Re: Identifying the image type within a PDF file?

In article 
<060920061558250009%dave@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
 Dave Balderstone <dave@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:

> In article <1hl97sg.1mi8wxvwxdbzhN%mike@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, Mike
> Rosenberg <mike@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> 
> > Mike Rosenberg <mike@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > 
> > > dorayme <doraymeRidThis@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Yes, part of me knows you are dead right! But I will have to go 
> > > > into training to not respond a leeeeeeetle leeeeeetle bit to 
> > > > aspersions of highly inaccurate psychiatric diagnoses... 
> > > 
> > > AAAACCK!!
> > 
> > To expand on that just a smidge, the point is that exhibiting some
> > impulse control and not writing essays will prevent people from
posting
> > such responses in the first place.
> 
> She's another Mark Conrad... Sometimes capable of cogent thought and
> expression, but unlikely to demonstrate same.

Ah it's you again! What a drag. The trouble with you Balderstone 
is that you pretend cogency, you have all the appearances of it 
to the unsuspecting. You are Wickam, (definitely not sweet sweet 
Elizabeth)... rather than Darcy. It was said of these two by 
Elizabeth that the one had all the appearance of goodness and the 
other all the goodness. The only relevant point here - the only 
one, you blockhead - is that your consistently constipated 
thoughts may appear cogent but are in fact evasive exercises in 
cowardliness and snideness. You never get down to detailed 
analysis for obvious reasons. Your basic dishonesty would be too 
exposed. 

Who the hell is this Conrad fellow, it is starting to irritate 
me? Have I a pretender?

-- 
dorayme