Having absorbed what this thread virtually overnight has revealed about your character, I've quickly come to expect no better from you than what you have, unfortunately, offered herein. It's been mildly disappointing.
CINOman: "Not looking in the [so-called] mire and muck you offer as your sources."
Are you not paying attention?
Was it not clear that, by the time of my last post to you, I no longer desired that you examine or even cast a cursory glance at the links I provided earlier? As I stated with crystal clarity in my last post, "If the links are going to have no effect other than to fatally distract you from the task of providing whatever evidence you think exists in support of your claim [and, obviously, the appearance of those links was having just such an effect] then you should simply forget they were posted in the first place and make a genuine effort to rise to the challenge, undistracted."
Obviously, you chose to ignore that advice, opting instead to reply yet again with a post of utter unresponsiveness. Well, you can stick your non-truth-seeking head back in the sand and go back to sleep now, as I'll not be bothering to urge you for a third time to do what you have made abundantly clear you have no intention of ever doing: posting a substantive reply to the question asked of you.
If you have felt "discounted" in some way by my uncompromising candor, well, perhaps there is consolation to be found in the unvarnished truth having set you free, if indeed it has, as the dull-herd-circulated-and-propagated, stale old platitude you saw fit to parrot in your immediately preceding post would have it. You're welcome.