text:
Joe Sample
Jessy J's "Second Chances." Because Sax Sells
October 13, 2013 / Jeff Winbush	/ Leave a comment
It is a paradox what distinguishes Jessy J was the very thing she did not put enough emphasis upon; being a female Latin jazz artist. Through three albums of solid, if standard, smooth jazz grooves enlivened somewhat by more distinctive outbursts of originality the woman known as Jessica Spinella stumbled with the blandly generic Hot Sauce (Heads Up, 2011).
In every musician's career a time comes when they must choose to follow a path to success chartered by others or one chartered by themselves. Perhaps Jessy J realized she was marginalizing herself as just another smooth jazz saxophonist in an overcrowded field and decided it was time for a course correction.
Either way Second Chances shows a musician willing to take chances even if they aren't big chances. It's still a compliment as Hot Sauce failed to be little more than product. Here, with Jessy J handling the production chores herself, she isn't going for complete reboot as much as a conceptually constructed album built around original compositions on the number two ("Listen 2 the Groove," "Second Chances," "Tango for Two," "Dos," "Double Trouble," "Twice") and a few covers, Eugene McDaniels' classic "Feel Like Makin' Love" and "Magalenha" by Sergio Mendes.
The result is the most fully realized album of the young artist's career and certainly her most consistent. Playing alto, tenor, soprano and baritone sax as well as flute, Jessy J shows off her versatility. Her breathy, girlish vocals on "Feel Like Making Love" won't make anyone forget Roberta Flack, but the support from Bryant Sinono (bass), Tim Stewart (guitar) and Norman Jackson (keyboards) from her own band step up and elevate the tune from a skip to at least listenable.
In the shift to put smooth jazz riffing aside to get closer to her Latin roots Jessy J is ably assisted by Jeff Lorber and Johnny Britt, a multi-instrumentalist, vocalist and songwriter who takes a lead vocal turn on the jumpin' "Mambo Gumbo" penned by Jessy J and Joe Sample. It doesn't hurt that her playing here is easily her best on record. Jessy J's confidence and skill has done nothing but grown and whether she's jamming on the tenor sax with Lorber and Jimmy Haslip on "Tango for Two" or soaring as she alternates between soprano and flute the lady does not fail to impress.
Jazz suffers from a severe lack of exposure. Young people don't listen to it. Older people can't find it on the radio or in the few stores still selling CD's. Clubs that play jazz are closing up and radio stations have dropped it from their format. I don't know how jazz survives if the only place you go to hear it are summer festivals and ocean cruises.
Jazz needs an infusion of not just younger musicians, but new means to reach younger ears. Jessy J can be of assistance in this by providing a bridge to the Latino community as well as adding a degree of sex appeal. That's not the highest way to get listeners who have tuned jazz out as "old folks music" to tune back in, but if Jessy J's pretty face can open ears as well as eyes the end justifies the means.
Initially, Jessy J seemed fated to be just another underachiever playing her saxophone competently if not memorably. Despite this being her fourth album, she truly seems to have made the most of a second chance to distinguish herself from a crowded field of players and by getting back to basics Second Chances is reason enough to give her a second listen.
Track Listing: Listen 2 the Groove; Second Chances; Feel Like Makin' Love; Magalenha; Tango For Two; Dos; La Luna Feliz; Double Trouble; Mambo Gumbo; Twice
Personnel: Jessy J: tenor, alto, baritone, and soprano saxophone, flute, vocals; Jeff Lorber: keyboards, guitar, strings; Jimmy Haslip: bass, background vocals; Tony Moore: drums; Dwight Sills: guitar; Johnny Britt: keyboards, drum programming, trumpet, vocals, additional vocals and vocal arrangement; Norman Brown: guitar, keyboards; Frank Abraham: bass; Michael Angel: rhythm guitar; Richie Gajate Garcia: percussion; keyboards; Norman Johnson: keyboards, strings; Bryant Sinono: bass, bass, keyboards, electric guitar; Charles Streeter: drums; Tim Stewart: guitar; Michael Thompson: guitar; Mike White: drums; Nancy Lyons: chorus vocals; Facundo: vocals, guitars
A different version of this review appeared at All About Jazz.
Jessy J Takes Her Chances (smoothjazztherapy.typepad.com)
The WAVE World Premiere: Jessy J's New Single "Listen 2 The Groove" (947thewave.cbslocal.com)
"Second Chances" for Jessy J (pinkandbluenotes.com)
Jessy J – Second Chances (smoothjazztherapy.typepad.com)
Crawford, Sample and Vaughn: Collaborations and Breakthroughs
Randy and Joe have forged a musical marriage that works.
Randy Crawford & Joe Sample: Live
It's a slight exaggeration to say keyboardist Joe Sample rescued Randy Crawford from pop music limbo, but it's not too far from the truth. Crawford is among the most distinct vocalists working, but her discography is riddled with over-arranged and over-produced disappointments. One of her finest moments remains when The Crusaders dropped all 11 minutes of "Street Life" on radio airwaves in 1979, featuring Crawford belting it out.
Some 27 years would pass Sample and Crawford before they reunited to record Feelin' Good (PRA, 2006), where the pianist wisely chucked the synthesizers, strings and overproduced pop tunes that Crawford's sensual vocals had to fight through over a decade's worth of middling albums and stripped the sound down to a bare (but not sparse) combination of piano, bass, drums and Crawford's sweetly sensual vocals.
The back-to-basics/less-is-more approach served Crawford well on Feelin' Good, and a second album, No Regrets (PRA, 2008) continued the collaboration. It was wise for Crawford to give up her pop/R&B stylings to pursue a more distinctive direction as a seriously soulful jazz singer, and Live pulls together some of the finest moments from a 2008 European tour. Steve Gadd handled the drumming duties on the two studio albums and returns here, as Nicklas Sample replaces Christian McBride on acoustic bass.
Live albums of a concert you didn't attend are a bit like looking at a friend's vacation photos of somewhere you haven't been, but everything that sounded good in the studio loses nothing on stage. From the opener "Every Day I Have the Blues" to the closer "Last Night at Danceland," Crawford and company deliver the goods over an economical 49 minutes. There isn't a dull moment on Live, but Crawford does herself proud on the Billie Holiday-written "Tell Me More and More and Then Some," with Sample killing 'em softly as he solos. "This Bitter Earth," "Me, Myself and I" and "No Regrets" are presented skilfully, playfully and brilliantly, with Gadd and Nicklas Sample providing solid support throughout.
Sample and Crawford have recently finished a tour in South Africa, but whether they plan to record again remains to be seen. If they don't, then Live serves as an outstanding document of a glorious alliance.
Track Listing: Every Day I Have the Blues; Feeling Good; Tell Me More and More and Then Some; Rainy Night in Georgia; This Bitter Earth; Me, Myself and I; No Regrets; One Day I'll Fly Away: Almaz; Street Life; Last Night at Danceland
Personnel: Randy Crawford; vocals; Joe Sample: piano; Steve Gadd: drums; Nicklas Sample: bass
Mr. Vaughn is a sharp dressed man.
Julian Vaughn: Breakthrough
Within the first 30 seconds of the stomping "On Your Feet," the lead-off track on Breakthrough, it's hard not to think, "Darned if this guy doesn't sound just like Wayman Tisdale." Hopefully Julian Vaughn will take the comparison as a compliment because his "lead bass" playing style is eerily reminiscent of Tisdale, who passed away in 2009.
The publicity notes for Vaughn's third album say he "doesn't try to be any other bassist than who he is." That's nice to say but as one of the producers is Darren Rahn, who collaborated with Tisdale, it isn't a stretch to suggest that Vaughn, a Kansas City native, wasn't ever so slightly influenced by Tisdale. Additionally, at a towering 6′ 7″ Vaughn is only an inch shorter than the former NBA power forward.
Breakthrough is calculated to make a splash on the charts and airwaves, not break any new ground. There is a cover of the R&B hit, "Rock Steady," a few vocal tracks that are okay, nothing memorable though, and a lot party tunes that given Vaughn plenty of space to jam and riff for the sake of jamming and riffing. Most of it sounds pretty good even if it's not terribly memorable.
The breakthrough here is Vaughn's confidence as a player and how much he dominates the proceedings as the star of the show. The ranks of premier electric bassists in his field has thinned, since Stanley Clarke says he's retired from the genre, Marcus Miller has one foot in the funk jazz genre, but is hardly wedded to it and Victor Wooten follows a uniquely eclectic muse which leaves the field wide open for Vaughn.
"Potential" is the heaviest word in the world because it means you haven't done it yet. Vaughn is playing it cautiously and conservatively as he's trying to leave a positive impression with the audience he's aiming for and the current position of Breakthrough on the contemporary jazz charts indicates it was a savvy strategy.
Vaughn has demonstrated he has talent. Now he has to take on the next challenge of making himself stand out from the crowd by stepping off the path established by others and blaze his own trail.
Track Listing: On Your Feet; J's Jammin; Ju Ju's Groove; The Thought of You; Breakthrough; I'll Do It; Be My Girl; Rock Steady; No Matter; Right On Time; Always Be Together.
Personnel: Julian Vaughn: lead bass, bass, keyboard bass; Ken Friend: bass; Darren Rahn: tenor sax, Wurlitzer, synthesizers, drum programming, additional guitar; Frank Selman: guitar; Anthony Jones: drums; Joey Woolfork: guitar; Nicholas Cole: piano; Jeremy Nixon; keyboards; Tobbi White-Darks: vocals; Marcus Anderson: saxophone; Anthony Saunders: vocals; Joey Woolfork: guitar; Josh Mayfield: drums; Jimmy Ellison: guitar; Matt Godina: guitar; Kinyon Price: Rhodes & strings; Paula Saunders: vocals
These reviews were originally published at All About Jazz.
Randy Crawford & Joe Sample – Live (smoothjazztherapy.typepad.com)
Julian Vaughn – Breakthrough (smoothjazztherapy.typepad.com)
George Benson Plays and Sings (and quite well, thank you)
November 11, 2011 / Jeff Winbush	/ 2 Comments
Still a hell of a guitar player when he plays guitar
At some point George Benson morphed from a guitarist who occasionally sang into a singer who occasionally played guitar. Benson's Breezin' (Warner Bros, 1976) launched his career trajectory to new heights based upon "This Masquerade," his only vocal turn on the album.
But oh, what a vocal "This Masquerade" was. It propelled Breezin' to Number One on the pop charts and the album won multiple Grammys, including Record of the Year, and his recording formula was set for the next 20 years. The follow-up, In Flight (Warner Bros, 1977) featured Benson's soulful tenor vocals on four of the six tracks and, while In Flight didn't boast a song as memorable as "This Masquerade," his guitar was still the musical centerpiece of the music.
Jazz aficionados rightly scratched their heads as Benson dove headlong into pop music and, by the time of 1984's 20/20 (Warner Bros, 1984), the guitar had virtually disappeared in a pea soup of limp arrangements, synthesizers and syndrums, the quintessential instrument that dates '80s records. The nadir of Benson's career might be Irreplaceable (GRP, 2004) which made a bid for hip-hop radio through sincere, but contrived tunes such as "Cell Phone," where Benson tried to place a call to heaven on the title device (no joke).
As a vocalist, Benson has proven to be at his best when the material is as strong as his 63 year old voice, and Guitar Man is a splendid showcase for it. The Beatles and Benson get along very well together (reference The Other Side of Abbey Road (A&M, 1969) for further evidence), as his skilled fingers strum the six strings on a lush interpretation of "I Want To Hold Your Hand." The mood of this recording is lights down low, slow dance and romance music. This is a record made by a grown-up for grown-ups. Benson has no need to make albums with one eye on the pop charts anymore. Recognizing his reign there is over, he can put his emphasis simply on playing and singing whatever he feels like.
Despite its title, Guitar Man doesn't feature a lot of frenzied jamming and high-flying solos, but Benson doesn't have to hammer with pyrotechnics. When he's on his game, as he is whether he's crooning Stevie Wonder's "My Cherie Amour" or gently coaxing the notes out of his guitar on John Coltrane's "Naima," it's a demonstration of an artist confidently allowing the music to speak for itself.
Whether he's swinging on "Tequila," with keyboardist Joe Sample, drummer Harvey Mason, and bassist Ben Williams, loping through "Don't Know Why," or straight-up crooning on "My One and Only Love," Benson's sense of taste, phrasing and ability to swing remain undiminished by time. Ably assisted by an accomplished assemblage of musicians, this is one of the best albums of the year. Just don't call it a comeback. George Benson is still The Guitar Man and even when it seemed he had forgotten for awhile, he always was.
Track Listing:Tenderly; I Want To Hold Your Hand; My Cherie Amour; Naima; Tequila; Don't Know Why; The Lady In My Life; My One and Only Love; Paper Moon; Danny Boy; Since I Fell For You; Fingerlero.
Personnel: George Benson: guitar, vocals; David Garfield: piano, keyboards, rhythm arrangement (2-8, 11, 12); Paul Jackson, Jr.: rhythm guitar (2); Ray Fuller: rhythm guitar (2); Freddie Washington: bass (2); Oscar Seaton, Jr. (2): drums; Charlie Bishart: violin, viola (2, 7); Dan Higgins: flute, alto flute, clarinet (2); Oscar Castro-Neves: orchestral arrangement (2); Ben Williams: bass (3-5, 7-9, 12); Harvey Mason: drums (3-5, 7-9, 12); Lenny Castro: percussion (3, 5, 6, 12); Joe Sample: piano (5, 8, 9, 12); Chris Walden: keyboards, string arrangement (7).
This review originally appeared in All About Jazz
Jessy J Serves Up Some "Hot Sauce"
October 7, 2011 / Jeff Winbush	/ Leave a comment
Do ya think I'm saxy?
The third major album by saxophonist Jessica Spinella (a.k.a. Jessy J) reflects both a reliance on a proven formula and the stirrings of venturing into unexplored territory.
Jessy's got a problem. She can attribute much of her success to veteran producer Paul Brown, whose other clients include Euge Groove, Rick Braun and Boney James. Brown is a master of the catchy hook, which makes him more commercial than cutting edge. That's not a bad thing, but it doesn't always make for boldly inventive music. Brown's production always sounds good, even if it's often a slightly different twist of the same old song.
Of Hot Sauce's ten songs, six are produced by Brown, but it's the other four which are the most interesting. There's nothing terribly wrong with "Remember the Night" and "Rio Grande," other than the odd sequencing of two tracks which sound remarkably similar except one is more up-tempo than the other, but there's just nothing original about them, either. Brown's skills are in revisiting what he's done on previous Jessy J albums like Tequila Moon (Peacon, 2008) and True Love (Peak, 2009).
Here, however, Brown holds the reins on the young saxophonist a bit too tightly. Any song entitled "Hot Sauce" ought to flat-out groove, not just bubble away for 3:17; "Mild sauce" would be a better descriptor for the underwhelming, paint-by-numbers title tune. There are faint traces of Jessy J's Latin heart beating faintly in the background, but it's overwhelmed by the slickness and sheen of Brown's production. A little less control and little more risk-taking were needed here.
More successful and much more fun are "Rainbow Gold" and 'Last Night," two funky workouts, with "Last Night" offering a rare performance by Joe Sample, workin' it out on the Hammond B3 organ with studio pros Harvey Mason (drums), Ray (Ghostbuster) Parker Jr. (guitar) and Nick Sample–son of the former Crusaders keyboardist–joining in on bass. Both feature Jessy J's vocalizations, so if you enjoy them, you're in luck.
The moment of revelation comes with Saunders Sermons and his vocal turn on "In A Sentimental Mood," with Jessy J playing a supporting role. Sermons simmers and sways, playing it straight, with Jessy J's tenor sax warmly warbling in the background. Sermons co-produced and arranged the Duke Ellington classic with pianist Jon Notar, and it's a winner, with some nice stick work from drummer Josh Guinta. Nothing else on Hot Sauce sounds remotely like this and it's a style for which Jessy J is well-suited.
There is a balance a musician must strike between art and commerce, and not every soloist thrives in the spotlight. The finest moments of Hot Sauce come when Jessy J is part of the band instead of the center of attraction. Going forward she will likely thrive in either role, but for now she seems most comfortable in the former than the latter.
Track Listing: Remember The Night; Rio Grande; Hot Sauce; Rainbow Gold: 'Til You Make Up Your Mind; Meant To Be; We Kissed; Leave Right Now; In A Sentimental Mood: Last Nigh
Personnel: Jessy J: tenor sax, soprano sax, flute, vocals; Paul Brown: guitar, drums, percussion, nylon string guitar, programmed drums (1-3, 5-7); Marco Basci: keyboards, strings, bass, drum programming (2, 5); Roberto Vally: bass (2, 5-7), Lawrence Young: keyboards (3); Michel Ripoli: guitars, bass (3); Deyon Dobson: keyboards, drum programming (3); Joe Sample: piano, Rhodes, Triton keyboard and Hammond B3 organ (4, 10); Ray Parker Jr.: guitars and background vocals (4, 10); Nick Sample: bass (4, 10); Harvey Mason: drums (4, 10); Gregg Karukas: keyboards, strings (6, 7); Jeff Caruthers: keyboards, guitar, bass and drum programming (8); Saunders Sermons: vocals (9); Jon Notar: piano (9); Jordan Scannella: electric bass (9); Josh Guinta: drums (9); Janis Liebhart: background vocals (10); Toni Scruggs: background vocals (10).
This review originally appeared at All About Jazz


ON HOLIDAY – Tiny Paper Co.
Hello!! We are currently on holiday until 20th May 2019 and we are offering a minimum 20% off while we are away (up to 50%) off + reduced flat rate shipping of $4.99. All orders will be processed and shipped from 20th May onwards. Please use code ONHOLIDAY to enjoy the savings, exclusions apply.
Exclusions: Grimms, Grapat, Sarah Silk, Way To Play, Omiebox, Wobbel and Magic Wood are too hot for this sale.
For any queries please email hello@tinypaper.co but may take a while to respond. Thank you for understanding and let's go shopping and stock up for birthday gifts or even Christmas!


text:
Bulgaria's foreign affairs minister, Teodora Genchovska, announced her resignation on Monday
Bulgaria's foreign affairs minister, Teodora Genchovska, announced her resignation on Monday, becoming the fourth and last minister from junior government coalition partner There Is Such a People (TISP) to step down to comply with a decision of party leader Slavi Trifonov to withdraw the TISP ministers from the cabinet.
Genchovska handed her resignation to Prime Minister Kiril Petkov and will carry out her duties until a successor is chosen, public TV broadcaster BNT reported, quoting a statement from the foreign ministry's press office.
Bulgaria's energy minister, Alexander Nikolov, submitted his resignation earlier on Monday to comply with TISP's decision to withdraw its ministers from the government.
The other two ministers from TISP - regional development minister Grozdan Karadjov and sports minister Radostin Velev, handed in their resignations last week.
Now the prime minister has to present the resignations and nominations for new cabinet ministers to parliament for approval. Prime Minister Kiril Petkov has said he is prepared to run the country with a minority government.
TISP holds 25 of 240 seats in parliament, which is expected. The remaining three parties of the governing coalition hold 109 seats among themselves.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


The 7th TransParcNet meeting took place from 9th to 12th June 2015 in the National Parks Bavarian Forest (DE) and Šumava (CZ).
Experts in cross-border cooperation in Protected Areas came together to share good practices in transboundary cooperation, discover cross-border partnerships in other parks and look into common project ideas.
This year's meeting will looked at "The value of healthy ecosystems for nature and people" from a transboundary perspective. We studied practical examples of raised bog restoration as well as the natural dynamic of ecosystems and their effects on biodiversity. We enjoyed views on the area from mountain tops and tree top walks, learning about the value of visitor management in order for everybody to benefit from the natural landscape.
A full report on the meeting will follow shortly. In the meantime, find below the presentations given at the meeting for you to download.


There is just something about the fall season that puts a little more magic in the air. Maybe it is the cooling temperatures, the leaves changing, nearing the start of holiday season, picking the perfect pumpkin, or a combination of things. Whatever it is, if you plan on joining us this fall, we want to give you the inside scoop on how to plan the perfect day.
Wear the right shoes. This has been quite the year of rain, hasn't it? While you're traipsing around our pumpkin patch in search of the perfect jack-o-lantern, we recommend wearing rain boots or an old pair of sneakers. We promise you will still look chic in your fall attire while staying clear of mud.
Flip the day. Our sister properties across the street, Bluemont Vineyard and Dirt Farm Brewing, tend to be busy on beautiful fall days. If you're planning on enjoying our Fall Pumpkin Harvest Festival activities, and visiting one of our sister properties, consider heading to them first. Grab a glass or pint and a bite to eat and enjoy the views, then come down the mountain and pick your pumpkin on your way out of town. Most families with little ones leave the farm early for afternoon naps, so the crowd tends to die down later in the day.
Weekday date. Want to skip the crowds completely? We still have wagon rides, pumpkin picking, our Roosteraunt concessions and pig races during the week!
Capture the moment. Did you really pick a pumpkin at a fall festival if you didn't Instagram it? Smartphones make it so easy to capture life's sweetest moments. When you share, be sure to tag us @greatcountryfarms and use #greatcountryfarms!
Give your pumpkin a proper send-off. After the fall season is over, what are you going to do with your pumpkin? It is likely past its prime but throwing it in the trash just feels wrong. Join us for our Pumpkin Chunkin' November 3 through 6 to smash your pumpkin in all kinds of fun ways. We feed the smashed pumpkins to our pigs for an extra special treat!


text:
TV Shows » Criminal Minds »
'Criminal Minds' Recap: The Number 372 Haunts a Drone-Obsessed Unsub
In season 13 episode 4 of Criminal Minds, titled, "Killer App," the BAU travels to California to help investigate a workplace shooting. They soon realize, however, that this is no ordinary shooting. Rather, this crime was not executed physically by an unsub, instead, it was carried out by a drone. The team must rush to find out who's behind the tech before it's too late.
A Shooting in Silicon Valley
The episode begins with a hip tech company in Silicon Valley. All of a sudden, shots ring out and the employees run and duck for cover, but no one can seem to see a shooter.
At the BAU, Prentiss asks Luke to her office to talk about what happened with Scratch. She says Luke wasn't specific enough in his report. Luke admits that he didn't try to help pull Scratch up. Prentiss said he did the right thing.
Homeland security calls the BAU for help with the workplace shooting at tech company, Ori-Gamey. The team heads to Silicon Valley. On the jet, the team evaluates what they know about the shooting so far. They haven't found a shooter, nor has a terrorist organization claimed responsibility. Three victims of three different races were killed and the team theorizes that the shooting might be a hate crime.
When the team arrives in California, Prentis works with Homeland Security on the scene. Things aren't adding up. The security guard who was killed had served in Afghanistan. He was shot several times but he never fired his weapon. Luke, J.J., Reid, and Simmons interview employees at the scene. A few people say they saw the shooter, but none of the stories add up. Prentiss and Luke play out what happened to the three victims. Abdullah was killed first, then Devlin and the security guard, one after the other. They theorize that there might have been two shooters.
Shemar Moore Returning to Criminal Minds for Season 13>>>
Garcia calls the team with the name of a possible suspect, Hugh Fitzgerald. Fitzgerald was fired, had a grudge, and was in the building earlier. The BAU tracks him down and he tries to outrun them in his car but fails. Hugh reveals that he tried to get away because he keyed his boss's car. He insists, however, that he did not shoot up the office. The team, therefore, theorizes that the shootings are personal and that the three victims were killed for a reason.
Flash to another tech company where four employees are working. As they work, bullets start to fly, and all four people are killed. The BAU responds to the second shooting. Based on the four people killed, the team rules out a hate crime and confirms that the killer probably is targeting specific people.
Killer Drone
Reid notices that no one responded to the shooter and that the trajectory of the bullets is too high to make sense. He realizes that there is no physical gunman. Instead, a drone is being used to attack the offices and the unsub controls it offsite.
They deliver the profile. The unsub is a lone wolf using a drone. He's a young, white male, tech-astute, with a personal vendetta. He's using a custom built drone and could be military trained. He's operating off a kill list and targeting specific victims. The team hasn't found the connection between the two companies, but they know it's the key to finding out who the unsub is.
In reviewing what they know, the team concludes that the security guard was the only one killed who wasn't on the unsub's list. J.J. discovers that the common thread between all the victims is a period of unemployment in 2016.
A blonde woman named Tori is talking on the phone in her car. She is afraid because coders "on the team" are dead. Then her car starts getting shot by the unsub. The BAU finds the shot up car, but the unsub has taken Tori. Tori works for a private military consulting firm called Peakstone. The team theorizes that Peakstone's civilian drone operations could be the connection. Prentiss speaks with the Homeland Security agent, who insists that the BAU take over the case. The unsub, whose name is Jake, is holding Tori at gunpoint. He thinks she won't remember him, but she does.
The team looks into Tori and find out she was in charge of drone teams consisting of coders and one pilot. They think the unsub is a former drone pilot blaming the coders on his team for making killing people seem like a game. Garcia calls in with helpful information. Tori's team ran during the time in 2016 that lines up with the victims' unemployment, until their contract was canceled in July 2016. The team's last mission, attacking an insurgent camp, had a lot of casualties, 372 dead. Garcia is trying to find the unsub's name from Peakstone but isn't have much luck.
372 Casualties
Meanwhile, Jake has brought Tori back to his house. She tries to convince him that he should be proud of his service, he kept his country safe. Prentiss goes to the Homeland Security agent, trying to get him to help her obtain the unsub's name from Peakstone. The agent says he can't help, but after Prentiss insists, he gives her his contact.
Still keeping Tori captive, Jake reveals he's upset about the letter he received after the team's contract ended that broke down every mission, including body count. When Jake puts down his gun, Tori takes the opportunity to grab it, fire, and run out of the house.
Prentiss meets with the Peakstone contact to try and get Jake's name. The contact refuses to give up the information. Tori runs out into the street and flags down a car to help her.
Prentiss returns to the team, letting them know Peakstone won't give up the information. Simmons announces that Tori is at the hospital. When the team arrives, J.J. and Luke talk to Tori and she admits she shot Jake. When they ask about the casualty counts, however, Tori lies, saying Jake said nothing about casualty counts.
Rossi and Simmons go to Jake's house and find him dead. He was shot multiple times, just like his earlier victims. Tori fired once and then dropped the gun on her way out. Rossi and Simmons wonder who could have wanted the unsub dead.
Quiz: Which Special Agent TV Hunk Would You Date?>>>
Back at the station, Garcia calls the team to let them know what she found out about the mission with the 372 casualty count. It turns out that there is no record of such a mission occurring at an insurgent training camp. Instead, she has finds that there was a bombing at an elementary school that matches the 372 count. Peakstone, the team realizes, covered up the bombing of the elementary school. They also find out that Tori was on the phone with the company when she was kidnapped.
Peakstone's to Blame
Tori, therefore, is unfinished business for Peakstone, because she knows what happened with the elementary school. Not only did Peakstone kill Jake, but they were trying to kill Tori as well. Just as the team makes this discovery, a suspicious cop takes over watching Tori's door at the hospital.
The cop goes in the room to shoot and kill Tori and the team arrives and arrests him. Tori reveals to J.J. and Luke that Jake blamed everyone on the mission team for turning him into a murderer. She also explains that Peakstone made her file fake reports and cover the mistake up. They place Tori under arrest. Rossi and Prentiss arrest the contact at Peakstone.
Back in D.C., Luke tells Prentiss that Tori cut a deal to testify against Peakstone. The government ended all contracts with the company and those responsible are going to jail. As Prentiss is swamped with paperwork, Luke offers Thai food and stays to share it with her.
What did you think of this complex episode? Did you feel sympathy for Jake, the unsub? What did you think of the brief conclusion to the Mr. Scratch saga? Let us know in the comments!
Criminal Minds season 13 airs Wednesdays at 10/9c on CBS. Want more news? Like our Facebook page.
(Image courtesy of CBS)
By Randa Kriss | Contributing Writer, BuddyTV
Flowers in the Attic Movies in Order
The production of the "Flowers in the Attic" movie series started in 2014 ...
Fifty Shades Movies In Order (How to Watch the Film Trilogy)
If you're eager to watch the Fifty Shades movies but need help figuring out...
Fifty Shades Movies In Order (How to Watch the Film Trilogy


Culture and ethnic backgrounds play an important role in the attitudes and perspectives on mental health. Stigma is a major barrier towards seeking treatment for mental health, thus improving awareness is crucial to improve public prevention and intervention of various mental illnesses. This study aimed to characterize the various perspectives on mental health and measure the differences between them among Caucasians and Asian-Americans. Mental health perspectives were divided into five categories – authoritarianism, benevolence, mental hygiene etiology, social restrictiveness, and interpersonal etiology. 204 participants were recruited to take a questionnaire that quantified these categories using five clinical scenarios representing psychiatric illnesses such as bipolar disorder, major depressive disorder, substance abuse, and schizophrenia. Results showed that Asian-Americans were scored higher in authoritarian, social restriction, and interpersonal etiology categories with high statistical significance (p-values << 0.05). The Caucasian group scored higher in benevolence and mental hygiene etiology categories with high statistical significance (p-values << 0.05). However, both groups were likely to seek treatment for mental illness with statistically analysis showing no meaningful difference between the two groups.


This study provides a literature review on school funding formulas across OECD countries. It looks at three salient questions from a comparative perspective: i) What kind of school formula funding schemes exist and how are they used, particularly for promoting the needs of socially disadvantaged pupils?; ii) How do school formula funding regimes perform according to equity and efficiency standards?; iii) What are the unresolved issues? Formula funding of schools, as opposed to administrative discretion and bidding, relies on a mathematical formula containing a number of variables (e.g. number of pupils), each of which has attached to it a cash amount to determine school budgets. Across OECD countries there are four main groups of variables in such formulas: i) student number and grade level-based; ii) needs-based; iii) curriculum or educational programme-based and; iv) school characteristics-based. Sometimes output and outcome-related variables are also used. The performance of formula funding compared to alternative funding regimes is dependent on the details of the formula and on the wider education policy environment. Formula funding systems typically advance transparency and accountability at low administrative costs and in combination with matching complementary policy tools they can also contribute to equity and efficiency. Currently, there are several ongoing debates across OECD countries: First, there is an inherent tradeoff between transparency/simplicity and sensitivity to local conditions/complexity. Second, knowing how much educating to a given standard costs is problematic and subject to heated debates. The main reason for this is that the causal relationship between education costs and student performance is largely unknown and even the identified impacts appear to be relatively small. Third, even though resources are allocated according to need estimation, they might not be devoted to these needs. Fourth, it is still undecided whether the introduction of school formula funding regimes has changed actual school funding practice.


text:
Michigan State Spartans Football
Big Ten Football
Highly-touted 2022 quarterback Katin Houser commits to Michigan State
Michigan State gets its quarterback, and one of the program's top targets, in the 2022 recruiting cycle.
By Ryan O'Bleness@ryanobleness Jun 27, 2021, 12:01pm CDT
Share All sharing options for: Highly-touted 2022 quarterback Katin Houser commits to Michigan State
Photo by Nic Antaya/Getty Images
The Michigan State Spartans have landed one of the program's top targets for the 2022 recruiting cycle, as highly-touted quarterback Katin Houser has flipped his commitment from Boise State to MSU.
COMMITTED!! #GoGreen pic.twitter.com/Nqnz7rqDxX
— Katin Houser (@katinhouser) June 27, 2021
Houser was a big priority for Michigan State head coach Mel Tucker and his staff, especially after AJ Duffy and Nicco Marchiol committed elsewhere, however Houser was definitely a "Plan A" for the coaching staff. The 6-foot-3, 200-pound quarterback out of St. John Bosco in Bellflower, California (and originally hailing from Nevada) has impressed throughout the summer camp circuit, and has quickly risen up the recruiting rankings board.
Houser is considered a four-star prospect by 247Sports' individual rankings, and a high-three-star according to the full industry-generated 247Sports Composite rankings. He is listed as the No. 27 quarterback, No. 27 recruit in the state of California and No. 396 overall recruit in the 2022 class, per the Composite rankings. Meanwhile, Rivals.com lists Houser as the No. 18 pro-style quarterback in the class, and the No. 24 player in California.
Spartan Up!! #GoGreen pic.twitter.com/qTYu60VdX2
Last weekend, Houser took his official visit to East Lansing and was clearly impressed with the Michigan State program by the time he left. Houser had been committed to Boise State since April 1, but announced his de-commitment from the Broncos on June 24.
Thank You. pic.twitter.com/3ENomgtETg
In addition to Michigan State and Boise State, Houser had scholarship offers from Iowa, UCLA, Arizona, Colorado, Washington, Washington State, Oregon State, Yale, Hawaii and several others.
Houser immediately becomes Michigan State's highest-graded prospect thus far in its 2022 class, with a Composite grade of 0.8884. The class now stands at 12 commitments overall, including seven commitments in the month of June alone.


text:
Spotlight 2020: This holiday season, we are extremely grateful to those who have given us a glimmer of hope in these difficult times.
About Burness
Jestin Patton
Senior Coordinator
Jestin is a first-generation college student, who joined Burness in 2019. Jestin brings with him years of experience working directly with youth and on behalf of youth in Texas and across the country. Jestin worked for the Boys & Girls club as a youth development specialist, site director, and area director. In these roles he developed programming to aide youth development and managed multiple state-licensed programs. After leaving the Boys & Girls Club, Jestin joined the American Heart Association as a Project Coordinator to support their advocacy work on issues combating childhood obesity and building a tobacco-free future. While in graduate school Jestin also worked at the University of Texas at Austin, supporting the OnRamps program which works to help students get acclimated to higher education through dual credit courses at local high schools.
Jestin received his bachelor's degree and master's degree from the University of Texas at Arlington, studying political science, communications, and public policy & administration. It was in the classroom and behind the debate podium that Jestin found a passion for public speaking and government advocacy. Growing up in Dallas, Texas Jestin learned to embrace different cultures and developed a love for the great outdoors. In his spare time, he enjoys reading poetry, trying new foods, and exploring art museums.
Back to Full Team
Want to work together to make the world a better place? Work With Us
Get in Touch +1 301-652-1558
7910 Woodmont Avenue, Suite 700
© 2021 Burness. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy
Looks like there was an issue, please try again.


text:
Richard Case Nagell Sends Jim Garrison on a Wild-Goose Chase
For several months in 1967, Assistant District Attorney William Martin, of the New Orleans D.A.'s office, had a series of meetings and exchange of letters with Richard Case Nagell.
Nagell dangled a tape recording of conspirators and William Martin did everything he could to retrieve the tape. In the end, there was no tape. Conspiracy theorists now claim that Nagell was scared off because of Martin's involvement with the CIA.
The Harold Weisberg Archive contains a large folder of documents from William Martin. You can also find these documents amongst the Garrison files.
I have put all the major memos and letters in chronological order, and I have transcribed, to the best of my ability, Nagell's handwritten letters to Martin. I've also annotated the large memos written by Martin to Jim Garrison.
The purpose of this effort is to make sense of what happened between Martin and Nagell and, at the end of this post, to contrast a conspiratorial view of what happened to what I think was really going on.
You may or may not agree with my reasoning, but here are the actual documents.
****************************************************************************************************************************
The Richard Case Nagell story starts with his sister. Here is a letter he wrote her on March 13, 1967:
At the same time as this correspondence, David Kroman was also contacting Garrison's office about Richard Case Nagell.
Richard Case Nagell was visited at the Springfield Medical Center for Federal Prisoners by William Martin, an Assistant District Attorney working for Jim Garrison, on April 10, 1967. Here is Martin's memo: (if you want to skip the memo, I have listed the salient points just below)
Here are some comments on this memo:
Martin visited with Nagell for about four hours over two days. He did not take notes since "the presence of a note pad and a pencil seem to make the subject nervous and reluctant to speak freely."
Right at the start of the interview, Nagell said he would not provide any material or evidence. "He stated he was worried about recent events and was at this point afraid to confide in anyone."
He was visited by his brother-in-law who had tried to "interrogate" him. As a result, "He (the subject) had decided to trust absolutely no one..."
Nagell told Martin that "he had been a Marxist-Leninist for many years and that he had no particular love or loyalty to the United States."
Nagell said that "he had kept account of our progress [the Garrison investigation] as best he could through his limited access to newspapers."
Nagell said that "there had actually been three separate plots to assassinate President Kennedy. The first was a plan to kill President Kennedy by bombing (a concealed bomb in the speaker's platform or the speaker's podium) on the occasion of December of January of 1962 when the President traveled to Miami, Florida to address the group of Cuban prisoners who had taken part in the Bay of Pigs invasion and who had just been released and returned to the States. A second and similar plan to kill the President was to have taken place in June of 1963 when the President traveled to Los Angeles for an important speaking engagement. The subject stated that the first and second plots (above mentioned) had never really become serious and that the plans never did reach more than just the talking stage. The third and final plot, which did in fact end with the assassination of President Kennedy, was an offshoot of the other two plans and was planned and put into effect by the same group of people.
The Cubans who "took an active part in the assassination acted as individuals..."
At the start of his second interview, Nagell asked Martin "what theory Mr. Garrison was working on as regards the assassination of President Kennedy." Martin then proceeded to tell Nagell the theory that the assassination was mean to arouse a new invasion of Cuba. Nagell "followed [Martin's] words with extreme interest..."
Nagell said that "he, as a Marxist-Leninist, had worked "for the other side" and had worked under the specific control of the Soviet Embassy in Mexico City." The Embassy had briefed him on the Miami and Los Angeles plots. "As to the assassination in Dallas the subject stated that his only connection was to function as a watchdog for the Soviet Embassy and to inform them of exactly what was taking place and of what progress was being made on a day to day basis."
Nagell was able to "infiltrate the assassination plot" and he made a "tape recording of four voices in conversation concerning the plot..."
The tape was primarily in Spanish and that one of the four people was "Arcacha" and "another individual whom the subject would only identify as "Q"."
The tape is in safekeeping in a small trunk left with a friend.
"An arrangement was made between the subject and this friend that under no circumstances was this box or trunk or any of its contents to be released to any person whatsoever, other than the subject, unless the friend were to be approached by a person bearing a handwritten letter in the handwriting of the subject, which letter would have to be signed by the subject in a certain secret manner."
If anybody approached this friend "and attempted to obtain the box or any of its contents without first having obtained this letter signed in a secret manner, then, in that case, the friend has instructions to destroy anything and everything that had been left in his safekeeping by the subject."
The name, address and telephone number of the subject's friend "has been turned over to Mr. Garrison for use at his discretion."
Nagell indicated he was scheduled to be sent back to Leavenworth and that privileged communications would be easier and that he could then get the letter to Martin.
Martin then conferred with an attorney who agreed that if Nagell was transferred to Leavenworth, they would have no trouble getting the letter.
Martin's job was to get the letter to get the tape.
Right after Martin's visit, Nagell sent him a letter on April 13, 1967:
Here is the text of the letter:
Dear Mr. Martin,
Yesterday, I was advised by the Director of this institution that I am being recommended for transfer to either the U. S. Correctional Institute, Danbury, Connecticut, the U. S. Penitentiary, Lewisburg, Pennsylvania, or the U. S. Penitentiary at Leavenworth, Kansas, presumably in that order. Such recommendations will be forwarded to the Federal Bureau of Prisons, but, as I mentioned during your visit, final approval will likely rest with the Attorney General's office.
It is my understanding, however, that I shall be sent back to Leavenworth, quickly within the next two to four weeks, to await final disposition of my [ ].
Upon my return to Leavenworth, I think it would be wise to complete the legal arrangements we discussed, without delay; that is, providing they can be [ ] satisfactorily.
I am still anxious to know whether or not Mrs. Frederick is still living in Colorado and, if so, whether she can be [ ] at the address I gave you. .... Being a very important defense witness, potentially at least, I would suggest a maximum effort be instituted to confirm her whereabouts, discreetly of course, lest she get upset at any inquiry.
Richard C. Nagell
William Martin visited Nagell again on April 23, 1967. Here is his memo: (again, the salient points are below)
Here are the main points of the memo:
Martin obtained agreement from the prison for privileged communications with Nagell.
Martin visited with Nagell on April 23, 1967.
Nagell now said that the tape should show "conclusive proof of a plot to kill President Kennedy."
There are four voices on the tape, including Nagell, and he was acting as interpreter only at the meeting.
Names and places on the tape were cover names and "did not literally mean what they said." For instance, the name Raul is on the tape, but Raul is a cover name. "He also stated that there is a reference to San Juan, Puerto Rico on the tape but that this is a cover for name of Mexico City."
The people on the tape did not know they were being taped and he would have been shot if they found out.
At the beginning of the interview, Nagell said the tape recording was made on the 20th or 21st of August 1963. Later on, he said the dates were 26th, 27th, 28th and 29th of September of 1963. Of course, that is when Nagell was in jail in El Paso. "When I asked the subject about this apparent contradiction he stated that the September dates had pertained to something else and that he had not been thinking clearly of my question when he answered me."
Nagell told Martin that his friend would probably give him the tape recording even without an introduction letter.
Nagell said that shortly before the assassination, he had gone to Miami where he learned that two FBI agents were assigned to work with Cuban revolutionaries and that these agents were known as "THE TACOS." While in Miami he had come into possession of a 22-revolver equipped with a silencer and "that he had assumed that this weapon was going to be used in the assassination at close range." Nagell disposed of the weapon "but that he could retrieve it at any time."
Nagell asked if Martin was aware of a man in San Antonio who owned a 6.5mm Mannlicher-Carcano rifle. "The subject stated that this man had known Lee Harvey Oswald and had been seen with him on many occasions."
The interview completed and the next day Martin went to see Mr. Nicholas - who was responsible for arranging the privileged meeting with Nagell. Nicholas went through Nagell's file and found a pink sheet which was supposedly a form from the Secret Service about a threat to the President.
Nagell was just outside and heard the discussion and he told Martin he was upset that he had been friendly with Nicholas. Nagell stalked out of the meeting and told Nicholas to take him back.
Nagell then told the prison doctor that "he would not continue with his plans to have me represent him in any manner and for me to "just forget the whole thing.""
The physician told Martin that Nagell "had earlier suffered severe brain damage in an airplane accident and that he also suffered from acute paranoia. The physician stated that within a few days the subject might have an equally strong and opposite reaction to this one at our last meeting and might be anxious to see me again."
Martin then sent off this short memo to Jim Garrison:
Martin then wrote Nagell a letter:
Martin's letter was rejected by Nagell:
I'm not sure when Garrison sent this note to Martin:
Nagell sent this letter to Martin on May 19. 1967:
The text reads as follows:
I am in the process of preparing a petition for writ of habeas corpus, together with a rather lengthy supporting memorandum. When completed, they will filed in the U. S. District Court, Western District of Missouri, at Kansas City, or, if I am returned to Leavenworth beforehand, they will be filed in the U. S. District Court for the Eastern District of Kansas.
I shall send a copy by registered mail either to you personally, or to District Court Judge Bernard J. Bagert, with whom, I think, you are acquainted.
Necessarily, my petition will be complete; it will reference names of some persons you may wish to subpoena.
The reasons for my contemplated action stems from a belief that my involvement, which, as you perfectly know by now was deeper that I have admitted to your or my sister, is going to be made public eventually, anyway. In this request, I hope only that the authorities furnish adequate safeguards for my children.
I am informed today I shall be returned to Leavenworth on or about June 12, 1967.
Nagell sent this letter to Martin on May 24, 1967:
The text of the letter reads:
Dear Mr. Martin:
This is to advise that in my opinion I am being denied the lawful right, as a person awaiting outcome of appeal, from adequately preparing a Memorandum In Support of my petition for habeas corpus, and that I do not feel I can submit a proper petition without attaching a lengthy supporting memorandum to it.
Whether or not the administrative policy responsible for this situation is itself in violation of the law, is, of course, a matter for the court to decide. I can only point out that such policy has the effect of abrogating the right aforementioned and my right of privileged communications with the court. In the latter request I'm sure you can understand there are certain aspects of my case which I prefer not to become general knowledge around the institution, at best not yet, but which must seriously be raised to support my petition.
I would ask that you contact Mr. Nicholas, like you did before, and request authorization to visit me under the conditions arranged previously (I promise not to panic). Request that I be allowed to present my hand-written petition and supporting memorandum to you for your perusal and inspection, and that you be permitted to take them with you in order to have them typed up.
If Mr. Nicholas wishes to read them himself, that is alright with me as long as it is done in your presence. In fact, it might be a good idea to have them notarized.
I cannot emphasize enough how pertinent and vital this matter is to all concerned because in these documents I shall have listed facts that can be substantiated by interviews and official records, and, I shall be willing to testify under oath concerning anything cited or alleged therein.
If these arrangements cannot be made to your satisfaction, then I would suggest you ask the proper authorities to initiate court action on my behalf.
In either event, I shall appreciate an early advisement of your intentions, if any, to alleviate my punishment.
Also, I might advise that I have terminated correspondence with my sister because I don't want her to be dragged into this mess inadvertently. I'm certain you will understand why it had to be so.
Richard Nagell
The letter reads:
I don't know whether or not you are in receipt of my letters dated May 19 and May 24. I would ask that you inform Mr. Nicholas here and make arrangements to visit me as soon as possible. It is important that I speak to you before my departure for Leavenworth. I can assure you will find a visit at this time of [ ] concern to my case to our mutual benefit.
Martin wrote back on June 1, 1967:
On June 7, 1967, Nagell gave this letter to William Martin to give to Frederick H. John as a letter of introduction:
Dear Fred,
This will serve to introduce Mr. William R. Martin, an attorney, who is acting on my behalf. Please have him identify himself. I have advised him that our acquaintance is derived strictly out of friendship and that you know absolutely nothing about my past dealings and activities during the years 1962 - 1963. I have written you at least twice after being sent to Leavenworth, but never received an answer. Is everything O.K.? I hope you will keep confidence in me until I am some day in the position to tell you my side of the story, relative to the offence for which I have now been twice convicted and sentenced to the maximum penalty of ten years.
In the event you did not receive my last letter, and providing you still have possession of, or know the location of, my personal belongings, I would ask that you check them and give to Mr. Martin one of the small recording tapes which is labeled "Houston -- August 23, 1962" or "Houston -- August 27, 1962" or with similar phrases typed on the label. They are in a box (cigar box, I believe) beneath my films on Korea. If any of the tapes are unlabeled, then let him play the first part of this (if it is in Spanish) to ascertain which one is applicable.
Thereafter, I would ask that you immediately dispose of all tape recordings that were in my trunk on September 1963, and also destroy my passport, and all "embarrassing material." (I have also advised Mr. Martin that you do not know the contents of my documentation, photographs, films, tracts, pamphlets or the nature of any belongings you have ever kept for me at my request). Please keep the other things for me, the non-recording things, until I get out of this mess. Thank you.
(Please destroy this letter)
Dick -- Richard Nagell
Martin took the letter and found Mr. John:
Nagell then wrote Martin on June 30, 1967
I am in receipt of your letter dated June 20. Since the physical evidence referred therein is no longer available, for whatever cause, I see no purpose in continuing with the preparation of my case..
Martin replied on July 7, 1967
Nagell replied on July 13, 1967:
I am in receipt of your letter dated July 7. If I interpret your wordage correctly, it appears that you may have misconstrued my reply of June 30, and the reasons behind it. I did not mean to infer by the assessment I gave that I would not continue with the preparation of my case, nor did I mean to foster the impression that there is no additional physical evidence available to substantiate the more essential elements at stake in my case, let alone the fundamental issues involved.
Rather, my assessment pertained strictly to our attorney-client relationship and was based on the assumption that since the particular item of physical evidence was not available, your representation would automatically be terminated (despite the verbiage used in your letter to June 20). In this sense, permit me to remind you that during our last discussion at Springfield you clearly indicated your sole interest in my case was to obtain access to the aforementioned evidence.
Regarding such evidence, I might point out that in my letters dated March 10 and March 13 to my sister, both of which were shown to your associate, I emphasized that time was of the essence in transacting the business discussed therein. And, I feel that if the procedure outlined in my March 13 letter had been followed at the very beginning, the item referred would presently be in your custody ... for I can assure you that it did not disappear in 1964, nor was it the subject of a burglary by the opposition, notwithstanding what you were told (probably in good conscience) by the witness.
Now, there have been two pertinent and recent developments in my case which call for prompt action on my part, and this is the chief reason I am writing at this time!
First off, I have received notification from the Clerk, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, that the appeal composed by court-appointed counsel has been filed and should be heard during the fall session. I fully intend to block such appeal for cause that has been cited previously, namely, Mr. [ ] advisement last October that if my second conviction is reversed without my being remanded for a new trial, I shall probably be committed civilly to a mental institution, notwithstanding the facts of my mental status or the findings by the U.S. Medical Center for Federal Prisoners.
Secondly, I have received a letter from an attorney who claims he has been retained by Arthur Greenstein to aid me. As I am not yet in communication with Mr. Greenstein I've been unable to confirm this, but there exists no reason to doubt the authenticity of the letter.
Hence, in view of this development, I ask that you please forward my memorandum in support of petition for habeas corpus to Mr. Greenstein via postal registry; and also, that you send this correspondence relating to Senator Russell and Kennedy to my sister by registered mail.
I shall, of course, be obliged to pay for the inconvenience and any expenses incurred if you will send the bill to my sister. I believe that you are in possession of both her address and that of Mr. Greenstein.
In closing, let me say that I too regret the overall effort was not productive. Perhaps the situation will change in the near future. If it does, I shall certainly keep in mind what your have stated in the last paragraph of your most recent letter.
Would you be so kind as to acknowledge receipt of this letter.
Nagell then wrote another letter to Martin on July 16, 1967:
I am in receipt of a letter dated July 14 from my sister, Mrs. Eleanore G. Gambert, which advises that she has not received the carbon copies of my petition for habeas corpus or its supporting memorandum.
In my opinion this constitutes a flagrant breach of faith on your part as you know very well I would not have given you the original of the latter document unless you had promised to mail the carbon copies to her by registered mail . . . which you did promise at Springfield.
So I am going to tell you, quite frankly, if the aforesaid documents are not released to my sister immediately, I shall take whatever legal steps appear necessary to correct the situation. I am not the fool you probably think I am, and in this respect, I strongly urge that you don't underestimate my intentions if these documents are not given to her.
For your information, my sister can be reached at the Maple Lake Farm, Kenyon, Rhode Island, where she will be until July 29, after which she plans to return to Canada.
Martin then wrote Nagell's friend Arthur Greenstein:
Martin wrote Nagell on July 25, 1967:
Here is Martin's letter to Nagell's sister, dated July 25, 1967:
Nagell wrote Martin on July 30, 1967:
I have received your letter dated July 25, in which you first allude to a lack of good manners on my part and then proceed to ridicule the substance of one of my letters as "presumptuous nonsense."
Regarding the former, permit me to remind you of your promise to mail the carbon-copies of my petition and its supporting memorandum to my sister before you departed Springfield on June 7, and the fact that you failed to do so. As pertains to your reasons -- which are really quite academic -- for the ensuing month-and-a-half delay in mailing these documents, let me remind you of our accord that they would not be typed up since they were not to be filed in court. This, by itself, makes your explanation sound rather empty, to say the least.
Concerning the letter reference, that is, your pious declaration of my "presumptuous nonsense," - if you are indeed referring to the balance of the letter I wrote you on July 16, then I can but say I'm sure you would not have judged the legal steps I contemplated to be either presumptuous or nonsense, had they been initiated. However, if you are referring to the communication sent your associate, also dated July 16, then I would at this time offer an apology. For I have since been apprised of information which not only convinces me there was no valid basis for the conjecture cited therein, but also that you have never acted in an operational capacity with that particular company.
Still, it is unfortunate that you could not actually exercise the restraint to which you alluded in the closing paragraph of your letter, and appreciate that any individual might jump to an erroneous conclusion when he is restricted to a minimum of data and a maximum of suspicion in evaluating a given situation. I say "unfortunate", because had you displayed more tolerance in this matter, especially in view of your own shortcomings, I'm sure I would have eventually cooled off and seen to it that the physical evidence you sought at Los Angeles was delivered to your hands personally, possibly within a period of weeks. I would have done this to show that I too can be trusted to keep my part of a bargain, not that you have done so in all respects.
Finally, in terminating our business and knotty association, I am going to venture that the future will show you people need me much more then I need you; that D.F. and his friends were nothing but peripheral characters, always expendable; who didn't really know the scheme of things, and couldn't tell you anything even if they were around to do so, which they are not; and that while you people may have set sail in the right direction you are now (from what I hear) about 180 degrees off course . . . but then, that is how it was meant to be.
Thanks for nothing,
Interesting that Nagell says that "D.F. [David Ferrie} and his friends were nothing but peripheral characters, always expendable; who didn't really know the scheme of things ..." The Garrison investigation was "180 degrees off course," and only Nagell could right the ship.
Martin wrote Nagell on August 7, 1967:
Here is a letter from Nagell to Martin dated August 30, 1967:
If you recall, in my letter dated July 13, I asked that you send the correspondence related to Senator Russell and Kennedy to my sister. She received all but the original of Senator Russell's letter, to me, dated January 20, and I note by the applicable enclosure to your letter to July 25 that it was not included in the list of documents mailed to her.
Hence, I would again request that you send this particular item to her, at your earliest convenience. Thank you.
In answer to your letter, aforementioned, which I feel warranted a clear reply, first, let me say that if you had informed me that security considerations were partially responsible for the delay in mailing the carbon copies of the drafts of my petition and supporting memorandum, instead of the reason you did cite, such explanation would have been quite acceptable to me.
As for the communication sent your associate (?) which was forwarded through privileged channels (ostensibly, at least) it is of some concern to me that you were not apprised, in any manner, of this. I did not intend for it to be -- nor do I think it should have been - kept from your [ ]
It is of greater concern, however, that you are unaware of to whom I referred. The only cryptic part of my entire reference was the word "company" and I used the term as instructed with the assurance given that you would understand it.
Now, I wonder about what the recipient of that communication, and several others which were forwarded to the same source through the same "privileged" channels, explaining in further detail my relationship to the subject discussed at Springfield and knowing the identify and last known whereabouts of some of the gusanos involved.
I am utterly pissed off at what has, apparently, happened through what can best be called my own stupidity.
Anyway; as a result of the foregoing, and for other, somewhat more practical reasons, I want you to know that I am closely reserving any and all rights of privileged communications that you may consider as having been legally in effect at the time we had our discussion. This, of course, may appear unnecessary and even academic from your standpoint and position. Nonetheless, you have it in writing for whatever purpose, if any, the future may dictate.
Here is a letter that Martin sent Nagell on September 11, 1967:
On the same date, Martin sent a letter to Richard Popkin:
*******************************************************************************************************************************
Discussion of the above documents
I have to feel for William Martin. He did everything he could to get the supposed tape recording of the conspirators. He was walking a tightrope since the slightest comment could set off Nagell. In the end, there was no tape, and no tape has ever shown up.
Conspiracy theorists believe that Martin told Nagell he was a former employee of the CIA. Dick Russell claims that Nagell wrote his sister on June 12, 1967, that "one major cause of the recent setback in my dealing with Mr. Martin stems directly from his advisement that he is a former employee of the Central Intelligence Agency. He could have done no worse by telling me he was an ex-F.B.I. man. Regardless of his reasons for such advisement, I can only say it had the effect of making me extremely cautious and suspicious ... I intend to take whatever steps I deem appropriate to protect my interests in the matter at hand."
I can't tell if this is a real letter that Nagell sent at the time, or something put together at a later date. Russell then says that, according to "Nagell's later correspondence" Martin was "an officer of the CIA assigned in an operational capacity to the Latin American directorate and ... a past associate of Tracy Barnes [and] Desmond Fitzgerald ..."
Indeed, there are two references to the company in Nagell's letters to Martin. In the July 30, 1967 letter, Nagell writes:
"For I have since been apprised of information which not only convince me there were no valid basis for the conjecture cited therein, but also that you have never acted in an operational capacity with that particular company."
And, on August 30, 1967 Nagell writes:
"It is of greater concern, however, that you are unaware of to whom I referred. The only cryptic part of my entire reference was the word "company" and I used the term as instructed with the assurance given that you would understand it."
It sounds like Nagell is referring to the CIA. It certainly doesn't appear from his letters that this really bothers him. In fact, when Garrison and his investigators were discussing the breakdown in communications between Martin and Nagell in September of 1968, they did not mention the CIA.
Interestingly enough, William Martin did have a CIA connection. He was a domestic contact of the CIA in 1964 and 1965:
Conspiracy theorist James DiEugenio can't quite be sure if Martin is to blame for the failure to retrieve the supposed tape. He writes in Destiny Betrayed: (page 183)
"Garrison arranged to have one of the many volunteers that had flocked to his office interview Nagell. This was a lawyer named William Martin. This turned out to be one of the many errors Garrison made. For it later turned out that Martin was suspected of being one of several CIA plants in Garrison's office. And his practice was located at Shaw's International Trade Mart. Neither Nagell nor Garrison had suspicions about the man at the time of Martin's first interview with Nagell."
He then writes: (page 184)
"Due to the handling of certain other documents between the two, and their future filing, by July of 1967, Nagell became quite estranged from Martin, and terminated any further discussions with him."
So, what was really going on?
Richard Case Nagell wanted help on his appeal. He realized that Garrison could possibly help. But the only way to get that help was to entice them with something related to their case. It's interesting that Nagell was not only following Garrison's case but that he wanted Martin to tell him about their theories. That way he could make everything fit.
Martin did help Nagell. He forwarded documents and he had Nagell's writ of habeas corpus typed up. You can see some of this document here. Once Martin realized the tape was not going to materialize there was no further need to help Nagell. And Nagell knew he had nothing else to keep Martin helping him. Even so, Nagell kept on writing.
Many prisoners contacted Jim Garrison. Edward Whalen and Edward Girnus were two other prisoners who claimed they had important information. James Alcock, Garrison's second-in-command, went down to interview Whalen. After he returned to New Orleans, Whalen wrote him a letter saying, well, come back because I have more information. Alcock did not go back, although Garrison sent the Whalen 'lead' to the HSCA.
When Nagell died in 1995, the ARRB searched his belongings. There was no tape, and no documents relevant to the JFK assassination.
But no matter. The mythical tape lives on.
James DiEugenio, in his book, The Assassinations, uses the supposed tape to indict Sergio Arcacha Smith in the assassination.
The Martin-Nagell correspondence continued in 1968:
Martin replied:
William Martin developed a fondness for Richard Case Nagell.
Richard Case Nagell Blog Posts
A Wrap-Up of the Richard Case Nagell Story
The Importance of Richard Case Nagell to Some Conspiracy Theorists
Was Richard Case Nagell the "Most Important Witness There Is"?
Jim Garrison and a few conspiracy theorists think Nagell is a very important witness. But is he really?
Genesis of the Richard Case Nagell story
Did David Kroman Crack the JFK Assassination Conspiracy?
David Kroman met Richard Case Nagell at the Springfield Medical Center for Federal Prisoners. Stephen Jaffe, a Garrison volunteer, wrote a memo, relating Nagell's story through the eyes and ears of David Kroman.
Richard Case Nagell Shoots Up the State National Bank in El Paso...
Nagell was convicted of armed robbery and was sentenced to ten years, but his conviction was overturned because of startling new evidence.
Richard Case Nagell and the JFK Assassination
Did Richard Case Nagell Have Foreknowledge of Oswald and the JFK Assassination?
There is no credible evidence that Nagell had any foreknowledge of either Lee Harvey Oswald or the JFK assassination.
Did Richard Case Nagell Meet Lee Harvey Oswald?
Nagell claims he met Oswald in Japan, Texas, Mexico City, and New Orleans. There is no credible evidence that he ever met Oswald.
Did Richard Case Nagell Warn Fidel Castro about the Assassination?
Nagell went to Cuba and met with Fidel Castro and even played ping-pong with the man.
Insane Conspiracy Theories about Richard Case Nagell
Who was Leon Oswald?
Richard Case Nagell said that he knew the two Oswalds - Lee Harvey and Leon. Some conspiracy theorists believe this madness.
Richard Popkin Melds the Second Oswald Theory with the Richard Case Nagell Story
Combine one part crazy and one part ridiculous and what do you come up with? An early attempt at a unified conspiracy theory of the JFK assassination.
Two Smoking Guns of the Richard Case Nagell Story
Is this Document the Smoking Gun on the Richard Case Nagell Story?
Nagell sent conspiracy theorist Dick Russell one page of a military intelligence file which seemed to indicate that he was monitoring Oswald and his wife on behalf of the CIA. But does the whole document really show that?
Dick Russell's Second Smoking Gun on the Richard Case Nagell Story
Did Richard Case Nagell had an Oswald Military ID in his possession when he was arrested in September 1963?
Richard Case Nagell and Jim Garrison
Why Didn't Richard Case Nagell Testify at Clay Shaw's Trial?
Richard Case Nagell believes that he wasn't called to testify at Clay Shaw's trial because his testimony would have blown up Jim Garrison's case.
Jim Garrison Discusses Richard Case Nagell
At a conference in September 1968, Garrison and his investigators discuss his face-to-face meeting with Nagell in New York City.
William Martin, an Assistant District Attorney working for Jim Garrison, tried to retrieve a tape that Nagell said contained the voices of three JFK assassination conspirators.
Richard Popkin Writes Garrison About Richard Case Nagell
Richard Popkin, author of "The Second Oswald," writes Jim Garrison about Richard Case Nagell. Garrison staffer Tom Bethell thought the Nagell lead was useless.
Richard Case Nagell's Mental Health
Richard Case Nagell's Fight for a Disability Pension
Nagell won a full disability pension in 1982 and the 60+ page court case provides complete details on his mental problems.
Why Did Richard Case Nagell Shoot Up the First National Bank of El Paso?
Richard Case Nagell told a psychiatrist why he shot up the bank in El Paso in 1963.
Richard Case Nagell's Family Speaks about his Mental Health


"No one is more vulnerable than a breastfeeding infant and their parent to industry exploitation."
If a baby is allergic to milk, it's common sense to avoid milk. But what if parents mistakenly thought their baby was allergic? And worse, what if someone had convinced them that it was? This may sound farfetched, but may have been happening for years. Based on a new report, many parents could be unnecessarily avoiding milk products and breastfeeding due to the baby formula industry's inappropriate influence on how milk allergies are diagnosed.
In a paper published in The British Medical Journal on Wednesday, Chris van Tulleken, Ph.D., an honorary senior lecturer at University College London, wrote that children in the UK were diagnosed with cows' milk protein allergy at a nearly 500-percent higher rate in 2016 compared to 2006, and van Tulleken suggests that the baby formula industry is to blame for this skyrocketing rate of diagnoses, which often results in children being transitioned quickly to non-dairy formulas.
And while this increase translated to 700 percent higher spending on these products by the National Health Service, van Tulleken writes, there's no evidence that more children are actually developing this allergy. Research from 2007 and 2016 suggest that there was not been a significant rise in the prevalence of cows' milk protein allergy over that time period.
As van Tulleken reports, this overstatement doesn't appear to be an accident. Out of six different milk allergy guidelines published between 2007 and 2017, the vast majority of contributing authors were researchers or doctors who received funding from the infant formula industry. In two cases, the guidelines were actually funded by the manufacturers themselves.
According to the World Health Organization's International Code of Marketing of Breast-milk Substitutes, published in 1981, companies that make milk substitutes are not supposed to directly educate mothers, create conflicts of interest, or advertise through health systems. But based on the information van Tulleken presents, it seems that infant formula manufacturers are finding ways to exert a strong influence on how doctors diagnose and treat patients.
And the consequences of this trend aren't just the profits for baby formula companies. In a report published earlier in 2018 by Save the Children, researchers found that formula companies have been offering gifts to healthcare workers like doctors and midwives, a direct violation of the WHO Code. In the Philippines, van Tulleken writes, data suggest that 16,000 deaths each year can be linked to formula feeding.
To a significant degree, the industry's influence is enabled by the specific nature of cows' milk protein allergy. Whereas some cows' milk protein allergies are Immunoglobin E (IgE) mediated — like what we think of with peanut or bee sting allergies — others are less obvious and appear more as a food sensitivity. And since the only way to confirm a non-IgE cows' milk protein allergy is for a baby to completely switch to a substitute before re-testing their tolerance, the baby formula industry benefits from creating and sponsoring guidelines that are more generous in the use of milk substitutes. In the service of these guidelines, the industry overstates the importance of stopping breastfeeding during this process.
And while the industry's involvement in shaping healthcare policies may sound obviously detrimental to the health of children, the bias involved in conflicts of interest is often subtle. In the video above, for instance, Dr. Rosie Hague presented on how to diagnose and treat cows' milk allergy, and at the very beginning of her lecture, she discloses that she receives funding from the industry.
"I hope that that doesn't influence anything that I say, but you should know that," she said. And while it's possible that funding sources don't influence how doctors treat patients, the truth is that they often do — whether it's subtly, as in tobacco industry-sponsored research finding fruity vape flavors are a problem, or explicitly, as in the case of pharmaceutical company INSYS Therapeutics paying doctors to overprescribe fentanyl.
Moving forward, van Tulleken hopes to get the WHO Code "enshrined in law" to prevent the kind of industry influence that has pervaded, as well as making conflict of interest declarations mandatory for doctors.


text:
Q: Can a JSP with JSTL tags be included in a ZK (zul) page? My front-end stack is Spring MVC + ZK + JSP
I have a jsp that has some legacy code and I need to include it within my ZUL page. The jsp has some JSTL tags  and . I have tried a few approaches but haven't got the jsp page to render correctly.
My question is, Can this approach be achieved? I have seen the same question asked a few times in the ZK forum with vague answers.
If this approach is possible, please help me with a working example and the configuration settings that I would need in the applicationContext.xml
Many Thanks, John

A: tomyeh (founder of zk) says here :
"ZK doesn't take JSP directive. To use JSP with ZK, you have to use ZK as filter to post-process JSP's output. "
Common approach is using zk tags in jsp page. ZK JSP tags should do this trick.
Please refer :
http://books.zkoss.org/wiki/ZK_Developer%27s_Reference/Performance_Tips/Use_ZK_JSP_Tags_instead_of_ZK_Filter
http://books.zkoss.org/wiki/ZK_Developer%27s_Reference/Integration/Presentation_Layer/JSP
http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/ZK/How-Tos/Integrate-Other-Frameworks#Struts_.2B_Tiles_.2B_JSP_.28.2B_Spring.29
http://www.packtpub.com/article/integrating-zk-with-other-frameworks

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


Where to stay near Shawnee State Park?
Our 2019 accommodation listings offer a large selection of 31 holiday rentals near Shawnee State Park. From 13 Houses to 5 Condos/Apartments, find unique holiday homes for you to enjoy a memorable holiday or a weekend with your family and friends. The best place to stay near Shawnee State Park is on HomeAway.
Can I rent Houses near Shawnee State Park?
Can I find a holiday accommodation with pool near Shawnee State Park?
Yes, you can select your prefered holiday accommodation with pool among our 11 holiday rentals with pool available near Shawnee State Park. Please use our search bar to access the selection of rentals available.
Can I book a holiday accommodation directly online or instantly near Shawnee State Park?
Yes, HomeAway offers a selection of 31 holiday homes to book directly online and 11 with instant booking available near Shawnee State Park. Don't wait, have a look at our holiday houses via our search bar and be ready for your next trip near Shawnee State Park!


Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT) is an advanced type of external beam radiation—a treatment option that uses high-energy rays to cure cancer .
A tumor is a complex, three-dimensional object. IMRT conforms to the shape of a tumor, and has the ability to allow your doctors to safely deliver a higher dose of radiation to the tumor. For several types of cancer, that means a higher cure rate.
Along with IMRT, your radiation oncologists may use Image-Guided Radiation Therapy (IGRT) to ensure that the radiation is precisely on target for each of your sessions.
At Cancer Care of Western New York, we treat more patients with IMRT and IGRT on a daily basis than many large university centers and cancer centers.


text:
Time Capsule October 2003
By Katharine Graham Premium
Sensitive subjects were rarely mentioned Sat our house, but three were particularly taboo — money, my father's being Jewish and sex. None of the three was ever articulated by any of us in the family; in fact, nothing difficult or personal was discussed among us. There was such an aversion to talking about money or our wealth that, ironically, there was, in some odd ways, a fairly spartan quality to our lives. We were not showered with conspicuous possessions, elaborate toys or clothes. At one point, when my sister Florence was 11, my mother wrote in her diary that she had gotten Flo very modest presents for her birthday — "books, pralines and other simple things." Though Mother felt that she had been a bit mean, she also felt that "it is the best way to continue their chance for happiness to restrain the desire for possessions."
Remarkably, the fact that we were half Jewish was never mentioned any more than money was discussed. I was totally — incredibly — unaware of anti-Semitism, let alone of my father's being Jewish. I don't think this was deliberate; I am sure my parents were not denying or hiding my father's Jewishness from us, nor were they ashamed of it. But there was enough sensitivity so that it was never explained or taken pride in. Indeed, we had a pew in St. John's Episcopal Church — the president's church, on Lafayette Square — but mainly because the rector was a friend of the family. When I was about 10, all of us Meyer children were baptized at home to satisfy my devout Lutheran maternal grandmother, who thought that without such a precaution we were all headed for hell. But for the most part, religion was not part of our lives.
One of the few memories I have of any reference to my being Jewish is of an incident that took place when I was 10 or 11. At school, we were casting for reading aloud The Merchant of Venice, and one classmate suggested that I should be Shylock because I was Jewish. In the same way I had once innocently asked my mother whether we were millionaires — after someone at school accused my father of being one — I asked if I was Jewish and what that meant. She must have avoided the subject, because I don't remember the answer. This confusion about religion was not limited to me: My sister Bis recalls that at lunch in our apartment in New York once, with guests present, she blurted out, "Say, who is this guy Jesus everyone is talking about?"
My identity as Jewish did not become an issue until I reached college and a discussion arose with a girl from Chicago who was leaving Vassar. She had been asked if she would see another acquaintance, a Jewish girl, also from Chicago. "Oh, no," she replied, "you can't have a Jew in your house in Chicago." My best friend, Connie Dimock, later told me how horrified she was to have this said in front of me. Only then did I "get it" — and this was 1935, with Hitler already a factor in; the world.
From Personal History by KATHARINE GRAHAM, copyright © 1997 by Katharine Graham. Used by permission of Alfred A. Knopf, a division of Random House Inc.
From the October 2003 issue of Family Tree Magazine.
Katharine Graham


We are a Christ-centered community built on Gospel values, and we empower all to lead faith-filled lives. Although St. Peter the Apostle is a Catholic school, we embrace and honor the families of all faiths in our community, for their very presence enriches us all.
The Rosary Club: All students are welcome to join in the Rosary Club on Wednesdays after school from 3:15 to 3:45 in the daily chapel. Regular praying of the rosary is encouraged as a means of enhancing devotion to Our Blessed Mother, Mary.
EDGE is a Catholic middle school youth ministry experience created for early adolescents in grades 6-8. EDGE is designed to meet the educational, spiritual, emotional, and social needs of young adolescents. Kids are always welcomed and encouraged to bring their friends! Check the St. Peter's Church Bulletin or our website calendar for meeting dates and times. Please contact the parish office at 912-897-5156 for any questions relating to EDGE!


The Confederation of British Industry (CBI) has responded to Chancellor Philip Hammond's Autumn Budget statement, which was delivered in the House of Commons over 72 minutes on the afternoon of Monday 29 October. According to the Chancellor, the era of austerity is "finally coming to an end". The 2018 growth forecast was downgraded to 1.3% from 1.5% in March due to the impact of bad Spring weather, but the forecast for 2019 is raised from 1.3% to 1.6% and annual forecasts upgraded to 1.4%, 1.4%, 1.5% and 1.6% in 2020, 2021, 2022 and 2023.
Public borrowing in 2018 is set to be £11.6 billion lower than forecast in March, representing 1.2% of GDP (ie the total value of goods produced and services provided). Borrowing as a share of GDP is to rise to 1.4% next year.
Overall, borrowing will total £31.8 billion, £26.7 billion. £23.8 billion, £20.8 billion and £19.8 billion in the next five years. Debt as a share of GDP peaked at 85.2% in 2016-2017, falling to 83.7% this year. It's forecast to drop to 74.1% by 2023-2024. 1.2% annual average growth in departmental spending is promised.
When it comes to the business landscape, there will be a new 2% digital services tax on the UK revenues of big technology companies from April 2020. Profitable companies with global sales of more than £500 million will be liable.
PFI contracts are to be abolished in the future, with a new Centre of Excellence established to manage existing deals "in the taxpayer's interest". The annual investment allowance is to be increased from £200,000 to £1 million for two years.
Interestingly, the contribution of smaller companies to the Apprenticeship Levy is to be reduced from 10% to 5%. Business rates bills for those firms with a rateable value of £51,000 or less will be cut by one third over two years. There will also be £900 million in business rates relief for smaller businesses and £650 million to "rejuvenate" our High Streets.
The Government is to extend changes to the way in which self-employment status is taxed, from the public sector to medium and large private companies, from 2020.


Not many people can say that they truly do what they love for a living, but we can! However, it needed a lot of practice and hard work to get to where we are. We take what we do very seriously, and we have lots of fun while we're doing it!
Our mission here at Mindful Pilates is to pass on the art of Pilates to as many people as possible. The best way to do this is to foster good instructors. This, along with giving something back to the community, is the main goal for recruiting new passionate team members. We are therefore always on the lookout for enthusiastic, hardworking and sociable Hong Kong residents who would like to work on building a career studying and spreading the beautiful legacy of Joseph Pilates!
The current part time position is open to Hong Kong residents, male or female, who are at least 21 years old and have a genuine love and passion for working on themselves and helping others in the process.
We look forward to meeting you and training with you!
Mindful movements help to clear your mind of racing thoughts and find a sense of peace in your own form.
Sign up for our monthly newsletters emailed straight to your inbox. Find out whats been happening lately at Mindful Pilates, read insight from our instructors and perfect your training techniques!
Congratulations! You've successfully subscribed to our newsletter.
Enjoy a trial discount offer!
Thanks for getting in touch with us! We'll get back to you as soon as we see this.
Or send us a message and we'll contact you.