Science Guardian

Truth, beauty and paradigm power in science and society

I am Nicolaus Copernicus, and I approve of this blog

News, views and reviews measured against professional literature in peer reviewed journals (adjusted for design flaws and bias), well researched books, authoritative encyclopedias (not the bowdlerized Wiki entries on controversial topics) and the investigative reporting and skeptical studies of courageous original thinkers among academics, philosophers, researchers, scholars, authors, filmmakers and journalists.

Supporting the right of exceptional minds to free speech, publication, media coverage and funding against the crowd prejudice, leadership resistance, monetary influences and internal professional politics of the paradigm wars of cancer, HIV(not)AIDS, evolution, global warming, cosmology, particle physics, macroeconomics, information technology, religions and cults, health, medicine, diet and nutrition.



Halton C. Arp wki/obit/txt/vds/txt/txt/bk/bk, Henry Bauer txt/blg/ blg/bks/bk/txt/bk/vd, John Beard bk, Harvey Bialy bk/bk/txt/txt/rdo/vd, John Bockris bio/txt/ltr/bk, Donald W. Braben, Peter Breggin ste/fb/col/bks, Darin Brown txt/txt/txt/txt/txt/vd, Giordano Bruno bk/bio/bio, Frank R. Buianouckas, Stanislav Burzynski mov, Erwin Chargaff bio/bk/bio/prs, James Chin bk/vd, Nicolaus Copernicus bk, Mark Craddock, Francis Crick vd, Paul Crutzen, Marie Curie, Rebecca Culshaw txt/bk, Roger Cunningham, Charles Darwin txts/bk, Erasmus Darwin txt//bk/txt/hse/bks, Peter Duesberg ste/ste/bk/txt/vd/vd, Freeman Dyson, Albert Einstein, Richard Feynman bio, John Fewster, Rosalind Franklin, Bernard Forscher tx, Galileo Galilei, Walter Gilbert vd, Goethe bio/bk/bio, Nicolas Gonzalez tlk/rec/stetxt/txt, Patricia Goodson txt/bk/bk, Alec Gordon, James Hansen, Etienne de Harven bk/txt/vd, Alfred Hassig intw/txt, Robert G. Houston txt, Steven Jonas vd, Edward Jenner txt, Benjamin Jesty, Adrian Kent vd, Thomas Kuhn, Fred Kummerow, Stefan Lanka txt/txt/vd, Serge Lang, John Lauritsen vd, Paul Lauterbur vd, Mark Leggett, Richard Lindzen, James Lovelock, Andrew Maniotis, Lynn Margulis, Barbara McClintock, Christi Meyer vd, George Miklos, Marco Mamone Capria, Peter Medawar, Luc Montagnier txt/txt/vd, Kary Mullis, Linus Pauling prs/vd/vd, Eric Penrose, Roger Penrose vd, Max Planck, Rainer Plaga, David Rasnick bio/vd/bk, Robert Root-Bernstein vd, Sherwood Rowland, Otto Rossler, Harry Rubin, Marco Ruggiero txt/txt/intw/vd, Bertrand Russell Carl Sagan vd, Erwin Schrodinger, Fred Singer, Barbara Starfield txt, Gordon Stewart txt/txt, Richard Strohman, Thomas Szasz, Nicola Tesla bio/bio, Charles Thomas intw/vd, Frank Tipler, James Watson vd/vd, Alfred Wegener vd, Edward O. Wilson vd.


Jad Adams bk, Marci Angell bk/txt/txt/txt, Clark Baker ste/txt/rdo/vd, James Blodgett, Tony Brown vd, Hiram Caton txt/txt/txt/bk/ste, Jonathan Collin ste , Marcus Cohen, David Crowe vd, Margaret Cuomo, Stephen Davis BK/BK,/rdo, Michael Ellner vd, Elizabeth Ely txt/txt/ste, Epicurus, Dean Esmay, Celia Farber bio/txt/txt/txt/vd, Jonathan Fishbein txt/txt/wk, T.C.Fry, Michael Fumento, Max Gerson txt, Charles Geshekter vd, Michael Geiger, Roberto Giraldo, David Healy txt, Bob Herbert, Mike Hersee ste/rdo, Neville Hodgkinson txt /vd, James P. Hogan, Richard Horton bio/vd/vd, Christopher Hitchens, Eric Johnson, Claus Jensen vd, Phillip Johnson, Coleman Jones vds, William Donald Kelley, Ernst T. Krebs Sr txt, Ernst T. Krebs Jr. txt,/bio/txt/txt/ltr, Paul Krugman, Brett Leung MOV/ste/txt/txt/tx+vd/txt, Katie Leishman, Anthony Liversidge blg/intv/intv/txt/txts/txt/intv/txt/vd/vd, Bruce Livesey txt, James W. Loewen, Frank Lusardi, Nathaniel Lehrman vd, Christine Maggiore bk/ste/rec/rdo/vd, Rouben Mamoulian txt/txt/txt/txt/txt/doc/flm/flm, Noreen Martin vd, Robert Maver txt/itw, Eric Merola MOV, Lady Mary Wortley Montagu, Michael Moore bio/MOV/MOV/MOV, Gordon Moran, Ralph Nader bk, Ralph Moss txt/blg/ste/bks, Gary Null /txt/rdo/vd, Dan Olmsted wki, Toby Ord vd, Charles Ortleb bk/txt/bk/intw/flm, Neenyah Ostrom bk, Dennis Overbye, Mehmet Dr Oz vd, Eleni Papadopulos-Eleopulos ste/vd, Maria Papagiannidou bk, Thomas Piketty bk/bk/bk/bk/bk/bk/bk/bk/bk/bk, Robert Pollin txt/vd/bk, Jon Rappoport bio/bk/bk/ste/bk/bk/vd, Janine Roberts bk/bk, Luis Sancho vd, Liam Scheff ste/txt/bk/bk/rdio/vd, John Scythes, Casper Schmidt txt/txt, Joan Shenton vd/vd, Joseph Sonnabend vd, John Stauber, David Steele, Joseph Stiglitz bk/txt, Will Storr rdo Wolfgang Streeck, James P. Tankersley ste, Gary Taubes vd, Mwizenge S. Tembo, John Tierney vd, Michael Tracey, Valendar Turner rec, Jesse Ventura bk, Michael Verney-Elliott bio/vds/vd, Voltaire, Walter Wagner, Andrew Weil vd, David Weinberger bio/bk/blg/blg/BK/bk/pds, Robert Willner bk/txt/txt/vd, Howard Zinn.

I am Albert Einstein, and I heartily approve of this blog, insofar as it seems to believe both in science and the importance of intellectual imagination, uncompromised by out of date emotions such as the impulse toward conventional religious beliefs, national aggression as a part of patriotism, and so on.   As I once remarked, the further the spiritual evolution of mankind advances, the more certain it seems to me that the path to genuine religiosity does not lie through the fear of life, and the fear of death, and blind faith, but through striving after rational knowledge.   Certainly the application of the impulse toward blind faith in science whereby authority is treated as some kind of church is to be deplored.  As I have also said, the only thing that ever interfered with my learning was my education. I am Freeman Dyson, and I approve of this blog, but would warn the author that life as a heretic is a hard one, since the ignorant and the half informed, let alone those who should know better, will automatically trash their betters who try to enlighten them with independent thinking, as I have found to my sorrow in commenting on "global warming" and its cures.
Many people would die rather than think – in fact, they do so. – Bertrand Russell.

The progress of science is strewn, like an ancient desert trail, with the bleached skeletons of discarded theories which once seemed to possess eternal life. - Arthur Koestler

One should as a rule respect public opinion in so far as is necessary to avoid starvation and to keep out of prison. – Bertrand Russell

Fraud and falsehood only dread examination. Truth invites it. - Samuel Johnson

A sudden bold and unexpected question doth many times surprise a man and lay him open. – Sir Francis Bacon (1561 – 1626)

He who knows only his own side of the case, knows little of that. – John Stuart Mill

Whenever you find that you are on the side of the majority, it is time to reform. – Mark Twain

Although science has led to the generally high living standards that most of the industrialized world enjoys today, the astounding discoveries underpinning them were made by a tiny number of courageous, out-of-step, visionary, determined, and passionate scientists working to their own agenda and radically challenging the status quo. – Donald W. Braben

An old error is always more popular than a new truth. — German Proverb

I am Richard Feynman and I approve of this blog

When even the brightest mind in our world has been trained up from childhood in a superstition of any kind, it will never be possible for that mind, in its maturity, to examine sincerely, dispassionately, and conscientiously any evidence or any circumstance which shall seem to cast a doubt upon the validity of that superstition. I doubt if I could do it myself. – Mark Twain

It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his income depends on his not understanding it. – Upton Sinclair

A clash of doctrines is not a disaster, but an opportunity. - Alfred North Whitehead

Fraud and falsehood only dread examination. Truth invites it. – Samuel Johnson

Man’s mind cannot grasp the causes of events in their completeness, but the desire to find those causes is implanted in man’s soul. And without considering the multiplicity and complexity of the conditions any one of which taken separately may seem to be the cause, he snatches at the first approximation to a cause that seems to him intelligible and says: “This is the cause!” – Leo Tolstoy

The evolution of the world tends to show the absolute importance of the category of the individual apart from the crowd. - Soren Kierkegaard

Who does not know the truth is simply a fool, yet who knows the truth and calls it a lie is a criminal. – Bertold Brecht

How easily the learned give up the evidence of their senses to preserve the coherence of ideas in their imagination. – Adam Smith

Education consists mainly in what we have unlearned. – Mark Twain

The mind likes a strange idea as little as the body likes a strange protein and resists it with similar energy. If we watch ourselves honestly, we shall often find that we have begun to argue against a new idea even before it has been completely stated. – Arthur Koestler

Whenever the human race assembles to a number exceeding four, it cannot stand free speech. – Mark Twain

People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices. - Adam Smith

There isn’t anything so grotesque or so incredible that the average human being can’t believe it. – Mark Twain

He who knows only his own side of the case, knows little of that. – John Stuart Mill

It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere. – Voltaire

People are generally better persuaded by the reasons which they have themselves discovered than by those which have come into the mind of others.- Blaise Pascal.

Illusion is the first of all pleasures. – Voltaire

The applause of a single human being is of great consequence. – Samuel Johnson

(Click for more Unusual Quotations on Science and Human Nature)

Important: This site is best viewed in LARGE FONT, and in Firefox for image title visibility (place cursor on pics to reveal comments) and layout display. Click the title of any post to get only that post and its Comments for printing. All posts guaranteed fact checked according to reference level cited, typically the original journal studies. Full guide to site purpose, layout and how to print posts out is in the lower blue section at the bottom of the home page.
---Admin AL/E/ILMK---

The Times talks – but only in the Business Media section – to remove the sting in Harper’s tale

Why the basic import of Duesberg is not going to be faced soon on 43rd Street

A nicely judged, “objective”, resolutely uninvolved piece, written over the weekend by Lia Miller for the New York Times’ Business section, An Article in Harper’s Ignites a Controversy Over H.I.V., is buried far from immediate notice today, Monday March 13, on page C5, noting, after three weeks silence, the Harpers piece and the teapot tempest it has brewed, but leaving the larger question strictly unaddressed: is Duesberg conceivably right?

The dissenters in HIV?AIDS must be pleased, for the article is shorn of the usual disparagement which creeps into every mainstream story on the dissenting view. But the science reporters and editors, particularly Larry Altman, must be slightly nervous that curiosity on the big question they have neglected so long might grow.

In his last issue as the editor of Harper’s Magazine, Lewis Lapham has left a parting gift for his successor: a firestorm in the media and among AIDS researchers.

The source is a 15-page article in the March issue, titled “Out of Control: AIDS and the Corruption of Medical Science,” by Celia Farber. Ms. Farber, a longtime magazine journalist, has been a polarizing figure because she has frequently written about the position of “AIDS dissidents,” who argue that H.I.V. does not cause AIDS.

Celia Farber is handled with care as a “long time journalist” rather than an insufferable “denialist”, editor Roger D. Hodge is allowed to confirm upfront that the piece was thoroughly fact checked, a scientist at Cornell who signed the 37 page rebuttal at TAC (Treatment Action Campaign of South Africa, which has posted it at TAC) is allowed to opine that Harpers’ reputation had taken an “irreparable hit” but not to quote specifics, “leading AIDS dissident” Duesberg was phoned but not reached, a magazine and Web gay columnist and “many scientists” are permitted to allege without a single example that the piece was “poorly fact-checked and had glaring errors”, Farber and Hodge are quoted as declining to take responsibility for Duesberg’s views, but merely for “covering dissent”, with Hodge standing behind Celia as no “crackpot” but “a courageous journalist” who has covered the story as a journalist at the cost of “great personal cost”.

On the while a nice job, in the inimitable Times style of handling a hot potato with tongs a foot long, which enables a reporter who knows nothing of the issue to cover the ground without a misstep.

Making the topic of Lia Miller’s assignment the lively reaction the Harpers article has provoked in certain quarters made it unnecessary for the Times reporter to read let alone report the Harpers article in detail, which presumably was the intention of the Times editors. It allowed the Times to deal with the topic and let the pressure off a little without placing itself in the line of fire. After all, if the Times has allowed itself to be led by the nose by a handful of misguided scientists and NIH officials who have willfully ignored the scientific literature for twenty years, which is the implication of the Duesberg section of the Harper’s piece, it has much to answer for.

Still, those copies of Harpers must be still lying on desks and perhaps even on the bedside table of more than one key figure at the Times, who must be asking questions of Larry and his colleagues, such as Nicholas Wade, who only recently has been thinking and writing about paradigm overthrow as we have reported earlier. We mentioned Duesberg to him a couple of months ago and were surprised to hear that he had neglected to read his Journal of Biosciences 2003 paper. Perhaps he has now.

The whole disturbance still threatens to turn into a scientific Katrina and puts these pillars of the HIV?AIDS established view into a slight pickle. For the Harpers article presents a problem for the Times if Farber’s coverage of Duesberg is taken seriously, for what it will lead to ultimately, if the can of worms is finally opened up fully, and Duesberg is eventually vindicated after a proper public illumination of his views and the twenty year failure of the scientists who run HIV?AIDS to produce argument or evidence to refute them, is a very grave accusation, far more momentous than anything the Times has faced to date in its recent history of having its credibility dented by its own Jayson Blair and Judith Miller’s misreporting, let alone the festering sore of its failure to report Stalin’s genocide long ago.

This is the accusation that its virtual complete omission of Duesberg’s views from its news and opinion columns over the years, and its occasional prejudicial damning of them when it has infrequently mentioned them, comprises a grave failure in journalistic responsibility to report the science of HIV?AIDS accurately and even handedly.


If that unjustified assumption (that HIV causes AIDS) is as wholly wrong as Duesberg’s peer reviewed papers since 1987 say it is, (the Times has) been partly responsible for a waste of public funds running into the hundreds of billions world wide, and the premature deaths of thousands of people, including many prominent in the arts in New York City.


The Times’ implicit endorsement of the conventional wisdom of AIDS in treating it as gospel over two decades, and mentioning Duesberg hardly at all, except in a dismissive review of his 1996 book, Inventing The AIDS Virus, by an insultingly inadequate mind in the mid-nineties, (this review , “Inventing the AIDS Virus” (April 7, 1996), by June E. Osborn, is mysteriously missing now from the notoriously inadequate Times search engine) but Duesberg’s letter in response to this shameful and abortive editorial disrespect is a classic:


AIDS and Drugs

(NYT) 589 words

Published: May 19, 1996

To the Editor:

In her review of my “Inventing the AIDS Virus” (April 7), June E. Osborn writes: “This book is destructive of personal morale, prevention efforts and public understanding both of H.I.V./AIDS and of biomedical science in general. It has the potential to wreak serious harm at a crucial point in the AIDS epidemic.” At the same time, Dr. Osborn faithfully defends the H.I.V.-AIDS orthodoxy with “enormous bodies of evidence . . . that firmly implicate H.I.V. in AIDS” but without being able to provide the one paper that proves that H.I.V. causes AIDS.

Yet 12 years and $35 billion after starting the war on AIDS in the name of the hypothesis that H.I.V. causes AIDS, America has no vaccine and no drug, has lost over 300,000 lives to AIDS and has yet to save the first AIDS patient. This is a sad testimony to the inability of the scientific and medical community to deal with AIDS properly.

In such a situation the scientific method calls for new, alternative hypotheses to compete with the unproductive H.I.V.-AIDS hypothesis. The scientific method functions very much like the free market economy: it provides the taxpayer and the patient with the most competitive and productive scientific theory.

“Inventing the AIDS Virus” has done exactly this. It provides a coherent and extensively documented alternative AIDS hypothesis. It is proposing that American and European AIDS is the medical consequence of the long-term consumption of recreational drugs and of antiviral drugs like AZT. This hypothesis is a synthesis and extension of the Centers for Disease Control’s very own pre-1984 “life style” hypothesis of AIDS, and of many recent studies that document the toxicity of AZT. The drug-AIDS hypothesis is very testable and could prevent, even cure, AIDS at a fraction of the annual $7.5 billion Federal AIDS budget currently invested in the unproductive H.I.V. hypothesis. In the light of the drug hypothesis, H.I.V. is a harmless passenger virus, and AIDS is an entirely preventable, and in part curable, consequence of the drug epidemic.

One would expect Dr. Osborn to give an alternative to the failed H.I.V. hypothesis some serious consideration. Yet there is not a single complimentary sentence in her review. Wearing her H.I.V.-AIDS blinkers, she not only misunderstands but also misrepresents the drug-AIDS hypothesis.

For example, contrary to Dr. Osborn’s assertion, “Inventing the AIDS Virus” does not assert that “gay men in whom AIDS was diagnosed in the early years . . . were not being truthful if they denied drug use.” The book documents with dozens of references that if asked, gay men with AIDS all reported abundant recreational drug use.

Also, contrary to Dr. Osborn, I do not “dismiss” AIDS in other countries. Both Chapter 6 and Chapter 8 and an appended scientific paper deal extensively with AIDS in other countries and its causes, which are malnutrition, parasitic infection and poor sanitation.

In the face of our AIDS epidemic and in the name of science, I object to a partial and political review of my book. Isn’t our common enemy AIDS rather than Peter Duesberg and other H.I.V. dissidents? Should AIDS be the winner of this debate because dissidents must be losers? Wouldn’t it be prudent to divert a few million dollars from the annual $7.5 billion AIDS budget into just one alternative hypothesis?

Peter Duesberg Berkeley, Calif.

) suggests that the responsible reporters in the area did not ever take the time to read Duesberg’s papers properly, since it is inconcievable that anyone intelligent and versed in the science could fail, if they did so, to respect his arguments as valid criticisms of the status quo, refereed as they were in the highest journals by peers who, politically speaking, were certainly nervous, and anxious to find as much fault as they could, and prevent publication of these “dangerous” views, which if they were as sound as the peer reviewers were forced to acknowledge, were not dangerous at all to AIDS patients, whom they would rescue from noxious drug regimens which would be revealed as misdirected, but a danger to the welfare and position of the HIV?AIDS scientists themselves.

To put it bluntly, if the New York Times has thus unjustifiably lent its weight to the dominant paradigm which Duesberg has so thoroughly critiqued and rejected over so many years by reporting only one side of the dispute, and using the HIV assumption in all its coverage without concern over its validity, in fact, reinforcing it with the mantra repeated in almost every report, “HIV, the virus that causes AIDS”, it has, if that unjustified assumption is as wholly wrong as Duesberg’s peer reviewed papers since 1987 say it is, been partly responsible for a waste of public funds running into the hundreds of billions world wide, and the premature deaths of thousands of people, including many prominent in the arts in New York City.

March 13, 2006

An Article in Harper’s Ignites a Controversy Over H.I.V.


An Article in Harper’s Ignites a Controversy Over H.I.V.


The New York Times

Printer Friendly Format

March 13, 2006

An Article in Harper’s Ignites a Controversy Over H.I.V.


In his last issue as the editor of Harper’s Magazine, Lewis Lapham has left a parting gift for his successor: a firestorm in the media and among AIDS researchers.

The source is a 15-page article in the March issue, titled “Out of Control: AIDS and the Corruption of Medical Science,” by Celia Farber. Ms. Farber, a longtime magazine journalist, has been a polarizing figure because she has frequently written about the position of “AIDS dissidents,” who argue that H.I.V. does not cause AIDS.

The Harper’s article centers on a clinical trial in Uganda for the drug Nevirapine that was later criticized for poor methodology and treatment of some test subjects. But the final third of the article focuses on the tangentially related topic of Dr. Peter Duesberg, a professor of molecular and cell biology at the University of California, Berkeley, and a leading AIDS dissident, and his strained relationship with the National Institutes of Health.

Soon after the article’s publication, rebuttals to Dr. Duesberg’s theories and to other aspects of Ms. Farber’s article were posted on Web sites like The Nation ( and A 37-page document, written by eight prominent AIDS researchers, was posted on the Treatment Action Campaign Web site (, a group that campaigns for greater access to H.I.V. treatment in South Africa. Harper’s received a surge of letters and phone calls.

Roger Hodge, who will succeed Mr. Lapham at Harper’s next month, said that Mr. Lapham initially assigned Ms. Farber an article about Dr. Duesberg’s cancer research, but the assignment was changed when news of the drug trial broke. Mr. Hodge edited the article.

“We knew, of course, that everyone would be upset,” he said, adding that the article was thoroughly fact-checked. “This is a very contentious subject. We have gotten some very, very thoughtful responses. But other pieces have generated a lot more mail.”

John P. Moore, a professor of microbiology and immunology at the Weill Medical College of Cornell University and one of the authors of the Treatment Action Campaign’s rebuttal, said he was shocked when he first saw the article. He said it seemed apparent that Mr. Hodge wanted to “teach the controversy” of Dr. Duesberg’s ideas, a controversy that he said AIDS researchers had resolved long ago. He added that Harper’s reputation had “taken an irreparable hit.” Dr. Duesberg didn’t immediately return a phone call seeking comment.

Benjamin Ryan, an editor at large at HIV Plus magazine who writes a monthly health column on, said he had lost faith in Harper’s. He said, as did many scientists, that the article was poorly fact-checked and had glaring errors.

Ms. Farber says that neither she nor Harper’s endorse Dr. Duesberg’s position, but that she is simply reporting on an unpopular view. “People can’t distinguish, it seems, between describing dissent and being dissent,” she said.

“I’m very familiar, since 20 years, with the hysteria end of the spectrum, the rage that breaks out when one touches certain tenets of dogma,” she wrote in an e-mail message. “Anger has been the dominant emotion in AIDS for a long time, almost the only emotion that seems to really function. Anger is connected to fear. I understand it. I’m used to it. I hope we can transcend it.”

Mr. Hodge said the magazine stood behind the article and Ms. Farber.

“The fact that she’s been covering this story does not make her a crackpot — it makes her a journalist. She’s a courageous journalist, I believe, because she has covered the story at great personal cost.”

* Copyright 2006The New York Times Company

4 Responses to “The Times talks – but only in the Business Media section – to remove the sting in Harper’s tale”

  1. Middleman Says:

    You can get this layman’s complete views on HIV/AIDS here if interested: Evolutionary Middleman

  2. Truthseeker Says:

    An exemplary essay! If only the entire population of the world had such an openminded and genuinely critical attitude in dealing with ideas that challenge the conventional wisdom they have heard for years.

    We are talking of adults of course. Children by definition must learn the basic from the previous generation, and trust their teachers until they master the subject, whether it is science or music.

    Unfortunately too many then maintain this suitable childhood attitude when they are supposedly grown up, and refuse the painful responsibility of assessing new ideas without prejudice. The POZ and Nation comment threads, like many others on this topic, are litmus tests for the presence of these adult children in this discussion.

    Here however we have a brilliant example of the mature adult attitude showing how it should be done. What a pity this model is lost on the first one to write a comment. Luckily the second comment puts him straight.

    But let’s note that once again arrogance goes with a closed mind, and not with a highly informed mind, which is modest, as the blogger demonstrates.

    One would think that the more you know, the more arrogant you might be. But as Aristotle and every other great mind has pointed out, the more you know, the humbler you become.

    Blogger John is in a highly evolved state of mind as far as we are concerned.

  3. Dean Esmay Says:

    Minor error: You refer to Duesberg’s book as “Inventing The AIDS Myth” but I believe the proper title is “Inventing The AIDS Virus.”

    (Thanks, Dean, fixed. – AL)

  4. Truthseeker Says:

    Correct, Dean, thanks, a Freudian slip. We posted before adding the important fact that the review is now missing from the Times search engine. Duesberg’s letter is still found, though.

    Anyone who knows where a copy is to be found (of the oruginal April 7 1996 review by June E. Osborn) please say.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Bad Behavior has blocked 1245 access attempts in the last 7 days.