Science and Technology news... :: View topic

Matt Giwer · Guest

Kendall K Down wrote:
[quote]In message <48f7d42e$0$13072$9a6e19ea@unlimited.newshosting.com
Matt Giwer <jull43@tampabay.REMover.rr.com> wrote:
Very true - but Matt the Pratt has never yet told the truth.

That the Old Testament is all myth is a fact. The miracles should
have been your first hint.

That Matt the Pratt doesn>t know his myth from his elbow is a fact.
[/quote]
That you are still childish enough to believe in miracles is your problem.

[quote]Until there are peer reviewed, professional publications on this find it is
not science.

Try doing some research, Matt the Pratt - and this time include
peer-reviewed professional publications, instead of basing everything
on newspaper articles and Hollywood films.
[/quote]
At least this time you admit she has nothing but press releases and no
professional publications to back up this criminal land grab.

[quote]Indiana Jones wasn>t a real archaeologist, you know.
[/quote]
And you are again faced with the fact that Silwan is being called the city of
David by her and her fellow crooks.

--
Seems to me becoming a POW is second only to getting killed on the
list of screw ups a military man can make.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 4073
http://www.haaretz.com What is Israel really like? http://www.jpost.com a7

Martin Edwards · Guest

Kendall K Down wrote:
[quote]In message <4c519$48f7764d$524b090b$22539@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl
Italo <olati3@yahoo.com> wrote:

Ophel is well north of "city of David".

No it isn>t. Ophel is a ridge running south from the Haram and ends in
a low cliff - probably man-made for defence. The city of David was
located on that ridge, as shown by excavations conducted at various
sites along it.
[/quote]
As evidenced by inscriptions, or what?

--
Corporate society looks after everything. All it asks of anyone, all it
has ever asked of anyone, is that they do not interfere with management
decisions. -From “Rollerball”

Martin Edwards · Guest

Italo wrote:
[quote]Kendall K Down wrote:
In message <4c519$48f7764d$524b090b$22539@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl
Italo <olati3@yahoo.com> wrote:

Ophel is well north of "city of David".

No it isn>t. Ophel is a ridge running south from the Haram and ends in
a low cliff - probably man-made for defence. The city of David was
located on that ridge, as shown by excavations conducted at various
sites along it.

Right. But another interpretation is that Ophel is not
synonymous with the city of David but a fortification or
tower, perhaps located just outside the southern Haram wall.

Not only is it not synonymous, but there is no evidence for any city of[/quote]
David, or any David, outside the Bible.

--
Corporate society looks after everything. All it asks of anyone, all it
has ever asked of anyone, is that they do not interfere with management
decisions. -From “Rollerball”

Martin Edwards · Guest

Kendall K Down wrote:
[quote]In message <48f7d239$0$13067$9a6e19ea@unlimited.newshosting.com
Matt Giwer <jull43@tampabay.REMover.rr.com> wrote:

The Ophel has been excavated by a number of archaeologists, including
Dame Kathleen Kenyon. The findings are considerably more than "two
parallel rows of stones".

As I have said to you many times about these fool claims, when there is a
professional publication let me know about it. Until then there is nothing
more than discovery by press release. Considering these claims are used to
support a clearly immoral if not criminal activity I am not holding my breath
for the professional publication.

Considering that Dame Kathleen Kenyon *did* publish - unlike a few
modern Israeli archaeologists - your ignorance is noted.

Yes, she did do that, but, at least on a brief search, I am uncertain[/quote]
about her claim to have found "the city of David". Stipulating that she
found ruins of the right age according to the Bible, what evidence did
she adduce for there being any David, or the ruins being associated with
him? There are ruins from the time of Brother Cadfael: that does not
mean he existed.

--
Corporate society looks after everything. All it asks of anyone, all it
has ever asked of anyone, is that they do not interfere with management
decisions. -From “Rollerball”

Martin Edwards · Guest

Matt Giwer wrote:
[quote]Kendall K Down wrote:
In message <48f7d239$0$13067$9a6e19ea@unlimited.newshosting.com
Matt Giwer <jull43@tampabay.REMover.rr.com> wrote:
The Ophel has been excavated by a number of archaeologists, including
Dame Kathleen Kenyon. The findings are considerably more than "two
parallel rows of stones".
As I have said to you many times about these fool claims, when there
is a
professional publication let me know about it. Until then there is
nothing
more than discovery by press release. Considering these claims are
used to
support a clearly immoral if not criminal activity I am not holding
my breath
for the professional publication.

Considering that Dame Kathleen Kenyon *did* publish - unlike a few
modern Israeli archaeologists - your ignorance is noted.

citation please

Finkelstein and Silverman still say she is, in professional terms,
an idiot.

Even assuming that she wasn>t, see the reply which should come in above.[/quote]

--
Corporate society looks after everything. All it asks of anyone, all it
has ever asked of anyone, is that they do not interfere with management
decisions. -From â€œRollerballâ€

Italo · Guest

Martin Edwards wrote:

[quote]Italo wrote:

Kendall K Down wrote:

In message
4c519$48f7764d$524b090b$22539@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl
Italo <olati3@yahoo.com> wrote:

Ophel is well north of "city of David".

No it isn>t. Ophel is a ridge running south from the
Haram and ends in a low cliff - probably man-made for
defence. The city of David was located on that ridge,
as shown by excavations conducted at various sites
along it.

Right. But another interpretation is that Ophel is not
synonymous with the city of David but a fortification
or tower, perhaps located just outside the southern
Haram wall.

Not only is it not synonymous, but there is no evidence
for any city of David, or any David, outside the Bible.

[/quote]
The "Ir David" is a name for the old 'Jebusite' center..
Remnants dating back to the middle bronze age were found
there, at Siloam/Silwan/Shelah/Silla - or whatever the
preferred spelling is, where it was supposed to>ve been.

As for the Ophel, Josephus says "..a certain place which
they called Ophlas, where it [the city wall] was joined to
the eastern gallery of the temple."
If the temple was at the site of the al-Aqsa, then I suppose
that Ophel may>ve been where later was the Silwan-gate.
Maybe a gate-building, and perhaps the same as the Siloam
tower and the Millo.
Now the Millo and Ophel seem to be inside
Ir-David/Siloam, but 2 Kings 12:20 suggests rather that it
may>ve been _near_ Siloam:
"And his servants arose, and made a conspiracy, and
smote Joash at the house of Millo, [on the way] that goeth
down to Silla."
IIUIC, the presumed late bronze age wall of the Ir David
does not reach all the way to the temple mound, so if the
Ophel was indeed touching on the temple building, then
_strictly speaking_ it can be said to>ve been outside, to
the north of, the Ir David (if that is defined by its walls).

--
Boycott American products

Martin Edwards · Guest

Matt Giwer wrote:
[quote]Martin Edwards wrote:
Kendall K Down wrote:
In message <48f7d239$0$13067$9a6e19ea@unlimited.newshosting.com
Matt Giwer <jull43@tampabay.REMover.rr.com> wrote:
The Ophel has been excavated by a number of archaeologists, including
Dame Kathleen Kenyon. The findings are considerably more than "two
parallel rows of stones".
As I have said to you many times about these fool claims, when there
is a
professional publication let me know about it. Until then there is
nothing
more than discovery by press release. Considering these claims are
used to
support a clearly immoral if not criminal activity I am not holding
my breath
for the professional publication.
Considering that Dame Kathleen Kenyon *did* publish - unlike a few
modern Israeli archaeologists - your ignorance is noted.

Yes, she did do that, but, at least on a brief search, I am uncertain
about her claim to have found "the city of David".

Claims are claims. Anyone can make them. What else could it be?
always impresses biblethumpers.

Stipulating that she found ruins of the right age according to the
Bible, what evidence did she adduce for there being any David, or the
ruins being associated with him? There are ruins from the time of
Brother Cadfael: that does not mean he existed.

These people are clearly irrational for believing without evidence.
They are also terminally stupid for thinking other people are as
irrational as they. As with Brits who spoke louder when a Wog did not
understand them they repeat the same nonsense with greater insistence.
Of course Oz is still in recovery from Brit rule but still afraid to
eliminate connections to the crown entirely. Maybe they will grow up
some day.

An interesting modern twist is that the British are now quite popular in[/quote]
Greece, as they are quite respectful even if they don>t speak the
language. What they really dislike is Germans talking to them loudly in
English.

--
Corporate society looks after everything. All it asks of anyone, all it
has ever asked of anyone, is that they do not interfere with management
decisions. -From â€œRollerballâ€

Martin Edwards · Guest

Italo wrote:
[quote]Martin Edwards wrote:

Italo wrote:

Kendall K Down wrote:

In message
4c519$48f7764d$524b090b$22539@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl
Italo <olati3@yahoo.com> wrote:

Ophel is well north of "city of David".

No it isn>t. Ophel is a ridge running south from the
Haram and ends in a low cliff - probably man-made for
defence. The city of David was located on that ridge,
as shown by excavations conducted at various sites
along it.

Right. But another interpretation is that Ophel is not synonymous
with the city of David but a fortification
or tower, perhaps located just outside the southern
Haram wall.

Not only is it not synonymous, but there is no evidence
for any city of David, or any David, outside the Bible.

The "Ir David" is a name for the old 'Jebusite' center..
Remnants dating back to the middle bronze age were found
there, at Siloam/Silwan/Shelah/Silla - or whatever the
preferred spelling is, where it was supposed to>ve been.

As for the Ophel, Josephus says "..a certain place which
they called Ophlas, where it [the city wall] was joined to
the eastern gallery of the temple."
If the temple was at the site of the al-Aqsa, then I suppose
that Ophel may>ve been where later was the Silwan-gate.
Maybe a gate-building, and perhaps the same as the Siloam
tower and the Millo.
Now the Millo and Ophel seem to be inside
Ir-David/Siloam, but 2 Kings 12:20 suggests rather that it
may>ve been _near_ Siloam:
"And his servants arose, and made a conspiracy, and
smote Joash at the house of Millo, [on the way] that goeth
down to Silla."
IIUIC, the presumed late bronze age wall of the Ir David
does not reach all the way to the temple mound, so if the
Ophel was indeed touching on the temple building, then
_strictly speaking_ it can be said to>ve been outside, to
the north of, the Ir David (if that is defined by its walls).

Thanks for the update, but how does it negate what I said? There are[/quote]
piles of rocks reputed to be Arthur>s seat all over the british Isles.

--
Corporate society looks after everything. All it asks of anyone, all it
has ever asked of anyone, is that they do not interfere with management
decisions. -From “Rollerball”

Matt Giwer · Guest

Martin Edwards wrote:
[quote]Kendall K Down wrote:
In message <48f7d239$0$13067$9a6e19ea@unlimited.newshosting.com
Matt Giwer <jull43@tampabay.REMover.rr.com> wrote:
The Ophel has been excavated by a number of archaeologists, including
Dame Kathleen Kenyon. The findings are considerably more than "two
parallel rows of stones".
As I have said to you many times about these fool claims, when there
is a
professional publication let me know about it. Until then there is
nothing
more than discovery by press release. Considering these claims are
used to
support a clearly immoral if not criminal activity I am not holding
my breath
for the professional publication.
Considering that Dame Kathleen Kenyon *did* publish - unlike a few
modern Israeli archaeologists - your ignorance is noted.

Yes, she did do that, but, at least on a brief search, I am uncertain
about her claim to have found "the city of David".
[/quote]
Claims are claims. Anyone can make them. What else could it be? always
impresses biblethumpers.

[quote]Stipulating that she
found ruins of the right age according to the Bible, what evidence did
she adduce for there being any David, or the ruins being associated with
him? There are ruins from the time of Brother Cadfael: that does not
mean he existed.
[/quote]
These people are clearly irrational for believing without evidence. They are
also terminally stupid for thinking other people are as irrational as they. As
with Brits who spoke louder when a Wog did not understand them they repeat the
same nonsense with greater insistence. Of course Oz is still in recovery from
Brit rule but still afraid to eliminate connections to the crown entirely.
Maybe they will grow up some day.

--
The secret of enlightenment cannot be told.
It can only be discovered.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 4057
http://www.giwersworld.org a1

Matt Giwer · Guest

Italo wrote:
[quote]Martin Edwards wrote:

Italo wrote:

Kendall K Down wrote:

In message
4c519$48f7764d$524b090b$22539@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl
Italo <olati3@yahoo.com> wrote:

Ophel is well north of "city of David".

No it isn>t. Ophel is a ridge running south from the
Haram and ends in a low cliff - probably man-made for
defence. The city of David was located on that ridge,
as shown by excavations conducted at various sites
along it.

Right. But another interpretation is that Ophel is not synonymous
with the city of David but a fortification
or tower, perhaps located just outside the southern
Haram wall.

Not only is it not synonymous, but there is no evidence
for any city of David, or any David, outside the Bible.

The "Ir David" is a name for the old 'Jebusite' center..
[/quote]
There is no evidence for any "Jebusites" outside of the bible. Why must the
nonsense always be compounded by biblethumpers?

--
When a hospital is said to be on the cutting edge of new treatments that
means it is following all the latest fads.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 4069
http://www.giwersworld.org/holo3/holo-survivors.phtml a3

Italo · Guest

Martin Edwards wrote:
[quote]Italo wrote:

Martin Edwards wrote:

Italo wrote:

Kendall K Down wrote:

In message
4c519$48f7764d$524b090b$22539@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl
Italo <olati3@yahoo.com> wrote:

Ophel is well north of "city of David".

No it isn>t. Ophel is a ridge running south from
the Haram and ends in a low cliff - probably
man-made for defence. The city of David was
located on that ridge, as shown by excavations
conducted at various sites along it.

Right. But another interpretation is that Ophel is
not synonymous with the city of David but a
fortification or tower, perhaps located just
outside the southern Haram wall.

Not only is it not synonymous, but there is no
evidence for any city of David, or any David, outside
the Bible.

The "Ir David" is a name for the old 'Jebusite'
center.. Remnants dating back to the middle bronze age
were found there, at Siloam/Silwan/Shelah/Silla - or
whatever the preferred spelling is, where it was
supposed to>ve been.

As for the Ophel, Josephus says "..a certain place
which they called Ophlas, where it [the city wall] was
joined to the eastern gallery of the temple." If the
temple was at the site of the al-Aqsa, then I suppose
that Ophel may>ve been where later was the Silwan-gate.
Maybe a gate-building, and perhaps the same as the
Siloam tower and the Millo. Now the Millo and Ophel
seem to be inside Ir-David/Siloam, but 2 Kings 12:20
suggests rather that it may>ve been _near_ Siloam: "And
his servants arose, and made a conspiracy, and smote
Joash at the house of Millo, [on the way] that goeth
down to Silla." IIUIC, the presumed late bronze age
wall of the Ir David does not reach all the way to the
temple mound, so if the Ophel was indeed touching on
the temple building, then _strictly speaking_ it can be
said to>ve been outside, to the north of, the Ir David
(if that is defined by its walls).

Thanks for the update, but how does it negate what I
said? There are piles of rocks reputed to be Arthur>s
seat all over the british Isles.

[/quote]
There is the phrase byt dwd on the Tel Dan stele.
Neither seems there anything obvious in the archaeological
data against the identification of that area with the
biblical City of David. It is ironic that the area is now
ethnically cleansed of the very people who are "of the blood
of David", the Palestinians.

Btw. In the Amarna letter 288 the vassal king of Jerusalem
mentions a "gate of Silu" as the location of a triple
killing, betrayed by servants.
Which reminds of how Joash was killed by his servants at the
Millo, on the way to Silla. Perhaps both at the same place
(the Silwan gate)?

--
Boycott American products

Martin Edwards · Guest

Italo wrote:
[quote]Martin Edwards wrote:
Italo wrote:

Martin Edwards wrote:

Italo wrote:

Kendall K Down wrote:

In message <4c519$48f7764d$524b090b$22539@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl
Italo <olati3@yahoo.com> wrote:

Ophel is well north of "city of David".

No it isn>t. Ophel is a ridge running south from the Haram and
ends in a low cliff - probably man-made for defence. The city of
David was located on that ridge, as shown by excavations conducted
at various sites along it.

Right. But another interpretation is that Ophel is not synonymous
with the city of David but a fortification or tower, perhaps
located just outside the southern Haram wall.

Not only is it not synonymous, but there is no evidence for any city
of David, or any David, outside
the Bible.

The "Ir David" is a name for the old 'Jebusite' center.. Remnants
dating back to the middle bronze age were found there, at
Siloam/Silwan/Shelah/Silla - or whatever the preferred spelling is,
where it was supposed to>ve been.

As for the Ophel, Josephus says "..a certain place which they called
Ophlas, where it [the city wall] was joined to the eastern gallery of
the temple." If the temple was at the site of the al-Aqsa, then I
suppose that Ophel may>ve been where later was the Silwan-gate.
Maybe a gate-building, and perhaps the same as the Siloam tower and
the Millo. Now the Millo and Ophel seem to be inside Ir-David/Siloam,
but 2 Kings 12:20 suggests rather that it may>ve been _near_ Siloam:
"And
his servants arose, and made a conspiracy, and smote Joash at the
house of Millo, [on the way] that goeth down to Silla." IIUIC, the
presumed late bronze age wall of the Ir David does not reach all the
way to the temple mound, so if the Ophel was indeed touching on the
temple building, then _strictly speaking_ it can be
said to>ve been outside, to the north of, the Ir David
(if that is defined by its walls).

Thanks for the update, but how does it negate what I said? There are
piles of rocks reputed to be Arthur>s seat all over the british Isles.

There is the phrase byt dwd on the Tel Dan stele.
Neither seems there anything obvious in the archaeological
data against the identification of that area with the
biblical City of David. It is ironic that the area is now
ethnically cleansed of the very people who are "of the blood
of David", the Palestinians.

As has been pointed out many times, the David could have been anyone,[/quote]
and it was not, at least I don>t think so, found in the part of
Jerusalem under discussion.

[quote]Btw. In the Amarna letter 288 the vassal king of Jerusalem
mentions a "gate of Silu" as the location of a triple
killing, betrayed by servants.
Which reminds of how Joash was killed by his servants at the
Millo, on the way to Silla. Perhaps both at the same place (the Silwan
gate)?

[/quote]
Then again perhaps not.
--
Corporate society looks after everything. All it asks of anyone, all it
has ever asked of anyone, is that they do not interfere with management
decisions. -From “Rollerball”

Matt Giwer · Guest

Martin Edwards wrote:
....
[quote]An interesting modern twist is that the British are now quite popular in
Greece, as they are quite respectful even if they don>t speak the
language. What they really dislike is Germans talking to them loudly in
English.
[/quote]
Unless I am mistaken the Brits are one of the few peoples who have not
invaded and conquered Greece. Perhaps they are simply making the best of a bad
lot.

--
God is a single parent who sent his son to earth on a suicide mission.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 4065
http://www.giwersworld.org/palestine/answers.phtml a9

Matt Giwer · Guest

Italo wrote:
...
[quote]There is the phrase byt dwd on the Tel Dan stele.
[/quote]
There is the single word BYTDWD. EVERY usage of BYT is is of a place to live,
from shack to palace to temple to town (BYTLHM, Bethlehem) to geographic area.
Not a single usage of BYT is as DYNASTY as the Brits use the word house is
found in bibleland. If in fact you should disagree you are FREE to present
those examples from non-biblical sources in bibleland.

One has to be profoundly ignorant of a lot of things not to understand one
cannot interchange meanings on one language with meanings in another.

http://www.giwersworld.org/ancient-history/david.phtml has details. You will
note from the picture there are dots separating words. BYTDWD is one word like
BYTLHM, Bethlehem.

[quote]Neither seems there anything obvious in the archaeological
data against the identification of that area with the
biblical City of David. It is ironic that the area is now
ethnically cleansed of the very people who are "of the blood
of David", the Palestinians.
[/quote]
Archaeology is a science. Science does not work that way. There must be
physical evidence found before one can make a single positive statement. We do
know that Egypt ruled the region at the time David was supposed to have been
king. That bit of fact found in Egypt clearly demonstrates the bible is no
more than the childish fiction it appears to be.

[quote]Btw. In the Amarna letter 288 the vassal king of Jerusalem
mentions a "gate of Silu" as the location of a triple
killing, betrayed by servants.
Which reminds of how Joash was killed by his servants at the
Millo, on the way to Silla. Perhaps both at the same place (the Silwan
gate)?
[/quote]
Must has been found which shows the source of the inspiration for names and
such that served the creators of the fantasy stories in the OT.

All this time you have been talking around the subject. Finally you say
enough to show you are simply retreading the long discredited nonsense of
other believers.

--
Abraham was such a great con artist he sold his wife to kings many times
over and convinced the world god gave him Palestine.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 4063
http://www.haaretz.com What is Israel really like? http://www.jpost.com a7

Italo · Guest

Matt Giwer wrote:
[quote]Italo wrote: ..

There is the phrase byt dwd on the Tel Dan stele.

There is the single word BYTDWD. EVERY usage of BYT is is
of a place to live, from shack to palace to temple to
town (BYTLHM, Bethlehem) to geographic area.
[/quote]
Suppose it means 'City of David'. One could consider that
David is an eponymic name inferred from the toponym, like
plenty examples from Greek and Roman mythology.
Then the origin of the toponym is the question.
As epithet of a deity dwd may also just mean 'the beloved'.
There was apparently also a deity Wadd ('love') in central
Arabia. In south Arabia Wadd seems to>ve been a name for the
moon god.
On the other hand, mesopotamian god names Dada, Dadu, Dadadu
seem to be variants of Adad/Hadad.

[quote]Not a single usage of BYT is as DYNASTY as the Brits use
the word house is found in bibleland.
[/quote]
The British use of the word house was also ancient use.

e.g.
<http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?layout.reflang=greek;layout.refembed=2;layout.refwordcount=1;layout.refdoc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0057;layout.reflookup=oi%29%2Fkoio;layout.refcit=entry%3Da%29%2Fnac;doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0057%3Aentry%3D%2372358>
oikos, 'house' - III. a reigning house, oi. ho basileos
Hdt.5.31 , cf.6.9, Th. 1.137, Isoc.3.41 ; AgamemnoniÃ´n oikÃ´n
olethron A.Ch.862 (anap.), cf. S.Ant.594(lyr.) ; also of any
family, Is.10.4, LXXGe.7.1, D.H.1.85 ;

[quote]If in fact you should disagree you are FREE to present
those examples from non-biblical sources in bibleland.

One has to be profoundly ignorant of a lot of things not
to understand one cannot interchange meanings on one
language with meanings in another.
[/quote]
Semantics are often comparable. The ancient world was more
interconnected as you think.

[quote]http://www.giwersworld.org/ancient-history/david.phtml
has details. You will note from the picture there are
dots separating words. BYTDWD is one word like BYTLHM,
Bethlehem.

Neither seems there anything obvious in the
archaeological data against the identification of that
area with the biblical City of David. It is ironic that
the area is now ethnically cleansed of the very people
who are "of the blood of David", the Palestinians.

Archaeology is a science. Science does not work that way.
There must be physical evidence found before one can make
a single positive statement. We do know that Egypt ruled
the region at the time David was supposed to have been
king. That bit of fact found in Egypt clearly
demonstrates the bible is no more than the childish
fiction it appears to be.
[/quote]
If you want read strictly hard facts you can always go read
a telephone book.

[quote]Btw. In the Amarna letter 288 the vassal king of
Jerusalem mentions a "gate of Silu" as the location of
a triple killing, betrayed by servants. Which reminds
of how Joash was killed by his servants at the Millo,
on the way to Silla. Perhaps both at the same place
(the Silwan gate)?

Must has been found which shows the source of the
inspiration for names and such that served the creators
of the fantasy stories in the OT.
[/quote]
A good place for an ambush can remain so even 500 years
later. A narrow passageway perhaps, or an open crossing
between two fortified locations (one on the temple mount and
the other at the 'city of David'/Siloah.)

[quote]All this time you have been talking around the subject.
Finally you say enough to show you are simply retreading
the long discredited nonsense of other believers.

[/quote]

--
Boycott American products


www.GetXFactor.com Leading Technology, Science, Agriculture News and information	Part of the Identityscape.com network... getxfactor.com jmoodmusic.com smartbusinesschoices.com mintdepot.com lowfaresalways.com evangelicalview.com shoppingpodder.com soproudlywehail.com webnews.ws currenthumor.com

Science and Technology news... Forum Index -> Archaeology Forum	Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 Next
Page 5 of 9