Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old January 25th 09, 12:43 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 14,870
Default Phil Innes tells the New York Times that he is a "chess journalist"

For a hoot, take a look at the New York Times Gambit Blog.

http://gambit.blogs.nytimes.com/2009...als-lingers-on

January 23, 2009 8:52 am

"Its interesting to note you did not publish my message yesterday -
but I can publish it, since I am a chess journalist. And I can note
that NY Times declined. Phil Innes
— Phil Innes"
  #2   Report Post  
Old January 25th 09, 01:02 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 14,870
Default Phil Innes tells the New York Times that he is a "chessjournalist"

On Jan 25, 7:43*am, samsloan wrote:
For a hoot, take a look at the New York Times Gambit Blog.

http://gambit.blogs.nytimes.com/2009...ainst-chess-of...

January 23, 2009 8:52 am

"Its interesting to note you did not publish my message yesterday -
but I can publish it, since I am a chess journalist. And I can note
that NY Times declined. Phil Innes
— Phil Innes"


None of the posters are active tournament chess players, but all of
them post a tremendous amount on the Internet.

Phil Innes calls himself a “chess journalist” but the only place he
has ever been published is on his own Blog.

Then, there is Rob the Robber who claims that “legal documents
clearing two of the defendants of wrong doing have been publicly
posted”, but actually, the documents to which he is referring prove
that his clients are guilty. They were filed in Springfield, Illinois
in the case USCF v. Polgar and Truong, Case No. 2008MR000751 and can
be downloaded from the Internet.

Sam Sloan
  #3   Report Post  
Old January 25th 09, 01:50 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,073
Default Phil Innes tells the New York Times that he is a "chessjournalist"

On Jan 25, 7:43*am, samsloan wrote:
For a hoot, take a look at the New York Times Gambit Blog.

http://gambit.blogs.nytimes.com/2009...ainst-chess-of...

January 23, 2009 8:52 am

"Its interesting to note you did not publish my message yesterday -
but I can publish it, since I am a chess journalist. And I can note
that NY Times declined. Phil Innes
— Phil Innes"


The "chess journalist" - ah, self-described! - felt the need to
respond to his own comments. How long until he screams! "I'm not your
boy" at himself again?
  #4   Report Post  
Old January 25th 09, 02:03 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Dec 2008
Posts: 879
Default Phil Innes tells the New York Times that he is a "chessjournalist"

On Jan 25, 8:02*am, samsloan wrote:
On Jan 25, 7:43*am, samsloan wrote:

For a hoot, take a look at the New York Times Gambit Blog.


http://gambit.blogs.nytimes.com/2009...ainst-chess-of...


January 23, 2009 8:52 am


"Its interesting to note you did not publish my message yesterday -
but I can publish it, since I am a chess journalist. And I can note
that NY Times declined. Phil Innes
— Phil Innes"


None of the posters are active tournament chess players, but all of
them post a tremendous amount on the Internet.

Phil Innes calls himself a “chess journalist” but the only place he
has ever been published is on his own Blog.


This is a very illustrative post by Sam Sloan, and why I personally
could never vote for him under any circumstances:

a) the material NY TImes Blog refuses to publish is a letter with URL
showing doctored document accusations

b) I don't have a blog

c) the chess site I write for has 60,000 readers/month which is #1
weekly US site

In just a few sentences we get Sloan smearing and obscuring each
aspect of a simple issue.

Then, there is Rob the Robber who claims that “legal documents


And in a few more sentences this rather insistent defamation.

clearing two of the defendants of wrong doing have been publicly
posted”, but actually, the documents to which he is referring prove
that his clients are guilty. They were filed in Springfield, Illinois
in the case USCF v. Polgar and Truong, Case No. 2008MR000751 and can



The documents I looked at are NOT the same as whatever the Sloan
cites.

What a character!

Phil Innes


Sam Sloan


  #5   Report Post  
Old January 25th 09, 02:48 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,073
Default Phil Innes tells the New York Times that he is a "chessjournalist"

On Jan 25, 9:03*am, wrote:
On Jan 25, 8:02*am, samsloan wrote:



On Jan 25, 7:43*am, samsloan wrote:


For a hoot, take a look at the New York Times Gambit Blog.


http://gambit.blogs.nytimes.com/2009...ainst-chess-of....


January 23, 2009 8:52 am


"Its interesting to note you did not publish my message yesterday -
but I can publish it, since I am a chess journalist. And I can note
that NY Times declined. Phil Innes
— Phil Innes"


None of the posters are active tournament chess players, but all of
them post a tremendous amount on the Internet.


Phil Innes calls himself a “chess journalist” but the only place he
has ever been published is on his own Blog.


This is a very illustrative post by Sam Sloan, and why I personally
could never vote for him under any circumstances:

a) the material NY TImes Blog refuses to publish is a letter with URL
showing doctored document accusations


Please post the URL.

b) I don't have a blog


Alekhine's Parrot has Innes-scat all over it.

c) the chess site I write for has 60,000 readers/month which is #1
weekly US site


"weakly", aka the "feeble Chessvile"

In just a few sentences we get Sloan smearing and obscuring each
aspect of a simple issue.

Then, there is Rob the Robber who claims that “legal documents


And in a few more sentences this rather insistent defamation.

clearing two of the defendants of wrong doing have been publicly
posted”, but actually, the documents to which he is referring prove
that his clients are guilty. They were filed in Springfield, Illinois
in the case USCF v. Polgar and Truong, Case No. 2008MR000751 and can


The documents I looked at are NOT the same as whatever the Sloan
cites.


When will these documents be shown to the world?


  #6   Report Post  
Old January 25th 09, 03:10 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Dec 2008
Posts: 879
Default Phil Innes tells the New York Times that he is a "chessjournalist"

On Jan 25, 9:48*am, The Historian wrote:
On Jan 25, 9:03*am, wrote:



On Jan 25, 8:02*am, samsloan wrote:


On Jan 25, 7:43*am, samsloan wrote:


For a hoot, take a look at the New York Times Gambit Blog.


http://gambit.blogs.nytimes.com/2009...ainst-chess-of...


January 23, 2009 8:52 am


"Its interesting to note you did not publish my message yesterday -
but I can publish it, since I am a chess journalist. And I can note
that NY Times declined. Phil Innes
— Phil Innes"


None of the posters are active tournament chess players, but all of
them post a tremendous amount on the Internet.


Phil Innes calls himself a “chess journalist” but the only place he
has ever been published is on his own Blog.


This is a very illustrative post by Sam Sloan, and why I personally
could never vote for him under any circumstances:


a) the material NY TImes Blog refuses to publish is a letter with URL
showing doctored document accusations


Please post the URL.


I already published it in my column - and I understand it is now on
view elsewhere. I wonder if Neil Brennan is bright enough to figure it
out himself?

b) I don't have a blog


Alekhine's Parrot has Innes-scat all over it.


How charming! Gratuitous nonsense, but what has Brennan ever written
that is not plain envy, either about chess or chess wring.

c) the chess site I write for has 60,000 readers/month which is #1
weekly US site


"weakly", aka the "feeble Chessvile"


And here is why the group of enthusiasts should NOT be allowed to
prosecute serious things in public. Its because they are either stupid
or liars.

No one can make anyone read Chessville - here Brennen characterises
the thing people most read as 'feeble'.

So what is that, stupid or untrue?

In just a few sentences we get Sloan smearing and obscuring each
aspect of a simple issue.


Then, there is Rob the Robber who claims that “legal documents


And in a few more sentences this rather insistent defamation.


clearing two of the defendants of wrong doing have been publicly
posted”, but actually, the documents to which he is referring prove
that his clients are guilty. They were filed in Springfield, Illinois
in the case USCF v. Polgar and Truong, Case No. 2008MR000751 and can


The documents I looked at are NOT the same as whatever the Sloan
cites.


When will these documents be shown to the world?


I would say about a week ago. Of course, if you has any intelligence,
interest in the matter or journalistic skill you would have found them
by now - but since you are as you appear, you must perforce get your
information from those of us who are 'feeble'.

Phil Innes

  #7   Report Post  
Old January 25th 09, 04:31 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,073
Default Phil Innes tells the New York Times that he is a "chessjournalist"

On Jan 25, 10:10*am, wrote:
On Jan 25, 9:48*am, The Historian wrote:



On Jan 25, 9:03*am, wrote:


On Jan 25, 8:02*am, samsloan wrote:


On Jan 25, 7:43*am, samsloan wrote:


For a hoot, take a look at the New York Times Gambit Blog.


http://gambit.blogs.nytimes.com/2009...ainst-chess-of...


January 23, 2009 8:52 am


"Its interesting to note you did not publish my message yesterday -
but I can publish it, since I am a chess journalist. And I can note
that NY Times declined. Phil Innes
— Phil Innes"


None of the posters are active tournament chess players, but all of
them post a tremendous amount on the Internet.


Phil Innes calls himself a “chess journalist” but the only place he
has ever been published is on his own Blog.


This is a very illustrative post by Sam Sloan, and why I personally
could never vote for him under any circumstances:


a) the material NY TImes Blog refuses to publish is a letter with URL
showing doctored document accusations


Please post the URL.


I already published it in my column - and I understand it is now on
view elsewhere. I wonder if Neil Brennan is bright enough to figure it
out himself?

b) I don't have a blog


Alekhine's Parrot has Innes-scat all over it.


How charming! Gratuitous nonsense, but what has Brennan ever written
that is not plain envy, either about chess or chess wring.

c) the chess site I write for has 60,000 readers/month which is #1
weekly US site


"weakly", aka the "feeble Chessvile"


And here is why the group of enthusiasts should NOT be allowed to
prosecute serious things in public. Its because they are either stupid
or liars.

No one can make anyone read Chessville - here Brennen characterises
the thing people most read as 'feeble'.

So what is that, stupid or untrue?



In just a few sentences we get Sloan smearing and obscuring each
aspect of a simple issue.


Then, there is Rob the Robber who claims that “legal documents


And in a few more sentences this rather insistent defamation.


clearing two of the defendants of wrong doing have been publicly
posted”, but actually, the documents to which he is referring prove
that his clients are guilty. They were filed in Springfield, Illinois
in the case USCF v. Polgar and Truong, Case No. 2008MR000751 and can


The documents I looked at are NOT the same as whatever the Sloan
cites.


When will these documents be shown to the world?


I would say about a week ago. Of course, if you has any intelligence,
interest in the matter or journalistic skill you would have found them
by now - but since you are as you appear, you must perforce get your
information from those of us who are 'feeble'.

Phil Innes


My apologies to Phil Innes and the website which publishes his
'journalism' (and which he is Business Manager for), Chessville. I'd
read his posting above and thought he meant he'd have a link to "legal
documents clearing two of the defendants" instead of additional hot-
air from the Trolgar couple. I should have realized it was the latter
that Mr. Innes was offering yet again. I'll try to avoid assuming Mr.
Innes has any journalistic credibility - or, indeed, any credibility
at all - in the future.
  #8   Report Post  
Old January 25th 09, 08:01 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,248
Default Phil Innes tells the New York Times that he is a "chessjournalist"

On Jan 25, 11:31*am, The Historian
wrote:
On Jan 25, 10:10*am, wrote:





On Jan 25, 9:48*am, The Historian wrote:


On Jan 25, 9:03*am, wrote:


On Jan 25, 8:02*am, samsloan wrote:


On Jan 25, 7:43*am, samsloan wrote:


For a hoot, take a look at the New York Times Gambit Blog.


http://gambit.blogs.nytimes.com/2009...ainst-chess-of...


January 23, 2009 8:52 am


"Its interesting to note you did not publish my message yesterday -
but I can publish it, since I am a chess journalist. And I can note
that NY Times declined. Phil Innes
— Phil Innes"


None of the posters are active tournament chess players, but all of
them post a tremendous amount on the Internet.


Phil Innes calls himself a “chess journalist” but the only place he
has ever been published is on his own Blog.


This is a very illustrative post by Sam Sloan, and why I personally
could never vote for him under any circumstances:


a) the material NY TImes Blog refuses to publish is a letter with URL
showing doctored document accusations


Please post the URL.


I already published it in my column - and I understand it is now on
view elsewhere. I wonder if Neil Brennan is bright enough to figure it
out himself?


b) I don't have a blog


Alekhine's Parrot has Innes-scat all over it.


How charming! Gratuitous nonsense, but what has Brennan ever written
that is not plain envy, either about chess or chess wring.


c) the chess site I write for has 60,000 readers/month which is #1
weekly US site


"weakly", aka the "feeble Chessvile"


And here is why the group of enthusiasts should NOT be allowed to
prosecute serious things in public. Its because they are either stupid
or liars.


No one can make anyone read Chessville - here Brennen characterises
the thing people most read as 'feeble'.


So what is that, stupid or untrue?


In just a few sentences we get Sloan smearing and obscuring each
aspect of a simple issue.


Then, there is Rob the Robber who claims that “legal documents


And in a few more sentences this rather insistent defamation.


clearing two of the defendants of wrong doing have been publicly
posted”, but actually, the documents to which he is referring prove
that his clients are guilty. They were filed in Springfield, Illinois
in the case USCF v. Polgar and Truong, Case No. 2008MR000751 and can


The documents I looked at are NOT the same as whatever the Sloan
cites.


When will these documents be shown to the world?


I would say about a week ago. Of course, if you has any intelligence,
interest in the matter or journalistic skill you would have found them
by now - but since you are as you appear, you must perforce get your
information from those of us who are 'feeble'.


Phil Innes


My apologies to Phil Innes and the website which publishes his
'journalism' (and which he is Business Manager for), Chessville. I'd
read his posting above and thought he meant he'd have a link to "legal
documents clearing two of the defendants" instead of additional hot-
air from the Trolgar couple. I should have realized it was the latter
that Mr. Innes was offering yet again. I'll try to avoid assuming Mr.
Innes has any journalistic credibility - or, indeed, any credibility
at all - in the future.


Andy Soltis once told me about a dream he had. He dreamed he had
died, and was before the Pearly Gates. St. Peter met him, and said
"Before we can let you into heaven, we have to know who you are."
"I'm Andy Soltis." This was met with blank incomprehension. "I'm
Andy Soltis," he repeated. "I was a chess grandmaster, a well-known
chess journalist, and author of many books."
St. Peter sadly shook his head. "I'm sorry, we don't allow chess
journalists in heaven. You'll have to leave."
Disappointed, Soltis asked if he could at least have a look around
before going. St. Peter agreed. And looking around, whom should Soltis
see but our Phil. Rushing back to St. Peter, Soltis said "Look!
There's Phil Innes. He's a chess journalist, and yet you let him in
here!"
St. Peter shook his head with a rueful smile. Lowering his voice, he
said to Andy "He only _thinks_ he's a chess journalist."

OK, the above is actually a twist on an old story Alekhine
supposedly told about himself and Bogolyubov, which I read in a 1948
Chess Review. But you get the idea.

  #9   Report Post  
Old January 25th 09, 09:12 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Dec 2008
Posts: 879
Default Phil Innes tells the New York Times that he is a "chessjournalist"

On Jan 25, 3:01*pm, wrote:
On Jan 25, 11:31*am, The Historian
wrote:



On Jan 25, 10:10*am, wrote:


On Jan 25, 9:48*am, The Historian wrote:


On Jan 25, 9:03*am, wrote:


On Jan 25, 8:02*am, samsloan wrote:


On Jan 25, 7:43*am, samsloan wrote:


For a hoot, take a look at the New York Times Gambit Blog.


http://gambit.blogs.nytimes.com/2009...ainst-chess-of...


January 23, 2009 8:52 am


"Its interesting to note you did not publish my message yesterday -
but I can publish it, since I am a chess journalist. And I can note
that NY Times declined. Phil Innes
— Phil Innes"


None of the posters are active tournament chess players, but all of
them post a tremendous amount on the Internet.


Phil Innes calls himself a “chess journalist” but the only place he
has ever been published is on his own Blog.


This is a very illustrative post by Sam Sloan, and why I personally
could never vote for him under any circumstances:


a) the material NY TImes Blog refuses to publish is a letter with URL
showing doctored document accusations


Please post the URL.


I already published it in my column - and I understand it is now on
view elsewhere. I wonder if Neil Brennan is bright enough to figure it
out himself?


b) I don't have a blog


Alekhine's Parrot has Innes-scat all over it.


How charming! Gratuitous nonsense, but what has Brennan ever written
that is not plain envy, either about chess or chess wring.


c) the chess site I write for has 60,000 readers/month which is #1
weekly US site


"weakly", aka the "feeble Chessvile"


And here is why the group of enthusiasts should NOT be allowed to
prosecute serious things in public. Its because they are either stupid
or liars.


No one can make anyone read Chessville - here Brennen characterises
the thing people most read as 'feeble'.


So what is that, stupid or untrue?


In just a few sentences we get Sloan smearing and obscuring each
aspect of a simple issue.


Then, there is Rob the Robber who claims that “legal documents


And in a few more sentences this rather insistent defamation.


clearing two of the defendants of wrong doing have been publicly
posted”, but actually, the documents to which he is referring prove
that his clients are guilty. They were filed in Springfield, Illinois
in the case USCF v. Polgar and Truong, Case No. 2008MR000751 and can


The documents I looked at are NOT the same as whatever the Sloan
cites.


When will these documents be shown to the world?


I would say about a week ago. Of course, if you has any intelligence,
interest in the matter or journalistic skill you would have found them
by now - but since you are as you appear, you must perforce get your
information from those of us who are 'feeble'.


Phil Innes


My apologies to Phil Innes and the website which publishes his
'journalism' (and which he is Business Manager for), Chessville. I'd
read his posting above and thought he meant he'd have a link to "legal
documents clearing two of the defendants" instead of additional hot-
air from the Trolgar couple. I should have realized it was the latter
that Mr. Innes was offering yet again. I'll try to avoid assuming Mr.
Innes has any journalistic credibility - or, indeed, any credibility
at all - in the future.


* Andy Soltis once told me about a dream he had. He dreamed he had


Let us look instead in what is before us, rather than these phantasms
of such as Taylor Kingston based upon the base liar Brennen's
testimony - brennen is so stupid that he insults the source he applies
to for information - then does the Kingston trick of dissing what he
asked for.

There is not any attention paid to

a) why NY TImes should suppress my message about fair reporting

b) not to notice that my message regarding fairness is suppressed at
all

c) why those who say they investigate here, only are as Spinrad does,
he 'feels' he says - while he, like 'transparency' Board Candidate
Brain Laugherty answers nothing about himself )

d) that half a dozen twerps should seek to dominate the last place
they can say anything at all - being barred everywhere else

- and seek to actively hector and repress those who have other opinion

e) last of all, which is last indeed, is the Sloan, that hapless
distorting climber who couldn't tell anyone the time straight.

You have all had your word, and now I think it is time that people had
words with you.

Since you have liked to repress and intimidate others, how awful it
must be for you to discover that your opinions were not free at all!
And that responsibility was required.



died, and was before the Pearly Gates. St. Peter met him, and said
"Before we can let you into heaven, we have to know who you are."
* "I'm Andy Soltis." This was met with blank incomprehension. "I'm
Andy Soltis," he repeated. "I was a chess grandmaster, a well-known
chess journalist, and author of many books."
* St. Peter sadly shook his head. "I'm sorry, we don't allow chess
journalists in heaven. You'll have to leave."
* Disappointed, Soltis asked if he could at least have a look around
before going. St. Peter agreed. And looking around, whom should Soltis
see but our Phil. Rushing back to St. Peter, Soltis said "Look!
There's Phil Innes. He's a chess journalist, and yet you let him in
here!"
* St. Peter shook his head with a rueful smile. Lowering his voice, he
said to Andy "He only _thinks_ he's a chess journalist."


Taylor Kingston knowingly repressed any question about jew-beating in
Russia. He asked me about it, and I told him his KGB interviewee would
not, in the opinion of 2 Russian soruces, tell the truth.

In the event Taylor Kingston did not raise the issue in his interview.

Taylor Kingston also dares not contradict me about how he behaved,
since I have the server records about this issue, and several others.

Taylor Kingston will respond on the record, or he will be vague.

Phil innes

* OK, the above is actually a twist on an old story Alekhine
supposedly told about himself and Bogolyubov, which I read in a 1948
Chess Review. But you get the idea.


  #10   Report Post  
Old January 25th 09, 10:13 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,248
Default Phil Innes tells the New York Times that he is a "chessjournalist"

On Jan 25, 4:12*pm, wrote:

Let us look instead in what is before us, rather than these phantasms
of such as Taylor Kingston based upon the base liar Brennen's
testimony -


I based nothing here on Brennen, Phil. My source for the joke was
I.A. Horowitz. Chess Review, September 1948, page 8, to be exact.

There is not any attention paid to

a) why NY TImes should suppress my message about fair reporting

b) not to notice that my message regarding fairness is suppressed at
all


That's right, Phil. I'm not interested in those matters. My point
was to puncture your pretensions of being a "chess journalist." A good
journalist seeks impartial, factual truth. That's never been your
strong suit.

Taylor Kingston knowingly repressed any question about jew-beating in
Russia.


Taking that brown acid again, huh, Phil? Or by now I guess you can
hallucinate freely without it.

He asked me about it, and I told him his KGB interviewee would
not, in the opinion of 2 Russian soruces, tell the truth.

In the event Taylor Kingston did not raise the issue in his interview.

Taylor Kingston also dares not contradict me about how he behaved,
since I have the server records about this issue, and several others.


Sheesh, Phil, whenever your pomposity is punctured you trot out this
old dead horse to flog, like it was the missing Nixon Watergate tape.
I interviewed Yuri Averbakh back in July 2002:

http://www.chesscafe.com/text/skittles181.pdf
http://www.chesscafe.com/text/skittles183.pdf

I recall very little, if any, of any correspondence you and I may
have had immediately prior to it. There could not have been much,
because Hanon Russell gave me very little advance notice when he asked
me to do the interview.
Now, if you have saved some e-mail you wrote to me about it, and
you're just bursting to reveal it to the world, feel free.

Taylor Kingston will respond on the record, or he will be vague. *


Phil, one of the best talents a man can develop is the ability to
laugh at himself. Many of us here laugh at you often. Why not join in
the fun?
Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Channing and Goichberg will ban Sam Sloan from the USCF forum [email protected] rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) 16 May 6th 07 10:06 AM
Channing and Goichberg will ban Sam Sloan from the USCF forum [email protected] rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 16 May 6th 07 10:06 AM
The Kingston Files Chess One rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) 151 November 12th 06 10:31 PM
The Kingston Files Chess One rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 147 November 12th 06 10:31 PM
Parr challenges Blair [email protected] rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) 201 January 3rd 06 01:19 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:15 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2019 ChessBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Chess"

 

Copyright © 2017