and think for even a microsecond that the stuff that is spewed there against Sen. Obama does Sen. CLINTON any favours. Those people are not supporters, they are “supporters”, because the constant lies, slanders, slurs, insults, and general contempt towards Sen. Obama slimes, defames, and spits in the face of everything Sen. Clinton stands for.

Every foul word, every slander, every speck of hatred there, or any of the PUMA sites, reflects badly not just on those who speak those lies, but casts dark and bitter shadows on Sen. Clinton as well. To her credit and honor, she has spoken out against the PUMAs that spew hatred in her name. She’s told people if they support her, they need to get behind her in supporting Sen. Obama.

PUMAs do NOT support Sen. Clinton. If they did, they wouldn’t be going against everything she stands for.

Sen. Clinton deserved a better campaign than she got. She doesn’t deserve to be slimed, maligned, or mistreated. Not by the press, not by the opposition, and especially NOT by people who claim to support her.

She does not deserve what PUMA has done in her name.

Posted by: Patrick McKinnion | August 06, 2008 at 01:06 AM

Oh, and as for your above link, you’re talking about Gobbles Security, the hackers who developed anti-piracy rootkits for the RIAA and tend to release “oh, hey, we found your bugs” without vendor notification first? The ones who basically act like street theatre in the world of computer security?

Yeah, basically completely unreliable sources.

Posted by: Patrick McKinnion | August 06, 2008 at 01:13 AM

Dear Patrick,

Good comments. As to the last one, it was the first thing I saw about Dr. Krawetz, so despite my better judgment (knowing I was not able to judge the worth of their claims), I thought it fun to add. Oops. One for you.

It was nasty on the net. I think the nastiness you encounter at NQ is an artifact of its refugee status. It is also an artifact of the Obama supporters who come to attack, the Republicans who like to stir the pot, and the frontier environment of the web.

Furthermore, I think rational, moral people can have good reason to be very concerned about what Obama does and does not bring as a candidate, much the same as many Obama supporters thought about Hillary, though some of these concerns were only parroted, debunked Rove talking points.

I believe that the disenfranchised Democrats who are PUMAs have a solid case for not backing the party line, due to a variety of different poor procedural decisions, which I base on my research in microsociology. If the group makes decisions that are contrary to the will or individual best interest of all members without applying a process that is equally respectful of all members, while being oriented towards their common goals, then those who are disenfrhanchised by the process are not obligated to follow the decision. This echoes Rousseau in his Social Contract (1762). In fact, depending upon how egregious the decision is, members of the group have an obligation to overturn the decision, if they do not want to sacrifice the group’s reason for existence, which is its common goals. Think Boston Tea Party. No taxation (decision) without representation (fair process). Why should we follow the King’s will when it so clearly works against our best interests?

The bad procedural decisions were magnified by the other ugliness (that you refer to) that came from places within and outside of the campaigns, which made people much more sensitive to slights, which made fair process even more important. Process fell to expediency. Ergo, PUMA.

If it is shown to be the case that enough significant caucus fraud occurred, and we recognize that the rules committee very selectively applied the rules with regard to who was sanctioned and how, then it reasonable to say that PUMAs epitomize what Hillary Clinton stands for, and not the contrary as you suggest.

What fun. Thank you for the indulgence.

Posted by: Steven Mather | August 06, 2008 at 02:36 AM