Jump to content
The Education Forum

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, Ernie Lazar said:

I am not suggesting anything except that Judge Tunheim has seen everything and he knows what documents remain to be released and he has never said one single word about any documents pertaining to a "radical right" plot or about any plot involving the JBS or its members -- which is your theory.  I prefer to rely upon people who have first-hand in-depth knowledge of a subject.  YOU prefer to rely upon your personal delusions.   There is no context where YOUR preferred use of the word "expert" makes any sense because, clearly, you DO NOT rely upon "experts".

Ernie,

I've been on this Forum more than 6 years, I've interviewed Larrie Schmidt, Harry Dean, Reverend Duncan Gray and Ruth Paine.    I have enjoyed correspondences with all of the above, and with Gary Mack, Gary Schoener and H.W. Brands on this topic.   I've explored the 90 boxes of the personal papers of Ex-General Edwin Walker at UT Austin.

Also, I've read over 200 books about the JFK Assassination since 1993, after Oliver Stone's movie, JFK, came out.   Further, under historian H.W. Brands at UT Austin, I've studied the entire WC testimony and exhibits about Lee Harvey Oswald.   

So -- I'm not an expert because I'm not a professional researcher -- I'm a computer geek.   But there are some JFK researchers who have told me (and still tell me) that I know more about the JFK Assassination than many researchers they know.

I may not be an expert -- but compared with your beginner's knowledge of the JFK Assassination, I'm a guru.

Last October the JFK Records Act released over 30,000 pages of previously withheld material relating to the JFK Assassination -- and nobody on planet earth has yet read it all -- much less analyzed it all.

I will still bet you 25 cents that my Walker-did-it CT will have ten times more proof at the end of the day -- than your KGB-did-it CT (presuming that this sort of betting online is legal).

Twenty-five cents, man!   Are you in?!

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

49 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said:

Ernie,

I've been on this Forum more than 6 years, I've interviewed Larrie Schmidt, Harry Dean, Reverend Duncan Gray and Ruth Paine.    I have enjoyed correspondences with all of the above, and with Gary Mack, Gary Schoener and H.W. Brands on this topic.   I've explored the 90 boxes of the personal papers of Ex-General Edwin Walker at UT Austin.

Also, I've read over 200 books about the JFK Assassination since 1993, after Oliver Stone's movie, JFK, came out.   Further, under historian H.W. Brands at UT Austin, I've studied the entire WC testimony and exhibits about Lee Harvey Oswald.   

So -- I'm not an expert because I'm not a professional researcher -- I'm a computer geek.   But there are some JFK researchers who have told me (and still tell me) that I know more about the JFK Assassination than many researchers they know.

I may not be an expert -- but compared with your beginner's knowledge of the JFK Assassination, I'm a guru.

Last October the JFK Records Act released over 30,000 pages of previously withheld material relating to the JFK Assassination -- and nobody on planet earth has yet read it all -- much less analyzed it all.

I will still bet you 25 cents that my Walker-did-it CT will have ten times more proof at the end of the day -- than your KGB-did-it CT (presuming that this sort of betting online is legal).

Twenty-five cents, man!   Are you in?!

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Not one single word of your "reply" pertains to Judge Tunheim or the ARRB which was the subject of my message. 

AND incidentally, I never presented a "KGB-did-it CT"That is yet another bogus delusion of yours.  My only comment has been that a genuine expert has specific, detailed knowledge of the relevant subject matter AND I then cited Judge Tunheim because (unlike yourself or myself) he has actually seen ALL the pertinent documentary evidence and he has NEVER uttered a single word about any sort of "plot" by JBS members nor have the names "Harry Dean" or "Edwin Walker" EVER crossed his lips.

It really is difficult to understand how it is possible for you make it through any 24 hour day when you so routinely misrepresent what people write or what they actually believe.

Edited by Ernie Lazar
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Ernie Lazar said:

Not one single word of your "reply" pertains to Judge Tunheim or the ARRB which was the subject of my message. 

AND incidentally, I never presented a "KGB-did-it CT"That is yet another bogus delusion of yours.  My only comment has been that a genuine expert has specific, detailed knowledge of the relevant subject matter AND I then cited Judge Tunheim because (unlike yourself or myself) he has actually seen ALL the pertinent documentary evidence and he has NEVER uttered a single word about any sort of "plot" by JBS members nor have the names "Harry Dean" or "Edwin Walker" EVER crossed his lips.

It really is difficult to understand how it is possible for you make it through any 24 hour day when you so routinely misrepresent what people write or what they actually believe.

Relax, Ernie, I didn't misrepresent you -- I only ignored you.

Your KGB-did-it CT is simply absurd.   It's ridiculous.   Just because Judge Tunheim of the ARRB says something -- anything -- does not impress me.  I WANT TO SEE THE MATERIAL EVIDENCE !!

What part of that demand do you fail to understand ??

There are so many scholars, college professors, lawyers, judges and ARRB researchers that PRESENT CONFLICTING CT's, that it is simply ABSURD.

It's time to cut through all the OPINIONS and SHOW THE MATERIAL EVIDENCE !!

There are experts EVERYWHERE.   How can they ALL be CORRECT when they contradict each other ??

Just because this guy is focused on one aspect (as most CTers are focused on the CIA-did-it CT), means nothing.

Does he say that there are no FBI files in the JFK Records Act FOIA releases that refer to Edwin Walker?    NO !!

Instead, he simply doesn't say ANYTHING about it, and you project your own interpretation on that, to conclude that THERE MUST BE NONE !!

And since for YEARS on this FORUM you have been trying to PROVE me WRONG, and failing, year after year, you again jump to your old conclusions !!

We are far past Thursday 26 October 2017 -- deadline for the JFK Records Act.   The 30,000+ pages have already been released !!   SHOW what they actually SAY.   That's all I want.

Sincerely,
--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

Relax, Ernie, I didn't misrepresent you -- I only ignored you.

Your KGB-did-it CT is simply absurd.   It's ridiculous.   Just because Judge Tunheim of the ARRB says something -- anything -- does not impress me.  I WANT TO SEE THE MATERIAL EVIDENCE !!

What part of that demand do you fail to understand ??

There are so many scholars, college professors, lawyers, judges and ARRB researchers that PRESENT CONFLICTING CT's, that it is simply ABSURD.

It's time to cut through all the OPINIONS and SHOW THE MATERIAL EVIDENCE !!

There are experts EVERYWHERE.   How can they ALL be CORRECT when they contradict each other ??

Just because this guy is focused on one aspect (as most CTers are focused on the CIA-did-it CT), means nothing.

Does he say that there are no FBI files in the JFK Records Act FOIA releases that refer to Edwin Walker?    NO !!

Instead, he simply doesn't say ANYTHING about it, and you project your own interpretation on that, to conclude that THERE MUST BE NONE !!

And since for YEARS on this FORUM you have been trying to PROVE me WRONG, and failing, year after year, you again jump to your old conclusions !!

We are far past Thursday 26 October 2017 -- deadline for the JFK Records Act.   The 30,000+ pages have already been released !!   SHOW what they actually SAY.   That's all I want.

Sincerely,
--Paul Trejo

Paul -- Please take your morning meds so that you can return to some semblance of reason.  Nobody (least of all me) has presented a "KGB-did-it" argument.  For some unknown reason, you have that bug in your mind.  The ONLY point being made is (I repeat), Tunheim has NEVER confirmed or even hinted that there are ANY remaining documents to be released which pertain to ANY "JBS plot" or which pertain to Edwin Walker or Harry Dean or ANYBODY else whom occupies YOUR delusions.  Period.  End of story.   

The reason why Tunheim is uniquely qualified to address this subject matter is simply because he has seen everything.  Furthermore, when the FBI or CIA or State Dept or whomever objected to release of documentary evidence and they wanted such documents to be withheld, it was the ARRB under Tunheim which made the final determinations.  Significantly, only a very small percentage of FBI documents were ever withheld in their entirety and, now, those have almost all been released. 

Six weeks from now you will have no further arguments to make.

LASTLY:

1.    I am NOT trying to prove your theory wrong.   Another delusion of yours.  My sole purpose is to correct your incessant glaring errors in logic and evidence as well as your false assumptions --- which you seem incapable of recognizing even when mountains of indisputable contradictory factual evidence is presented.

1.1   Furthermore, you do not really have "a theory"

A genuine theory operates much differently from how you approach evidence. 

Your methodology is quite simple: 

(A)  You actively search for ANYTHING (no matter where it comes from) which you think can be used to support your pre-determined conclusions.  That unproven data then becomes "fact" in your mind.  [Examples: Harry Dean's falsehoods and your swallowing whole everything in Dr. Caufield's book]

(B)  THEN you use your unproven data (aka assumptions) as the basis for all your subsequent analysis and commentary and conclusions -- AND -- you DEMAND that your perceived opponents accept your warped personal opinions without serious examination or challenge.  You interpret serious examination or challenge as a personal insult.

GENUINE theory operates much differently. 

2.  Genuine theories recognize that they can be falsified in many different ways.  Consequently, the authors and adherents of those theories welcome serious and rigorous examination and challenges. 

2.1  More importantly, genuine theories are not constructed with circular arguments which use lowest-common-denominator reasoning techniques (as you often do)

2.2  Genuine theories enthusiastically search for new previously unknown documentary or other primary source evidence. 

2.3  BY CONTRAST:  As merely one example, despite your many years of talking with/interviewing and believing every syllable coming out of  Harry Dean's mouth, you never even bothered to pursue Harry's FBI or CIA files--which nobody had ever seen.  Nor did you pursue any other primary source data regarding Harry's narrative which is available at NARA or at other locations or from other researchers.

3.   Lastly, with respect to JFK's murder, I have made no "conclusions" (old or otherwise) -- other than recognizing your intellectual dishonesty and defective logic and evidence.

Link to post
Share on other sites

For those who are interested, I have finished uploading the FBI files shown below.  In addition, there are four non-FBI files which I uploaded (the first 4 items).   

The next batch of my paper FBI files being converted into PDF files will probably be completed by early April and will include:

Bombings w/Racial or Religious Basis--Los Angeles (10/13/58 - 12/1/58)    35pp
Bombings w/Racial or Religious Basis--San Francisco (10/23/58 - 6/3/64)    399pp
Christian Defense League--HQ (12/23/58 - 1/20/76)    624pp
COINTELPRO--White Hate Groups-HQ (9/64 - 12/65)    26pp
COINTELPRO--White Hate Groups-Jacksonville (9/2/64 - 7/20/66)    240pp
Crommelin, John G.--HQ (1/1/50 - 3/31/76)    304pp
Klan Type Orgs and Hate Groups--HQ (8/20/61 - 9/14/66)    537pp
National Knights of the KKK, Inc--Atlanta (James R. Venable) (8/25/60--9/4/60)    529pp
National States Rights Party--Jackson (12/22/64 - 5/31/68)    228pp
Sensing, Thurman    83pp

========================================================================================================================

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ernie,

In your desperation to prove me wrong for the past several years, you are now denying that you are trying to prove me wrong.

This only underscores your failure to accomplish your mission.  

Nobody knows why you don't get tired of it.   It's like your years and years of attacks on Harry Dean -- perhaps the most important living witness of the JFK Assassination through the eyes of General Walker, Loran Hall and Larry Howard.

You continue to post page after page of data about FBI files related to anything EXCEPT the JFK Assassination.    It's as though you're oblivious to the fact that this is specifically a JFK Forum, and not a defend-the-FBI Forum.

Oh, well.   As long as the Moderators allow your nonsense here, so will I.   But I'll keep pointing out that it's nonsense.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said:

Ernie,

In your desperation to prove me wrong for the past several years, you are now denying that you are trying to prove me wrong.

This only underscores your failure to accomplish your mission.  

Nobody knows why you don't get tired of it.   It's like your years and years of attacks on Harry Dean -- perhaps the most important living witness of the JFK Assassination through the eyes of General Walker, Loran Hall and Larry Howard.

You continue to post page after page of data about FBI files related to anything EXCEPT the JFK Assassination.    It's as though you're oblivious to the fact that this is specifically a JFK Forum, and not a defend-the-FBI Forum.

Oh, well.   As long as the Moderators allow your nonsense here, so will I.   But I'll keep pointing out that it's nonsense.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Paul---you are off your meds again.  It is not a case of "proving you wrong".  It is simply a case of correcting your most egregious errors -- as many other people here have done repeatedly.  Harry Dean is not a "witness" to anything -- except in his and your mind.  As previously noted, NOBODY (but you) even mentions Harry Dean.

With respect to your comment about the FBI files I have posted online:  Apparently, you have never read Dr. Caufield's book.  Many of the people and organizations he discusses are among the FBI files I have posted online.  In addition, in order to understand the radical right in the United States (i.e. their arguments and their issues and concerns) any serious person must understand the larger context which produced the radical right --- which is exactly what Dr. Caufield attempted to do in his book.  NOT surprisingly, you don't understand this point because you have revealed yourself as a mental midget.

Oh, BTW, with respect to "allowing nonsense" here on EF ---- between you and me --- ONLY ONE of us has been banned several times for varying periods of time (and it isn't me).

Edited by Ernie Lazar
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Ernie Lazar said:

Paul---you are off your meds again.  It is not a case of "proving you wrong".  It is simply a case of correcting your most egregious errors -- as many other people here have done repeatedly.  Harry Dean is not a "witness" to anything -- except in his and your mind.  As previously noted, NOBODY (but you) even mentions Harry Dean.

With respect to your comment about the FBI files I have posted online:  Apparently, you have never read Dr. Caufield's book.  Many of the people and organizations he discusses are among the FBI files I have posted online.  In addition, in order to understand the radical right in the United States (i.e. their arguments and their issues and concerns) any serious person must understand the larger context which produced the radical right --- which is exactly what Dr. Caufield attempted to do in his book.  NOT surprisingly, you don't understand this point because you have revealed yourself as a mental midget.

Oh, BTW, with respect to "allowing nonsense" here on EF ---- between you and me --- ONLY ONE of us has been banned several times for varying periods of time (and it isn't me).

Ernie,

It really isn't as "cute" as you think, to speak of me as being "off your meds."     A Moderator should look at that.

You have nothing to stand on to allegedly "correct" my errors.   On the topic of the JFK Assassination, you're a beginner.  Other people here at least have a JFK CT, but you don't even have that.    The CTers are obviously biased, though, like you are.

I've not only read Jeffrey Caufield's book, General Walker and the Murder of President Kennedy: the Extensive New Evidence of a Radical Right Conspiracy (2015), but I actually supported him with encouragement, and with photographs from General Walker's personal papers at UT Austin -- just as he sent me photographs from other Walker collections, during the time that Caufield was writing it.

Caufield carefully targets the FBI memos that he uses, to build his CT in the JFK Assassination.  You, on the other hand, post FBI memos willy nilly, by the hundreds or thousands, just on their own.  You use this Forum thread about Jeff Caufield's recent book as your personal dumping ground.   

To accuse me of being a "mental midget" is also less "cute" than you think it is, Ernie.   A Moderator should look at that, too.

While it is true that I've been suspended four times in the past 6 years of my activity here -- that was entirely due to biased members who gathered together to try to get me banned forever, simply because I successfully challenged their CT, to which they had only feeble responses.   

I was suspended as Forum Leaders examined the evidence.   The biased members always failed.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said:

Ernie,

It really isn't as "cute" as you think, to speak of me as being "off your meds."     A Moderator should look at that.

You have nothing to stand on to allegedly "correct" my errors.   On the topic of the JFK Assassination, you're a beginner.  Other people here at least have a JFK CT, but you don't even have that.    The CTers are obviously biased, though, like you are.

I've not only read Jeffrey Caufield's book, General Walker and the Murder of President Kennedy: the Extensive New Evidence of a Radical Right Conspiracy (2015), but I actually supported him with encouragement, and with photographs from General Walker's personal papers at UT Austin -- just as he sent me photographs from other Walker collections, during the time that Caufield was writing it.

Caufield carefully targets the FBI memos that he uses, to build his CT in the JFK Assassination.  You, on the other hand, post FBI memos willy nilly, by the hundreds or thousands, just on their own.  You use this Forum thread about Jeff Caufield's recent book as your personal dumping ground.   

To accuse me of being a "mental midget" is also less "cute" than you think it is, Ernie.   A Moderator should look at that, too.

While it is true that I've been suspended four times in the past 6 years of my activity here -- that was entirely due to biased members who gathered together to try to get me banned forever, simply because I successfully challenged their CT, to which they had only feeble responses.   

I was suspended as Leaders examined the evidence.   The biased members always failed.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Everybody on Planet Earth is " a beginner" with respect to JFK's assassination.  There are numerous different and mutually exclusive "theories" and nobody has any genuine claim to expertise -- despite your pretensions.  My position has always been the same:  while I agree that there WAS a conspiracy involved, I have no way to prove any particular theory.  THAT is what you describe as my "bias".

However, like all other rational human beings, I can detect when somebody is presenting nonsense or speculation or delusional and illogical "connect-the-dots" scenarios AND I can recognize when people (like yourself) make absolutely false statements. 

YOUR definition of "bias" is anybody who challenges something you prefer to believe.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/20/2018 at 9:20 AM, Ernie Lazar said:

Paul---you are off your meds again.  It is not a case of "proving you wrong".  It is simply a case of correcting your most egregious errors -- as many other people here have done repeatedly.  Harry Dean is not a "witness" to anything -- except in his and your mind.  As previously noted, NOBODY (but you) even mentions Harry Dean.

Say again?   :up

  https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/docid-32312899.pdf

Other memos in the pdf are at the link...

5a8ddbc9b9818_64-03-24HARRYDEANPROVIDINGINFOONFRANKVEGA.thumb.jpg.c22efa22410cf5a86382949ed09e7d23.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, David Josephs said:

Say again?   :up

  https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/docid-32312899.pdf

Other memos in the pdf are at the link...

5a8ddbc9b9818_64-03-24HARRYDEANPROVIDINGINFOONFRANKVEGA.thumb.jpg.c22efa22410cf5a86382949ed09e7d23.jpg

Not sure what your point is David.  I am the person who obtained Harry Dean's FBI files and CIA file so I know precisely what is in them.  There is absolutely NOTHING to support Harry's "recollections" regarding the John Birch Society or any "JBS plot" nor is there anything whatsoever which confirms that Harry EVER told the FBI anything about Edwin Walker or Guy Galbadon or John Rousselot or any other subject related to his "JBS plot" narrative.

Consequently, my original comment still stands, i.e. Harry Dean was not a "witness" to anything with respect to JFK's murder.  Which is precisely why no JFK researchers cite Harry Dean as a reliable witness.

BTW -- the FBI agent in the Los Angeles field office who had the most direct contact with Harry (see above memo's reference to William J. McCauley) hand-wrote the following comment on one of the letters which Harry sent to Los Angeles-FBI:

 “Is this fellow a mental case somewhere? No acknowledgement needed.”

Edited by Ernie Lazar
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd have to take your world for it then Ernie...

 

Are we then to understand that every file related to JBS and DEAN is still in existence?

Nothing would have been destroyed, nothing hidden away?

Can you explain the "HARRY DEAN    IS - CUBA" designation?  Wouldn't that be related to the assassination?

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, David Josephs said:

I'd have to take your world for it then Ernie...

 

Are we then to understand that every file related to JBS and DEAN is still in existence?

Nothing would have been destroyed, nothing hidden away?

Can you explain the "HARRY DEAN    IS - CUBA" designation?  Wouldn't that be related to the assassination?

The only file on Harry which is no longer in existence is his Chicago-FBI field office file.  It was destroyed in May 1990.  However, the documents in that file were summarized in memos which the Chicago field office sent to FBI-Los Angeles (after Harry moved to Los Angeles in 1961) and to FBI HQ.

The FBI file caption you refer to has nothing whatsoever to do with JFK.  That file was created after Harry contacted the FBI-Los Angeles office because he claimed to have information about Frank Vega.  That information (according to Harry) refers to Harry's June 1960 trip to Cuba when, supposedly, Frank Vega interrogated Harry.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would point out that about 4 years ago, Ernie Lazar said publicly that Harry Dean HAD NO FBI Records at all, and that Ernie knew this for a FACT because Harry had no FBI Number.

I presented this as a question to Dr. Jeffrey Caufield, knowing he was working on the book which is the topic of this thread.   Dr. Caufield immediately sent me the FBI Number for Harry Dean.    (I'm very busy at work today, so I'll find the details later for this thread.   For now, I'll go by memory).

In any case, Ernie Lazar immediately changed his tune, and found dozens of FBI files on Harry Dean, and claimed that he always knew this.   He never gave Jeff Caufield or myself any credit for this knowledge.

This is the sort of person we're dealing with here.   Lazar always knows what he knows AS A FACT -- until he gets more facts.

US Navy sailor, Harry Dean, is important to US History and to the JFK Assassination saga, because of these connections in his life: 

1.  Fidel Castro (1961)
2.  The FPCC in Chicago (1961)
3.  The FBI in Chicago (1961)
4.  Gabby Gabaldon in Southern California (1962)
5.  The John Birch Society in Southern California (1962)
6.  The Minutemen in Southern California (1963)
7.  Loran Hall in Southern California (1963)
8.  Larry Howard in Southern California (1963)
9.  General Walker, visitor to Southern California (9/1963)

Insofar as these persons were involved in the JFK Assassination, the claims of Harry Dean since 1965 on the Joe Pyne Show, remain vital to this very day.   (Add to this list the FBI in SoCal)

Skeptical dogmatists like Ernie Lazar, in the final analysis, are JUST JEALOUS that such a humble guy as Harry Dean could have lived such a colorful and exciting life.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo
Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said:

I would point out that about 4 years ago, Ernie Lazar said publicly that Harry Dean HAD NO FBI Records at all, and that Ernie knew this for a FACT because Harry had no FBI Number.

I presented this as a question to Dr. Jeffrey Caufield, knowing he was working on the book which is the topic of this thread.   Dr. Caufield immediately sent me the FBI Number for Harry Dean.    (I'm very busy at work today, so I'll find the details later for this thread.   For now, I'll go by memory).

In any case, Ernie Lazar immediately changed his tune, and found dozens of FBI files on Harry Dean, and claimed that he always knew this.   He never gave Jeff Caufield or myself any credit for this knowledge.

This is the sort of person we're dealing with here.   Lazar always knows what he knows AS A FACT -- until he gets more facts.

US Navy sailor, Harry Dean, is important to US History and to the JFK Assassination saga, because of these connections in his life: 

1.  Fidel Castro (1961)
2.  The FPCC in Chicago (1961)
3.  The FBI in Chicago (1961)
4.  Gabby Gabaldon in Southern California (1962)
5.  The John Birch Society in Southern California (1962)
6.  The Minutemen in Southern California (1963)
7.  Loran Hall in Southern California (1963)
8.  Larry Howard in Southern California (1963)
9.  General Walker, visitor to Southern California (9/1963)

Insofar as these persons were involved in the JFK Assassination, the claims of Harry Dean since 1965 on the Joe Pyne Show, remain vital to this very day.   (Add to this list the FBI in SoCal)

Skeptical dogmatists like Ernie Lazar, in the final analysis, are JUST JEALOUS that such a humble guy as Harry Dean could have lived such a colorful and exciting life.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

CHALLENGE FOR PAUL TREJO:

1.  QUOTE VERBATIM WHAT I WROTE "ABOUT 4 YEARS AGO" TO PROVE WHAT YOU JUST POSTED

2.  IF YOU CANNOT OR WILL NOT QUOTE VERBATIM WHAT I WROTE -- THEN WE ALL WILL KNOW YOU ARE A DAMN xxxx

Edited by Ernie Lazar
Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...