 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
History Forum / General / Ancient History / October 2003professional bigotry (Re: Earliest Gospel MSS make it all clear
In soc.history.ancient Doug Weller <dweller@ramtops.demon.co.uk> wrote in article <ghugov4530rbsdfe3uf219p1o6ujv8vh2m@4ax.com>: : On Sat, 11 Oct 2003 21:25:03 GMT, in soc.history.ancient, Yuri Kuchinsky : wrote: :>In soc.history.ancient Doug Weller <dweller@ramtops.demon.co.uk> wrote: :>> On 11 Oct 2003 13:21:36 -0700, in soc.history.ancient, Yuri Kuchinsky :>> wrote: :> :>> >So, Doug, why don't you tell us why I was expelled from the Synoptic-L? :>> > :>> >There must have been a reason... but what was it? :>> :>> You've been told the reason more than once, have you got a memory problem? :>> :>> Do a search on Google for posts by Jeffrey B. Gibson (jgibson000@home.com) :>> -- they will make it clear to you or anyone who looks that you know why :>> you were expelled. :>> :>> There's no need to keep repeating it. And if you persist in living in :>> denial, no one can help you. :>> :>> Doug :> :>I see... still no straight answer from Doug... : I've told you how to find the information. I and others have explained it : all before, there is no need for me to repeat it. If you've forgotten it : you should have no trouble finding it, and I'm not looking it up for you. : If your research skills aren't good enough to let you do a simple Google : groups search, why should anyone trust your book? If only he knew the answer, I'm sure that he would have given it already. :) Just keep on exposing your bias, Doug... Yuri. Yuri Kuchinsky -=O=- http://www.globalserve.net/~yuku For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong -=O=- H. L. Mencken "Nick Burns" <chrismcreynolds@hotmail.com> wrote on Mon, 13 Oct 2003 in article <3f8b0ece$0$26293$a32e20b9@news.nntpservers.com>: > "Yuri Kuchinsky" <yuku@clio.trends.ca> wrote in message > > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Nor from you. Why are you not answering the question? The answer is simple, I was expelled for no reason. Or, alternatively, I was expelled because of the professional bigotry. > The question you put to Doug seems more of a personal issue that > can be solved with email. Why not answer the person that asked for > your evidence behind your allegations? What allegations? Yuri. Yuri Kuchinsky in Toronto -=O=- http://www.trends.ca/~yuku It is a far, far better thing to have a firm anchor in nonsense than to put out on the troubled seas of thought -=O=- John K. Galbraith >"Nick Burns" <chrismcreynolds@hotmail.com> wrote on Mon, 13 Oct 2003 >in article <3f8b0ece$0$26293$a32e20b9@news.nntpservers.com>: [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > >What allegations? I count three allegations in your post I'm replying to. Of course, it could just be that you broke the rules of the list, were warned, carried on breaking them and are now whining about the consequences. Of course, if that's what happened, you'd never admit it because it doesn't fit into your world view. Doug  SignatureDoug Weller -- exorcise the demon to reply Doug & Helen's Dogs http://www.dougandhelen.com Doug's Archaeology Site: http://www.ramtops.co.uk > >"Nick Burns" <chrismcreynolds@hotmail.com> wrote on Mon, 13 Oct 2003 > >in article <3f8b0ece$0$26293$a32e20b9@news.nntpservers.com>: [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > > Doug One more personal attack coming from Mr. Doug Weller. I wonder what is the reason why Mr. Weller so often engages in these personal attacks. Yuri. Yuri Kuchinsky -=O=- http://www.trends.ca/~yuku A vacuum is a hell of a lot better than some of the stuff that nature replaces it with -=O=- Tennessee Williams >> >"Nick Burns" <chrismcreynolds@hotmail.com> wrote on Mon, 13 Oct 2003 >> >in article <3f8b0ece$0$26293$a32e20b9@news.nntpservers.com>: [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] >One more personal attack coming from Mr. Doug Weller. I wonder what is >the reason why Mr. Weller so often engages in these personal attacks. Pretty funny, coming from someone who started threads about Doug the Weasel, or Doug the New Age Creationist. Can't take it when you get it back? Do I need to repost that old list of names you have called people? In fact it's in part your propensity to call people names and insult them that has led to your getting into trouble on so many mailing lists. Look at the way you renamed this thread for instance. Doug SignatureDoug Weller -- exorcise the demon to reply Doug & Helen's Dogs http://www.dougandhelen.com Doug's Archaeology Site: http://www.ramtops.co.uk In soc.history.ancient Doug Weller <dweller@ramtops.demon.co.uk> wrote: :>> >"Nick Burns" <chrismcreynolds@hotmail.com> wrote on Mon, 13 Oct 2003 :>> >in article <3f8b0ece$0$26293$a32e20b9@news.nntpservers.com>: [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] :>One more personal attack coming from Mr. Doug Weller. I wonder what is :>the reason why Mr. Weller so often engages in these personal attacks. : Pretty funny, coming from someone who started threads about Doug the : Weasel I called you Doug the Weasel a few years ago, so now you're on some sort of a personal vendetta against me... is that it? Yuri. Yuri Kuchinsky -=O=- http://www.trends.ca/~yuku Reading made Don Quixote a gentleman, but believing what he read made him mad -=O=- George Bernard Shaw >In soc.history.ancient Doug Weller <dweller@ramtops.demon.co.uk> wrote: [SNIP] >:>One more personal attack coming from Mr. Doug Weller. I wonder what is >:>the reason why Mr. Weller so often engages in these personal attacks. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >I called you Doug the Weasel a few years ago, so now you're on some sort >of a personal vendetta against me... is that it? No, I am simply pointed out that personal attacks are part of your stock in trade, eg your current one on Metzger and the long list of previous ones on many other people. If you can't stand the heat get out of the kitchen. Doug SignatureDoug Weller -- exorcise the demon to reply Doug & Helen's Dogs http://www.dougandhelen.com Doug's Archaeology Site: http://www.ramtops.co.uk > >In soc.history.ancient Doug Weller <dweller@ramtops.demon.co.uk> wrote: > > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > Doug I must say that I've never seen Doug so hard up as he's now, having watched him in action for many years... Yes, there were many times before when he engaged in personal attacks, but, still, what we see now is quite unusual. What is this, the personal attack number 6, without a break? And he added a few more after this message... I guess this leaves me no choice but to killfile my old pal Mr. Doug Weller. Perhaps he's been spending too much time with the dogs... Yuri. Yuri Kuchinsky -=O=- http://www.trends.ca/~yuku -=O=- Toronto "Frantic orthodoxy is never rooted in faith but in doubt. It is when we are not sure that we are doubly sure." -- Reinhold Niebuhr >> >In soc.history.ancient Doug Weller <dweller@ramtops.demon.co.uk> wrote: >> > [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] >I guess this leaves me no choice but to killfile my old pal Mr. Doug >Weller. Perhaps he's been spending too much time with the dogs... A good idea. Killfile me and everyone who disagrees with you. You are known for making personal attacks on people but not being able to take it when anyone points them out. If you could only accept that other people can disagree with you but not be liars, frauds, mentally ill, etc etc. you wouldn't have so many problems (it might also help if you were more frank about your academic background, what languages you actually can read fluently, your work background perhaps (although I'm under the impression, perhaps quite wrongly, that you haven't worked much in your life). Try being humble and more frank about yourself. Doug SignatureDoug Weller -- exorcise the demon to reply Doug & Helen's Dogs http://www.dougandhelen.com Doug's Archaeology Site: http://www.ramtops.co.uk >From: yuku@trends.ca (Yuri Kuchinsky) >I must say that I've never seen Doug so hard up as he's now, This from a person who decries personal attacks? > "Nick Burns" <chrismcreynolds@hotmail.com> wrote on Mon, 13 Oct 2003 > in article <3f8b0ece$0$26293$a32e20b9@news.nntpservers.com>: [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > The answer is simple, I was expelled for no reason. Or, alternatively, > I was expelled because of the professional bigotry. Actually, neither of these (mutually exclusive?) answers is true. I've been in touch with the moderators of Synoptic-L, and I've been informed that the reason that Yuri was expelled was that he refused to follow moderators directives, sent to him off list, to cease posting on a particular subject. So there >>was<< a reason for his expulsion, and it had >>nothing<< to do with professional bigotry. It had to do with Yuri's behavior -- his refusal to follow the protocols that he agreed to follow when he signed up with the Synoptic-L List. Now Yuri might want to argue that the subject that he was posting on was perfectly appropriate for that List. But whether or not this is true, any such argument >>is beside the point<< big time. The moderators made a decision that it was not appropriate -- which is their right to do and which Yuri, in subscribing to Synoptic-L acknowledged is their right to do. Yuri was informed of this decision and was told off list that he should no longer post on this topic or make reference to it an any post he sent in to Synoptic-L. Yuri ignored this directive and went ahead and posted a message that went against the moderators' directive. So if he has anyone to blame for what happened on Synoptic-L, it's only himself. Again, I emphasize that he might want to argue that what he was posting on (the topic that the moderators asked him to stop posting on) was nothing the moderators should ever have placed a stop order on. But I also -- and again -- emphasize that this is entirely beside the point. Interestingly, if you go to Yuri's Loisy List, you'll that he actually recognizes this! You'll see several instances of Yuri doing to certain Loisy subscribers the same thing that the Synoptic-L moderators felt compelled to do in his case. You'll see that he banned people for continuing to post on topics that in Yuri's judgment (but not in theirs!)were inappropriate for his List after he had told them not to. So the complaint from Yuri above is not only false. It shows that he operates with a double standard. Sorry if I'm stating what is already obvious to everybody else here. Frederick In soc.history.ancient Frederick Weller <FSWeller@yahoo.com> wrote: : Yuri Kuchinsky <yuku@clio.trends.ca> wrote in message news:<oUWib.271$hA4.792842 : 44@news.nnrp.ca>... [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] :> The answer is simple, I was expelled for no reason. Or, alternatively, :> I was expelled because of the professional bigotry. : Actually, neither of these (mutually exclusive?) answers is true. : I've been in touch with the moderators of Synoptic-L, and I've been : informed that the reason that Yuri was expelled was that he refused to [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] : with Yuri's behavior -- his refusal to follow the protocols that he : agreed to follow when he signed up with the Synoptic-L List. : Now Yuri might want to argue that the subject that he was posting on : was perfectly appropriate for that List. But whether or not this is : true, any such argument >>is beside the point<< big time. : The moderators made a decision that it was not appropriate -- which is : their right to do and which Yuri, in subscribing to Synoptic-L : acknowledged is their right to do. : Yuri was informed of this decision and was told off list that he : should no longer post on this topic or make reference to it an any : post he sent in to Synoptic-L. : Yuri ignored this directive and went ahead and posted a message that : went against the moderators' directive. : So if he has anyone to blame for what happened on Synoptic-L, it's : only himself. : Again, I emphasize that he might want to argue that what he was : posting on (the topic that the moderators asked him to stop posting : on) was nothing the moderators should ever have placed a stop order : on. But I also -- and again -- emphasize that this is entirely beside : the point. What is missing here, of course, is, What on earth was that unnamed "topic"? Is this perhaps a "topic" that dares not speak its name? :) But let me help Mr. Frederick Weller here a bit... Yes, I will speak that name! That name was the Diatessaron! So perhaps the professional bigotry does have something to do with this discussion, after all? : Interestingly, if you go to Yuri's Loisy List, you'll that he actually : recognizes this! You'll see several instances of Yuri doing to [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] : not in theirs!)were inappropriate for his List after he had told them : not to. This is false. I remember expelling only one member of Loisy-L before, and that was because there was a public outcry for his expulsion. Yours, Yuri. Yuri Kuchinsky -=O=- http://www.trends.ca/~yuku A great many people think they are thinking when they are merely rearranging their prejudices -=O=- William James > : Again, I emphasize that he might want to argue that what he was > : posting on (the topic that the moderators asked him to stop posting [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > But let me help Mr. Frederick Weller here a bit... Yes, I will speak that > name! That name was the Diatessaron! Actually it was the 14th century Middle English Pepsyian Gospel Harmony. The Diatessaron has alway been and still is a topic that can be discussed on Synoptic-L. > > So perhaps the professional bigotry does have something to do with this > discussion, after all? [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > This is false. I remember expelling only one member of Loisy-L before, and > that was because there was a public outcry for his expulsion. What you remember and waht actually happened are two different things. But in the case of Alan Cox, didn't he protest that what he was saying was relevant? And if it was, your giving in to a public outcry was cowardly and represents a succumbing on your part to the bigotry you claim is characteristic of the Synoptic-L moderators. Frederick [Weller:] > > : Again, I emphasize that he might want to argue that what he was > > : posting on (the topic that the moderators asked him to stop posting > > : on) was nothing the moderators should ever have placed a stop order > > : on. But I also -- and again -- emphasize that this is entirely beside > > : the point. [Yuri:] > > What is missing here, of course, is, What on earth was that unnamed > > "topic"? Is this perhaps a "topic" that dares not speak its name? :) [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Harmony. The Diatessaron has alway been and still is a topic that can > be discussed on Synoptic-L. According to Prof. Boismard, the famous French biblical scholar, this 14th century Middle English Pepysian Gospel Harmony (aka the Magdalene Gospel) is the closest to the earliest Diatessaron that we currently have. So it looks like the Moderators of the Synoptic-L would welcome the discussion of the Diatessaron, but not of the earliest Diatessaron... :) That's logic!!! Or maybe that's the professional bigotry? > > So perhaps the professional bigotry does have something to do with this > > discussion, after all? [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > Frederick I'm glad that you've retreated from your previous accusation that I've "banned people" from Loisy-L. Yuri. Yuri Kuchinsky -=O=- http://www.globalserve.net/~yuku "Contrariwise," continued Tweedledee, "if it was so, it might be, and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic!" -- Lewis Carroll, "Through the Looking Glass" >From: yuku@trends.ca (Yuri Kuchinsky) >According to Prof. Boismard, the famous French biblical scholar, this >14th century Middle English Pepysian Gospel Harmony (aka the Magdalene >Gospel) is the closest to the earliest Diatessaron that we currently >have. Closest that we have? This according to one scholar? > >From: yuku@trends.ca (Yuri Kuchinsky) > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Closest that we have? This according to one scholar? I have discovered by contacting the moderators of a List where Yuri last posted this question begging claim [is this actually what Boismard says? And just because he says it (if he does), does that make it true, especially since other scholars, equally as reputable as Boismard have not said the same thing about the Pepypsian GH that Boismard allegedly does] and they let me know three inportant things. First, they asked Yuri to write to Boismard to see if Boismard would agree with all that Yuri is claiming above. Second, that they would publish both Yuri's letter and Boismard's reply. Third, that they would admit they were wrong about the relevance of the Harmony to discussion of the Diatessaron if Boismard said he did agree, and that Yuri could continue to posts on the topic of why the Harmony is important for outlining the original text of the Gospels. But there's been no indication that Yuri really had the courage of his convictions. He apparently never wrote to Bosimard (who, I happen to know, >>does<< respond to letters about his work and does not feel that he's too busy to deal with questions about what he's published). Or if Yuri did write, he certainly never posted what Boismard said in reply. Perhaps Yuri didn't want to reveal that Boismard does not really say what he has alleged Boismard says about the Harmony? Frederick > > >From: yuku@trends.ca (Yuri Kuchinsky) > [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > > Frederick I guess I'm one of those old-fashioned guys who still believe that the best way to find out what a scholar thinks is to read his books... What Boismard thinks about Yuri is completely irrelevant, of course, and is an obvious red herring. What Boismard thinks about the Magdalene Gospel OTOH is entirely relevant in the present context, and can be discovered easily enough by reading his books. Yuri. Yuri Kuchinsky -=O=- http://www.trends.ca/~yuku A great many people think they are thinking when they are merely rearranging their prejudices -=O=- William James >From: FSWeller@yahoo.com >I have discovered by contacting the >moderators of a List where Yuri >last posted this question begging claim... I did write to Boismard. He did not endorse Yuri and had his publisher send me a copy of _L'Evangile de L'Enfance_. Why is that, Yuri? > [Weller:] > > > : Again, I emphasize that he might want to argue that what he was [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > Gospel) is the closest to the earliest Diatessaron that we currently > have. Nay I please have a citation from Boismard where he says this? > So it looks like the Moderators of the Synoptic-L would welcome the > discussion of the Diatessaron, but not of the earliest Diatessaron... [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > I'm glad that you've retreated from your previous accusation that I've > "banned people" from Loisy-L. So far as I can see, I haven't done anything of the sort. Persons or people, you still did what you said the moderators of Synoptic L should not have done and for the same reason. Frederick. Frederick > Yuri. > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic!" > -- Lewis Carroll, "Through the Looking Glass" > > According to Prof. Boismard, the famous French biblical scholar, this > > 14th century Middle English Pepysian Gospel Harmony (aka the Magdalene > > Gospel) is the closest to the earliest Diatessaron that we currently > > have. > > Nay I please have a citation from Boismard where he says this? Perhaps this will help, Boismard on the Magdalene Gospel http://www.trends.ca/~yuku/bbl/boismard.htm > > So it looks like the Moderators of the Synoptic-L would welcome the > > discussion of the Diatessaron, but not of the earliest Diatessaron... [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > > Frederick. So who are these "people" (plural) that I banned from Loisy-L? Surely you don't want to be known as a false accuser? Yuri. Yuri Kuchinsky -=O=- http://www.trends.ca/~yuku Oh, what tangled webs we weave when first we practice to believe. > According to Prof. Boismard, the famous French biblical scholar, this > 14th century Middle English Pepysian Gospel Harmony (aka the Magdalene [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > So it looks like the Moderators of the Synoptic-L would welcome the > discussion of the Diatessaron, but not of the earliest Diatessaron... If anyone here wants to do what it looks like Yuri never had the courage of his convictions to do -- that is, to run his views on what Boismard said with respect to the Pepysian Harmony by Boismard himself to see if Boismard would agree that Yuri has represented his view of the Harmony accurately -- here's Boismard's address: P. Marie-Emile Boismard, O.P. Ecole biblique POB 19053 Jerusalem 91190 Israel Tel: 972 2 626 44 68 ext. 247 Fax: 972 2 628 25 67 Frederick In soc.history.ancient Frederick Weller <FSWeller@yahoo.com> wrote: : yuku@trends.ca (Yuri Kuchinsky) wrote in message news:<2b61489c.0310180920.5b4ff : 280@posting.google.com>... [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] :> So it looks like the Moderators of the Synoptic-L would welcome the :> discussion of the Diatessaron, but not of the earliest Diatessaron... : If anyone here wants to do what it looks like Yuri never had the : courage of his convictions to do -- that is, to run his views on what : Boismard said with respect to the Pepysian Harmony by Boismard himself : to see if Boismard would agree that Yuri has represented his view of : the Harmony accurately -- here's Boismard's address: : P. Marie-Emile Boismard, O.P. : Ecole biblique : POB 19053 : Jerusalem 91190 : Israel : Tel: 972 2 626 44 68 ext. 247 : Fax: 972 2 628 25 67 : Frederick What Boismard thinks about Yuri is completely irrelevant in the present context. What Boismard thinks about the Magdalene Gospel OTOH is entirely relevant, and, sure enough, it can be discovered quite easily by reading his books. (Of course one also needs to know French.) So what am I supposed to say to Boismard in my letter, Frederick, in any case? "Excuse me, Monsieur le Professeur, but I just wanted to ask you if what you wrote in your books was for real, or were you just kidding around?" Is that it? :) Yuri. Yuri Kuchinsky -=O=- http://www.trends.ca/~yuku A great many people think they are thinking when they are merely rearranging their prejudices -=O=- William James > In soc.history.ancient Frederick Weller <FSWeller@yahoo.com> wrote: > > What Boismard thinks about Yuri is completely irrelevant in the present > context. Or maybe not, if he thinks you are a crank and that you've misued what he's said. What Boismard thinks about the Magdalene Gospel OTOH is entirely > relevant, and, sure enough, it can be discovered quite easily by reading > his books. (Of course one also needs to know French.) > > So what am I supposed to say to Boismard in my letter, Frederick, in any > case? Send him the page you've asked me to looks at (http://www.trends.ca/~yuku/bbl/boismard.htm) > And ask for his comments on whether or not your representation of what he says is accurate and whether or not the conclusions you've drwan from his work are conclusions he'd support. Frederick In soc.history.ancient Frederick Weller <FSWeller@yahoo.com> wrote: : What Boismard thinks about the Magdalene Gospel OTOH is entirely :> relevant, and, sure enough, it can be discovered quite easily by reading :> his books. (Of course one also needs to know French.) :> :> So what am I supposed to say to Boismard in my letter, Frederick, in any :> case? : Send him the page you've asked me to looks at : (http://www.trends.ca/~yuku/bbl/boismard.htm) > : And ask for his comments on whether or not your representation of what : he says is accurate I already know it's accurate. Yuri. Yuri Kuchinsky -=O=- http://www.globalserve.net/~yuku "Contrariwise," continued Tweedledee, "if it was so, it might be, and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic!" -- Lewis Carroll, "Through the Looking Glass" >In soc.history.ancient Frederick Weller <FSWeller@yahoo.com> wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > >I already know it's accurate. This is, presumably, a claim that he has told you it is accurate. If not, you can only believe or think it is, you can't claim knowledge that it is accurate. Doug SignatureDoug Weller -- exorcise the demon to reply Doug & Helen's Dogs http://www.dougandhelen.com Doug's Archaeology Site: http://www.ramtops.co.uk > >In soc.history.ancient Frederick Weller <FSWeller@yahoo.com> wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > you can only believe or think it is, you can't claim knowledge that it is > accurate. Echoing Doug, the matter at hand was whether _Boismard himself_ thinks your use of him on the page you have directed us to is accurate, not whether _you_ know you have represented him accurately. And this is something only Boismard, not you, can say __after__ he has _seen_ and read your page. There seems to be good reason to say that Boismard has never seen your page. I mean, you have never sent it to him, have you? And there also seems to be good reason to say that you _won't_ send it -- though it escapes me why you won't, especially since you'd be vindicated on the John List whose moderators would admit that they were wrong in challenging your claims about the Pepsyian Harmony if Boismard would confirm that you have represented him correctly and that the conclusions you have drawn from what he wrote were valid ones. So may I have your permission to send the page to Boismard? Frederick In soc.history.ancient Frederick Weller <FSWeller@yahoo.com> wrote: : Echoing Doug, the matter at hand was whether _Boismard himself_ thinks : your use of him on the page you have directed us to is accurate, not : whether _you_ know you have represented him accurately. And this is : something only Boismard, not you, can say __after__ he has _seen_ and : read your page. Nonsense! Any scholar who can read French can say if my summary of Boismard is accurate or not... : There seems to be good reason to say that Boismard has never seen your : page. I mean, you have never sent it to him, have you? : And there also seems to be good reason to say that you _won't_ send it : -- though it escapes me why you won't, Because I see no reason to do so. : especially since you'd be vindicated on the John List I see no need for me to be "vindicated" on the John List... None of my theories have ever been challenged in any significant way on the John List. Personal attacks, yes, I've seen quite a few of these, but they only indicate the scholarly bankruptcy of those who engaged in such tactics. : whose moderators would admit that they were wrong in challenging your : claims about the Pepsyian Harmony Nobody challenged my claims about the Pepysian Harmony in any significant way. : if Boismard would confirm that you have represented him correctly and : that the conclusions you have drawn from what he wrote were valid : ones. See above. : So may I have your permission to send the page to Boismard? : Frederick Send it to anyone you want. Be my guest. Yuri. Yuri Kuchinsky -=O=- http://www.trends.ca/~yuku A great many people think they are thinking when they are merely rearranging their prejudices -=O=- William James |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.