Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
General
GeneralCardiologyVisionDentistryPharmacyLaboratoryNutritionAlternative
Diseases and Disorders
AIDSAlzheimer'sArthritisAsthmaCancerBreast CancerDiabetesEpilepsyGlaucomaHepatitisHerpesLupusProstate BPHProstate CancerProstatitisSinusitisTinnitus

Medical Forum / General / Alternative / December 2006

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Dr. Stephen Barrett of Quackwatch Exposed In Court Cases

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Ilena Rose - 02 Dec 2006 02:38 GMT
http://www.canlyme.com/quackwatch.html

1 December 2006

Dr. Stephen Barrett of Quackwatch Exposed In Court Cases

At trial, under a heated cross-examination by Negrete, Barrett
conceded that he was not a Medical Board Certified psychiatrist
because he had failed the certification exam.

This was a major revelation since Barrett had provided supposed expert
testimony as a psychiatrist and had testified in numerous court cases.
Barrett also had said that he was a legal expert even though he had no
formal legal training.

The most damning testimony before the jury, under the intense
cross-examination by Negrete, was that Barrett had filed similar
defamation lawsuits against almost 40 people across the country within
the past few years and had not won one single one at trial.

During the course of his examination, Barrett also had to concede his
ties to the AMA, Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and Food & Drug
Administration (FDA).

P R E S S R E L E A S E

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Date: October 13, 2005

Location: Allentown, Pennsylvania

Court Case: Stephen Barrett, M.D. vs. Tedd Koren, D.C. and Koren
Publications, Inc.
Court of Common Pleas of Lehigh County for the State of Pennsylvania
Court Case No.: 2002-C-1837
Contact: Carlos F. Negrete
LAW OFFICES OF CARLOS F. NEGRETE
San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675
Phone: 949.493.8115
Fax: 949.493.8170
email: mediarelations@healthfreedomlaw.com
mediarelations@negretelaw.com
URL: www.healthfreedomlaw.com
www.negretelaw.com

Dr. Tedd Koren, DC.
Phone: 800.537.3001
267.498.0071 Fax: 267.498.0078
URL: www.korenpublications.com

Subject: Quackwatch Founder Stephen Barrett loses Major Defamation
trial in Hometown

In a stunning development, Lehigh Valley Pennsylvania Judge J. Brian
Johnson on Thursday, October 13, 2005, tossed out nationally known
self-proclaimed ‘consumer medical advocate’ Stephen Barrett’s
defamation lawsuit just minutes before it was going to be considered
by a local jury.

The lawsuit, filed in August 2002, against also nationally known
Pennsylvania chiropractor, lecturer, researcher and publisher, Dr.
Tedd Koren sought unspecified damages against Koren and his company,
Koren Publications, Inc. for statements that he wrote in his
newsletter in 2001 about Barrett.

Barrett, a long-time nemesis of chiropractic, filed the lawsuit
because of Koren’s publication that Barrett was ‘licensed’ and in
trouble because of a $10 million lawsuit and because Barrett was
called a ‘Quackpot’.

In his defense, Koren contended that the statements were true and not
defamatory and that he had a First Amendment right to write them in
his newsletter.

Thursday’s ruling by Judge Johnson represented a major reversal of the
finding of an arbitration in August 2004 wherein a panel of three
local private attorneys reviewing the case had found in favor of
Barrett and awarded Barrett $16,500 in damages and that Koren should
publish a retraction. That award was appealed by Koren.

Dr. Koren was represented by well-known health freedom San Juan
Capistrano, California, attorney Carlos F. Negrete for trial and
Washington, D.C. attorney James Turner of Swankin & Turner. Easton,
Pennsylvania attorney Christopher Reid of Laub, Seidel, Cohen, Hof &
Reid served as local counsel for the team and was co-counsel for the
trial along with Negrete.

Turner and Negrete have been well known for their representation of
clients in the health food, supplement and vitamin industries as well
as representing naturopaths, nurses, dentists, physicians,
chiropractors and complimentary therapists across the country.

Turner’s experience dates back the 1960s when he joined consumer
advocate Ralph Nader and was one of the groundbreaking Nader’s Raiders
that made consumer advocacy popular and brought about significant
changes in manufacturing and consumer protection.

In making the ruling to throw out the case, Judge Johnson granted a
rare directed verdict to the jury finding there was insufficient
evidence to support Barrett’s claims. Judge Johnson indicated that
this case was one of those rare times where such a motion was
appropriate.

Barrett operates the web site www.quackwatch.org , www.chirobase.org
and 20 other web sites and has been a long time critic of chiropractic
calling much of it"quackery".

The victory to chiropractor Koren comes almost 18 years to the date
that chiropractors received national attention with their victory
against the American Medical Association (AMA) by obtaining an
injunction against the AMA from an Illinois federal judge for engaging
in illegal boycotting of doctors chiropractic in Wilk et al vs. AMA.

Barrett had been an outspoken supporter of the AMA at the same time
that Koren had been a vocal advocate that the AMA has, in recent
years, violated the spirit of the federal judge’s order.

After the ruling, Koren proclaimed that: I am overjoyed and
enthusiastic that this nightmare is over and that the science, art and
philosophy of chiropractic and the work of all of my colleagues have
been vindicated.

“This case took a toll on my life and family, but I knew that I was
right in publishing the truth.”

Dr. Barrett has no right to misinform the public about chiropractic
and other natural healing arts or to try to silence anyone who
criticizes him or tell consumers that he is not what he purports to
be.

“I believe that it is not right to be silent when there is a duty to
inform the public and let the truth be told.”

For years, Barrett has touted himself as a medical expert on
‘quackery’ in healthcare and has assisted in dozens of court cases as
an expert. He also was called upon by the FDA, FTC and other
governmental agencies for his purported expertise.

He was the subject of many magazine interviews, including Time
Magazine and featured on television interviews on ABC’s 20/20, NBC’s
Today Show and PBS.

He has gained media fame by his outspoken vocal disgust and impatience
over natural or non-medical healthcare, including his criticisms of
two time Nobel Prize winner Linus Pauling.

Dr. Tedd Koren is known for his writings and lectures on chiropractic
science, research, philosophy, and chiropractic patient adjusting.

He is known for his Koren Publications chiropractic patient education
brochures, posters, booklets, books and other products that are used
in chiropractors’ offices throughout the United States and around the
world.

Dr. Koren also co-founded a chiropractic college, is on the extension
faculty of two chiropractic colleges, is published in chiropractic and
bio-medical journals and has received numerous awards in his field.
His web sites include www.korenpublications.com and
www.teddkorenseminars.com

In his 2001 newsletter, Koren published articles that revealed that
even though he touted himself as a medical expert, Barrett had not
been a licensed physician since the early 1990s.

He also published that Barrett had been the subject of a $10 million
racketeering lawsuit [that had been withdrawn] and called him a
‘quackpot’ for the contradiction of his website and lack of
credentials.

Koren’s trial attorney, Carlos F. Negrete of San Juan Capistrano,
California, is known for his defense of physicians, chiropractors,
dentists, clinics and natural heath providers who practice what is
known as complimentary & alternative medicine and holistic healthcare.
Negrete has also handled groundbreaking cases against HMOs in
California and has represented many celebrities and politicians.

At trial, under a heated cross-examination by Negrete, Barrett
conceded that he was not a Medical Board Certified psychiatrist
because he had failed the certification exam.

This was a major revelation since Barrett had provided supposed expert
testimony as a psychiatrist and had testified in numerous court cases.

Barrett also had said that he was a legal expert even though he had no
formal legal training.

The most damming testimony before the jury, under the intense
cross-examination by Negrete, was that Barrett had filed similar
defamation lawsuits against almost 40 people across the country within
the past few years and had not won one single one at trial.

During the course of his examination, Barrett also had to concede his
ties to the AMA, Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and Food & Drug
Administration (FDA).

This was not the first time that Negrete was a trial attorney in a
Barrett case. He also represented anti-fluoridation advocate Darlene
Sherrell in a federal lawsuit filed in Eugene, Oregon by Barrett.

Barrett also lost in trial of that case. Negrete also represented
Robert King of King Bio Natural Medicine of North Carolina and
MediaPower (manufacturers of CalMax and Nu-Zymes) of Maine in cases
filed by an organization led by Barrett, which were lost by Barrett's
organization.

Barrett has also filed a lawsuit against Negrete and his client Dr.
Hulda Clark (author of The Cure for All Diseases and The Cure for All
Cancers) , which is now pending and awaiting trial in San Diego,
California federal court.

After the Koren trial, Negrete stated: “The de-bunker has been
de-bunked. I am pleased and satisfied with this outcome for Dr. Koren
and am proud that Dr. Koren did not succumb to the pressures of the
intimidation of Barrett’s legal wrangling. Not everyone can stand up
to someone as well known as Barrett.”

Negrete continued, “It is another great day for health freedom and
alternative healthcare around the world. I am especially pleased that
this most important victory was in Barrett’s own hometown. It just
goes to show you that there is justice anywhere, even when you are a
visitor challenging the home team.

Barrett is a shill for the medical and pharmaceutical cartels and his
bully tactics and unjustified discrediting of leading innovators,
scientists and health practitioners should not be tolerated.”

Negrete said, “You can be assured that our legal team will be wherever
health freedom advocates and practitioners are being persecuted. The
tide is now turning and people are no long accepting that synthetic
drugs are the only form of treatment are the only way to address
health concerns.

"Every day, consumers are becoming more educated about the benefits of
holistic and alternative methods. This is something that the medical
establishment obviously fears and wants to crush with false
propaganda.”

Koren said that he would now go back to his home in Pennsylvania to
spend more time with his family and continue to write, research, and
lecture on topics concerning chiropractic and healthcare and the
experiences he has gained from this precedent setting legal battle.

He plans to give new lectures to chiropractors across the country who
are under attack or have been subjected to governmental actions.

He also announced that he is forming a new organization aimed at
informing and assisting chiropractors across the country.

The trial started on Monday, October 10, 2005 and ended on October 13,
2005 Barrett was represented by local Allentown attorney, Richard
Orloski.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~

www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/QuackWatchWatch.htm

www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/BarrettVsRosenthal.htm
Rod - 02 Dec 2006 13:28 GMT
That's nice Ilena
We all know that Barrett is a loser so why go on with it.

Let it be and get on with the remainder of life.

Cheers, rod

> http://www.canlyme.com/quackwatch.html
>
[quoted text clipped - 254 lines]
>
> www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/BarrettVsRosenthal.htm
Peter Bowditch - 02 Dec 2006 22:15 GMT
>That's nice Ilena
> We all know that Barrett is a loser so why go on with it.

Ilena forgets to mention how she lost when she sued AOL and some
people a few years back. Note - Ilena initiated the action.

She still hasn't paid the court-ordered costs.
Signature

Peter Bowditch aa #2243
The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au
Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au
To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com

Ilena Rose - 02 Dec 2006 14:40 GMT
Hi Rod ... nice to hear from you again.

I wanted to respond to your comments here and on a couple other
threads.

True, Barrett is a loser ... but a very bad one.

He cowers behind the scenes and has his publicists like disbarred
Probert and Willa Nanaweedkiller Nidiffer post for him ...

I was away for several days and came back to their lies about the case
they just lost.

This article was just published yesterday ... can you imagine the
Chutzpah of Barrett .... who FAILED the medical boards ... declaring
himself the authority to harass others of his dubious "Credential
Watch"???

I'll stop defending myself when they stop attacking me and spreading
lies about me and their losing case.

www.breastImplantAwareness.org/BarrettVsRosenthal.htm

www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/QuackWatchWatch.htm

>http://www.canlyme.com/quackwatch.html
>
[quoted text clipped - 254 lines]
>
>www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/BarrettVsRosenthal.htm
pmoran - 02 Dec 2006 21:23 GMT
> Hi Rod ... nice to hear from you again.
>
[quoted text clipped - 16 lines]
> I'll stop defending myself when they stop attacking me and spreading
> lies about me and their losing case.

Rod is right that it is about time this stopped.

You go first, because you started it   It is absolutely clear that you
spread libellous material about Barrett and Polevoy before they said
anything at all about you.  And what lies have they ever spread about
you?

Those who feel it might be prudent to hear the other side of Barrett's
dealing's with Koren (who was also spreading Bolen's lies as though
they were true  ) should consult the following site that has links to
the original court documents of cases involving Koren.

http://www.quackwatch.org/search/webglimpse.cgi?ID=1&query=koren

Peter Moran

> www.breastImplantAwareness.org/BarrettVsRosenthal.htm
>
[quoted text clipped - 258 lines]
> >
> >www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/BarrettVsRosenthal.htm
pmoran - 02 Dec 2006 22:17 GMT
As an example of some of the harrassment that Barrett has had to put up
with, from parties that Ilena supports, see -- .

http://www.quackwatch.org/11Ind/negrete.html

Take particular note of the US Court of Appeals comments at the end.

This is to do with the racketeering accusation that was made against
numerous critics of Hulda Clark.

I haven't seen most of  this material before.  It is well-documented
and provides a startlingly different perspective to Ilena's..
   

PM
Peter Bowditch - 03 Dec 2006 00:33 GMT
>As an example of some of the harrassment that Barrett has had to put up
>with, from parties that Ilena supports, see -- .
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
>This is to do with the racketeering accusation that was made against
>numerous critics of Hulda Clark.

Has Negrete got this on his web site yet?

http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles/comment/clark07.htm

I loved it when this man who claims to be a lawyer (and not even a
disbarred one) called me a "bottom feeding parasite" while
simultaneously rambling on about how I was defaming someone. I wonder
which law school he went to.

>I haven't seen most of  this material before.  It is well-documented
>and provides a startlingly different perspective to Ilena's..
>    
>
>PM
Signature

Peter Bowditch aa #2243
The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au
Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au
To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com

David Wright - 03 Dec 2006 00:30 GMT
>>As an example of some of the harrassment that Barrett has had to put up
>>with, from parties that Ilena supports, see -- .
[quoted text clipped - 14 lines]
>simultaneously rambling on about how I was defaming someone. I wonder
>which law school he went to.

I believe it was the "Close Cover Before Striking School of Law."

 -- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net
    These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
     "If George Bush were my dad, I'd be drunk in public so often that
      James Baker would have me killed." -- Bill Maher on the Bush twins
Mark Probert - 03 Dec 2006 18:28 GMT
> As an example of some of the harrassment that Barrett has had to put up
> with, from parties that Ilena supports, see -- .
>
> http://www.quackwatch.org/11Ind/negrete.html

I had forgotten about this:

"The suit against my wife (a family physician) was done purely for
harassment purposes. She was not a member of Quackwatch, and her only
involvement in antiquackery activity is to answer medical questions when
I need help and to provide me with journal articles she thinks might
interest me. She was not involved in any way in my criticism of Hulda
Clark. Even though she submitted an affidavit stating these facts,
Negrete would not drop her from the suit and even tried (unsuccessfully)
to force both of us to travel to California for depositions. In May
2002, I filed discovery requests in the Clark suit which demanded that
Negrete reveal precisely what alleged facts could support the charges he
made in the cross-complaints. When he refused, we filed motions to
compel him to do so. In June, rather than face the judge and admit that
the suit was bogus, he withdrew it."

These disgusting, indecent people use the courts to stalk and harass,
and then hide behind the Communications *Decency* Act. How pathetic of
them.

> Take particular note of the US Court of Appeals comments at the end.

Peter, people are lazy, here is the quote:

The scurrilous nature of the defendants' allegations of wrongdoing and
their efforts to publicize them widely on the Internet, when coupled
with their utter failure to offer any proof of their charges, gives rise
to a compelling inference of malice [10].

> This is to do with the racketeering accusation that was made against
> numerous critics of Hulda Clark.
>
> I haven't seen most of  this material before.  It is well-documented
> and provides a startlingly different perspective to Ilena's..

No surprise there.
Sdores - 03 Dec 2006 23:58 GMT
Goodness, all of you give it a rest already, please!  UM MOM Susan
Ilena Rose - 02 Dec 2006 22:12 GMT
LOL ... what arrogance and chutpah and ignorance all mixed together,
Moran!

I would hate to be a patient of yours.

The courts have specifically ruled that nothing I wrote or reposted
about your hero, never board certified Barrett ... and your continuing
the lie about this for him speaks volumes.

Here are the words from the Supreme Court decision.

http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/opinions/documents/S122953.PDF
QUOTE;

As the lower courts correctly concluded, however, none of the hostile
comments against Dr. Barrett alleged in the complaint are defamatory.

UNQUOTE

Barrett should never have tried to get thousands of dollars from me by
his threats.

You ignore ... either by ignorance or negligence ... all evidence that
doesn't suit your biased preconceptions ... and form conclusions
inaccurately drawn from that biased place.

When I catch an extra hour or so ... I will dedicate a page to YOU,
Healthfraud Moran and respond point by point to his lies and false
accusations and conclusions.

Stephen Barrett demanded first $500 and then $2000 from me for
reposting Mr. Bolen's piece and made the false conclusion that it was
"defamatory" calling someone (him, in this case) a "quack."

This, from a non licensed, never board certified so called "doctor"
who had made his living for years labeling others as such ... and
waging smear campaigns to destroy their lives and work.

What arrogance and ignorance mixed together!

He too, made many false claims ... and even declared under penalty of
perjury that he couldn't "remember" publicly calling "anyone a quack."

How convenient.

www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/BarrettVsRosenthal.htm

www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/QuackWatchWatch.htm
Ilena Rose - 02 Dec 2006 22:36 GMT
After several years of being harassed by then President of Inamed
(McGhan) ... also denying his paymasters, Patrick O'leary ... I did
indeed sue him for all the lies he and his team posted about me.

I had never heard of a SLAPP suit before ...

For that whole story ...

www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/PatrickOleary.htm

www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/QuackWatchWAtch.htm
Peter Bowditch - 03 Dec 2006 00:33 GMT
>After several years of being harassed by then President of Inamed
>(McGhan) ... also denying his paymasters, Patrick O'leary ... I did
>indeed sue him for all the lies he and his team posted about me.

Tell us the result, Ilena.

Tell us how much you were ordered to pay to Dr O'Leary.

Tell us how much you have actually paid.

Signature

Peter Bowditch aa #2243
The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au
Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au
To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com

Ilena Rose - 03 Dec 2006 18:46 GMT
LOL ... disbarred and discredited Stephen Barrett Promoter, Mark S
Probert illustrates perfectly the idiocy behind the Healthfraud
Campaigns.

The 3 wackos ... including Christopher Grell (who I had NEVER even
mentioned before he sued me for "conspiracy to libel" and "libel" )
... named other people in their SLAPP suit who had never posted a word
about any of them.

Typical Quack / Healthfraud Attack Tactics ...

www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/QuackWatchWatch.htm

www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/Polevoy.htm

www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/BarrettVsRosenthal.htm

www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/PropagandistProbert.html
pmoran - 02 Dec 2006 23:36 GMT
> LOL ... what arrogance and chutpah and ignorance all mixed together,
> Moran!
>
> I would hate to be a patient of yours.

Typical ad hominem.   You can't help it, can you?

> The courts have specifically ruled that nothing I wrote or reposted
> about your hero, never board certified Barrett ... and your continuing
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> As the lower courts correctly concluded, however, none of the hostile
> comments against Dr. Barrett alleged in the complaint are defamatory.

This was a throw-away line by one of the judges at the end of his
submission on the question of whether there was a conspiracy.  I wonder
if he would rephrase it if he knew that you were using this to justify
what you did.

What the courts actually said was the statements were not "actionable"
under current law, and all the other judges expressed concern at the
implications of the decision that they were forced to make under that
law.

This is what the other judges said -- .

"The court granted the motion, finding that Rosenthal's statements
concerned an issue of public interest within the scope of the
anti-SLAPP statute,
and were, for the most part, not actionable because they contained no
provably
false assertions of fact. Plaintiffs do not challenge that ruling. The
court
determined that the only actionable statement appeared in an article
Rosenthal
received via e-mail from her codefendant Tim Bolen."

We now know that you were not even an completely innocent party simply
passing on  views that you knew nothing about.   The court documents
show that you were a personal friend of Bolen, and undoubtedly a
knowing accomplice of that disreputable character in this vicious
attack on undeserving parties.

Also, since you claim what you said was not defamatory, are you
prepared to stand by everything you said and support the claims with
direct evidence?  I asked this before.

Your bare claim that the "hostile accusations" were not defamatory
carries with it the clear implication that everything you said was
true.  The courts have not said that, and Barrett and others deserve
this to be stated loudly and clearly and as often as it takes..  That
is mainly all I have been saying.

> When I catch an extra hour or so ... I will dedicate a page to YOU,
> Healthfraud Moran and respond point by point to his lies and false
> accusations and conclusions.

Yes, that is what you do.  I expect no less of you.   I will not give
you the pleasure of looking at it  as I am sure I would find it
hurtful.   But that is its intent, isn't it?   Not to inform. Not to
reveal the truth.  Simply to get back at those who are responding to
the unjustified implications that you and others have been drawing from
the court's decision and that you are repeatedly referring to on these
newsfoups.   Stop doing that and I will also shut up.

> Stephen Barrett demanded first $500 and then $2000 from me for
> reposting Mr. Bolen's piece and made the false conclusion that it was
> "defamatory" calling someone (him, in this case) a "quack."

I suggest everyone reads Barrett's version of the events at the sites I
have posted.

> This, from a non licensed, never board certified so called "doctor"
> who had made his living for years labeling others as such ... and
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> He too, made many false claims ... and even declared under penalty of
> perjury that he couldn't "remember" publicly calling "anyone a quack."

After having about three days to justify yourself, this is the best you
can come up with?  

Peter Moran.
Ilena Rose - 03 Dec 2006 14:16 GMT
After several years of being harassed by then President of Inamed
(McGhan) ... also denying his paymasters, Patrick O'leary ... I did
indeed sue him for all the lies he and his team posted about me.

I had never heard of a SLAPP suit before ...

For that whole story ...

www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/PatrickOleary.htm

www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/QuackWatchWAtch.htm

Since Bowditch is asking ... and the answers are above ... perhaps
he'd like to share how much the more than dubious NCAHF was ordered to
pay to King Bio and how much they have paid already.
Peter Bowditch - 03 Dec 2006 19:37 GMT
>After several years of being harassed by then President of Inamed
>(McGhan) ... also denying his paymasters, Patrick O'leary ... I did
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
>he'd like to share how much the more than dubious NCAHF was ordered to
>pay to King Bio and how much they have paid already.

I have no way of knowing how much, if anything, NCAHF has paid to the
admitted fraudsters and liars at King Bio. I was asking YOU how much
YOU were ordered to pay to Dr O'Leary and how much YOU had actually
paid.

(The reason I call King Bio "admitted fraudsters and liars" is that
the King Bio web site at one time noted that the only differences
between King Bio products was labelling  - all products were
chemically identical. And I am still waiting for their cancer cure
which was due years ago.)
Signature

Peter Bowditch aa #2243
The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au
Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au
To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com

 
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



©2012 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.