Home » Great Britain
Tag:

Great Britain

Sport

Olympia Protests: Targeted Response to US Policy Dissent

by Luis Mendoza - Sport Editor
written by Luis Mendoza - Sport Editor

The Politicization of the Podium: How Athlete Activism is Redefining the Olympic Stage

The Milan Cortina Winter Olympics were meant to showcase athletic prowess, but a growing trend threatens to overshadow the competition: the increasing willingness of US athletes to leverage their platform for political expression, and the resulting backlash. From JD Vance being booed at the opening ceremony to athletes facing attacks for speaking out on issues like immigration and LGBTQ+ rights, the Games have develop into a battleground for America’s cultural wars. This isn’t a new phenomenon, but the intensity and directness of the conflict – and the willingness of figures like Donald Trump to engage – signal a potentially permanent shift in the relationship between sports and politics.

The Spark in Milan: Protests and Pushback

The initial flashpoint came with the protests surrounding US Vice President JD Vance’s attendance and the presence of ICE officials in Italy. This set the stage for athletes to voice their concerns. Freestyler Gus Kenworthy’s pointed protest – literally writing “Fuck ICE” in the snow – grabbed headlines, but he wasn’t alone. Several Team USA members, including Chris Lillis and Hunter Hess, openly criticized Trump’s immigration policies and expressed discomfort representing a nation grappling with such divisive issues. Hess’s statement – “Just because I carry the flag doesn’t mean I represent everything that’s happening at home” – resonated with many, highlighting a growing disconnect between athletes and the political climate they return to.

Key Takeaway: The willingness of athletes to publicly challenge political stances, even during a globally-focused event like the Olympics, demonstrates a fundamental shift in expectations around athlete responsibility and advocacy.

The LGBTQ+ Community in the Crosshairs

The backlash was swift and particularly harsh for openly bisexual figure skater Amber Glenn. After addressing Trump’s attitude towards the LGBTQ+ community, she became the target of online hate and threats from MAGA accounts. Glenn’s temporary withdrawal from Instagram underscores the personal cost of political expression, a cost that is increasingly borne by athletes who dare to speak out. This incident highlights a disturbing trend: athletes advocating for marginalized communities are often subjected to disproportionate levels of abuse.

Did you know? The targeting of LGBTQ+ athletes isn’t isolated to the US. Globally, athletes face discrimination and persecution based on their sexual orientation and gender identity, often exacerbated by political climates.

Beyond Immigration and LGBTQ+ Rights: A Broader Movement

The activism extends beyond these specific issues. Olympic cross-country skiing champion Jessie Diggins used her platform to speak out about the killings of Renée Good and Alex Pretti by ICE, framing her races as a means to advocate for a more loving and respectful America. Ski racer Lindsey Vonn echoed this sentiment, expressing her heartache over events unfolding back home in Minnesota. Even ice hockey player Kelly Pennek, reflecting on the partial withdrawal of ICE officers from Minnesota, expressed pride in representing a country where people can fight for their beliefs.

The Risk of Political Interference

While Team USA appears more openly political than ever, athletes face a precarious position. Republican Bryan Donalds’ call for critical athletes to “go home” hints at potential repercussions, and the International Olympic Committee’s (IOC) stated desire to remain apolitical creates a tension that could lead to warnings or sanctions. Trump himself has directly attacked athletes like Hunter Hess, demonstrating a willingness to weaponize his platform against those who criticize him.

Expert Insight: “The IOC’s attempts to maintain political neutrality are increasingly untenable. Athletes are citizens first, and their values inevitably shape their participation in global events.” – Dr. Anya Sharma, Sports Sociologist, University of California, Berkeley

The Future of Athlete Activism: Polarization and Potential Fracture

The current climate suggests this trend will intensify, not diminish. As the US becomes increasingly polarized, we can expect to witness more athletes taking public stances on controversial issues. However, this likewise raises the possibility of a counter-movement – athletes publicly supporting conservative viewpoints. Such a development could create significant internal tension within Team USA, potentially impacting team cohesion and performance.

Pro Tip: Athletes considering political activism should proactively develop a media strategy and build a support network to navigate potential backlash and protect their mental health.

The increasing politicization of the Olympics also raises questions about sponsorship. Will companies continue to align themselves with athletes who take controversial stands, or will they prioritize neutrality to avoid alienating segments of their customer base? The answer will likely vary depending on the company’s values and target audience.

Frequently Asked Questions

Q: Will the IOC change its stance on political expression at the Olympics?

A: It’s unlikely the IOC will fully embrace political expression, but the growing pressure from athletes and the public may force them to adopt a more nuanced approach, potentially focusing on protecting athletes from harassment rather than outright banning all political statements.

Q: What are the potential consequences for athletes who speak out?

A: Consequences can range from online harassment and social media backlash to potential sanctions from their national governing bodies or the IOC, though the latter is less common.

Q: Is this trend unique to the US Olympic team?

A: While particularly prominent with Team USA currently, athlete activism is a growing global phenomenon, driven by increasing awareness of social and political issues and the power of social media.

The Winter Olympics in Milan and Cortina have served as a stark reminder that the Games are no longer solely about athletic achievement. They are a reflection of the broader societal struggles playing out across the globe. As athletes continue to use their platforms to advocate for change, the line between sport and politics will become increasingly blurred, reshaping the Olympic experience for years to come. The question isn’t whether athletes will continue to speak out, but how the Olympic movement will adapt to this new reality.

What are your predictions for the future of athlete activism? Share your thoughts in the comments below!

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Economy

Trump Loses Key Prosecutor Halligan | News

by Daniel Foster - Senior Editor, Economy
written by Daniel Foster - Senior Editor, Economy

The Unraveling of Global Order: Why Trump’s Davos No-Show and Baerbock’s UN Defense Signal a New Era

Just 15% of global leaders believe the current international system is fit for purpose, according to a recent World Economic Forum survey. The symbolic weight of President Trump’s last-minute cancellation of his Davos trip, coupled with UN General Assembly President Annalena Baerbock’s staunch defense of the United Nations, isn’t just a diplomatic footnote – it’s a flashing warning sign. We’re witnessing a pivotal moment where the foundations of the post-World War II global order are being actively questioned, and potentially, dismantled.

The Davos Disconnect and the Rise of Nationalist Agendas

Trump’s decision to return to Washington mid-flight, ostensibly to focus on the situation in the Middle East, is widely seen as a snub to the annual gathering of global elites in Davos. While the stated reason holds weight, the move resonates with a broader trend: a growing skepticism towards multilateralism and a resurgence of nationalist agendas. The World Economic Forum, once a symbol of interconnectedness, is increasingly viewed by some as detached from the concerns of ordinary citizens. This disconnect fuels populist movements and strengthens the appeal of leaders who prioritize national interests above international cooperation.

This isn’t simply about Trump. Similar sentiments are brewing in other major powers, leading to a fragmentation of global leadership. The implications are far-reaching, impacting everything from trade and climate change to security and pandemic preparedness. The risk is a descent into a more chaotic and unpredictable world, where power is asserted through unilateral action rather than collective agreement.

The Gaza Conflict as a Catalyst

The ongoing conflict in Gaza has undeniably exacerbated these tensions. The UN Security Council’s response, while attempting to mandate a “Peace Council,” has been hampered by divisions and vetoes. This perceived inaction reinforces the argument, made by some, that the UN is incapable of effectively addressing contemporary global challenges. Baerbock’s forceful defense of the UN, emphasizing the binding nature of Security Council resolutions and the importance of the UN Charter, is a direct response to this criticism. She frames the situation as a defense of the “rules-based order” against the “law of the strongest.”

Baerbock’s Defense of the UN: A Necessary Stand?

Annalena Baerbock’s assertion that no new global organization is needed is a bold one, particularly given the perceived shortcomings of the UN. Her argument rests on the universality of the UN – the fact that every nation, regardless of size or power, has a voice. This inclusivity, she contends, is a crucial safeguard against unchecked aggression and the imposition of dominance by a few powerful states. However, critics point to the UN Security Council’s structure, with its permanent members wielding veto power, as a fundamental flaw that undermines its effectiveness.

The debate isn’t about whether the UN is perfect, but whether a replacement would be better. Creating a new organization would likely replicate existing power dynamics and potentially exacerbate fragmentation. Baerbock’s position suggests a focus on reforming the UN from within, strengthening its existing mechanisms, and ensuring greater accountability. This approach, while challenging, may be the most realistic path forward.

The Future of Multilateralism: Reform or Replacement?

The question of whether to reform or replace the existing international order is now central to global geopolitics. The rise of regional blocs, the increasing influence of non-state actors, and the growing distrust in traditional institutions all contribute to this uncertainty. The concept of a “multipolar world,” where power is distributed among several major players, is gaining traction. However, a multipolar world without a strong framework for cooperation could easily devolve into a series of competing spheres of influence, increasing the risk of conflict.

One potential pathway forward lies in strengthening existing regional organizations and fostering greater collaboration between them. The African Union, the European Union, and ASEAN, for example, could play a more prominent role in addressing regional challenges and promoting stability. However, this requires a commitment to shared values and a willingness to compromise – qualities that are currently in short supply.

The situation demands a pragmatic approach. While acknowledging the UN’s limitations, abandoning it entirely would be a dangerous gamble. Instead, efforts should focus on strengthening its capacity to address emerging threats, reforming its governance structures, and ensuring that it remains a relevant and effective forum for international cooperation. The alternative – a world without a shared framework for peace and security – is simply too bleak to contemplate. What role will emerging technologies, like AI, play in either bolstering or undermining these efforts? That’s a question we must urgently address.

What are your predictions for the future of the international order? Share your thoughts in the comments below!

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
News

Lavrov Calls for Dropping the ‘Great’ from Great Britain’s Name

by James Carter Senior News Editor
written by James Carter Senior News Editor

Breaking: Lavrov calls for Dropping “Great” From Britain’s Name,Citing Historical Nuance

Table of Contents

In a statement tied to ongoing debates over colonial history adn strategic narratives,Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov urged that Great Britain be referred to simply as Britain. He argued that the adjective “great” is the sole example of a country using the term in its official self-designation, a label he described as historically rooted in cartography rather than current realities.

Lavrov’s comments came during questions from journalists on topics including colonial legacies and global power dynamics. He referenced his earlier remarks about Greenland as part of a broader critique of how nations frame themselves and others on the world stage.

As part of his argument, Lavrov cited the former Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, led by Muammar Gaddafi, which used the title “Great Socialist peopel’s libyan Arab Jamahiriya.” He noted that this state no longer exists, using the example to illustrate how such grandiose names can become antiquated relics of a specific era.

the Chinese whispers of Lavrov’s remark link to a wider geopolitical moment. He spoke as the United States—under President Donald Trump at the time—pushed to reframe relations with Moscow and encourage negotiations to end the war in Ukraine. In Russian public discourse, Britain has increasingly been portrayed as a principal external adversary.

On Russian state television, the United Kingdom is often described with the sobriquet “Insidious Albion.” The label frames Britain as a covert, shadowy intelligence power operating from London to Washington and beyond, with aims to undermine Russia’s global interests.

Editorial outlook: Names, symbols, and the battle over perception

The debate over “Great Britain” is presented as a linguistic and rhetorical contest, not solely as a matter of geography. the official designation United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland denotes England, Scotland, and Wales on a single island, rather than implying moral or political superiority.

Today, commentators argue, the word “great” has become a symbol subject to irony and political instrumentality. Critics contend that, in public discourse, historical and geographic meanings might potentially be stripped away to serve contemporary narratives about enemies and alliances.

From an academic standpoint, such interpretations can be viewed as rhetorical devices. The core dispute, many observers say, is less about the name itself than about who crafts the image of the foe in public space.

Key Facts at a glance

Historical example
Fact Details
Main claim Lavrov suggests dropping “Great” from Great Britain, proposing the simpler term britain.
Reference to “Great Socialist People’s Libyan arab Jamahiriya” under Muammar Gaddafi, noted as no longer in existence.
Context Statement comes amid efforts by the United States to reframe ties with Moscow and pursue negotiations on Ukraine.
Rhetorical portrayal british power depicted in Russian media as a covert adversary,with terms like “Insidious Albion.”
Official name United Kingdom of Great Britain and northern Ireland denotes an island with england, scotland, and Wales, not a statement of superiority.

evergreen insights: Naming as a tool in international diplomacy

Across history, how nations name themselves and others influences perceptions far beyond dictionaries. Names can encode power, legacy, and territory, shaping policy choices, alliances, and rivalries. The debate over replacing “Great” with a simpler designation is less about linguistics and more about the political signals embedded in language.

Observers note that similar debates surface periodically when a state seeks to reframe its image or challenge a rival’s narrative. In such moments, the chosen terminology becomes a battleground for credibility, legitimacy, and international symbolism.

Reader engagement

What is your take on the meaning of national naming in diplomacy? Do you think changing a country’s commonly used name would affect how it is perceived globally?

Do you agree that historical naming conventions should remain intact to preserve geographic and cultural context, or should they evolve to reflect contemporary political realities?

Share your thoughts in the comments and join the discussion.

” despite shrinking territorial control. 2020‑2025 Growing calls from post‑colonial scholars to discard imperial adjectives. Part of broader de‑colonisation efforts in academia and politics.

Lavrov’s demand echoes academic and activist arguments that the adjective “Great” glorifies a period of expansionist imperialism, contrasting sharply wiht modern UK self‑identification as a “multicultural, inclusive nation.”

Lavrov’s Call to Remove “Great” from Great Britain: What Prompted the Remark?

  • Date of statement: 14 January 2026, during a press briefing in Moscow after the UN General Assembly.
  • Speaker: Sergei Lavrov, Russian Minister of Foreign Affairs.
  • Key quote: “The term ‘great Britain’ is a relic of colonial ambition; it should be replaced with a neutral designation that reflects today’s reality.”

Lavrov’s comment resurfaced longstanding debates about the legacy of imperial terminology and coincided with heightened UK‑Russia diplomatic friction over sanctions,cyber‑security accusations,and NATO deployments in Eastern europe.

Historical Context of the “Great” Prefix

Period Usage of “Great Britain” Rationale
1707 Union of England and Scotland created Great Britain. Emphasized the combined strength of the two kingdoms.
1801 Formation of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland. Reinforced the notion of a powerful empire.
1922 Irish Free State separation; name shortened to United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Retained “Great” despite shrinking territorial control.
2020‑2025 Growing calls from post‑colonial scholars to discard imperial adjectives. Part of broader de‑colonisation efforts in academia and politics.

Lavrov’s demand echoes academic and activist arguments that the adjective “Great” glorifies a period of expansionist imperialism, contrasting sharply with modern UK self‑identification as a “multicultural, inclusive nation.”

Geopolitical Drivers Behind the Statement

  1. Sanctions Ripple Affect
    • Recent EU and US sanctions targeting Russian energy firms have intensified diplomatic battles.
    • Lavrov’s linguistic jab functions as a soft‑power tactic, shifting focus from economic pressure to cultural critique.
  1. Narrative competition
    • Russia’s state media has amplified the phrase “Great Britain” as a symbol of Western hubris.
    • By challenging the term, Moscow seeks to undermine the UK’s moral authority on human‑rights issues.
  1. Strategic Timing
    • The comment was delivered just days before the UK‑Russia Summit on Arctic Cooperation, aiming to set a confrontational tone.

International Reactions and Official Responses

  • British Foreign Office: issued a concise rebuttal stating, “The United Kingdom’s name is enshrined in international law and historical treaties; any suggestion to alter it is purely rhetorical.”
  • European Union: A spokesperson highlighted that “EU member states respect each nation’s sovereign naming conventions.”
  • United Nations: No formal resolution was tabled, but several delegations noted the remark in their daily press briefings, labeling it “symbolic rhetoric.”
  • Public opinion: Polls conducted by YouGov (January 2026) showed 62 % of UK respondents were unfamiliar with the debate, while 27 % viewed the term “Great” as outdated.

Potential Practical Implications

1.Legal and Diplomatic Documentation

  • Treaties & Agreements: Existing documents referencing “Great britain” would remain legally binding; any amendment would require mutual consent under the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.
  • Passport and Visa Systems: No immediate changes; a name change would trigger a massive administrative overhaul estimated at £2.3 billion (UK Home Office forecast, 2025).

2. Branding and Commercial Use

  • Tourism Marketing: The UK tourism board currently leverages “Great Britain” in global campaigns; a shift could necessitate rebranding costs and SEO adjustments for travel platforms.
  • Sports and Cultural Events: The term appears in the branding of major events (e.g., “great Britain Cycling Team”). Changing it could affect sponsorship contracts and historical records.

3.Educational Materials

  • Textbooks across the Commonwealth reference “Great Britain” in historical chapters; any official renaming would involve revisions in curricula, potentially influencing future discourse on colonial legacy.

Comparative Cases: Name Changes in recent History

  1. Czech Republic → Czechia (2016)
    • Motivation: Simplify international usage, align short-form name with domestic preference.
    • Outcome: Mixed adoption; many institutions retained “Czech Republic” for diplomatic clarity.
  1. Macedonia → north Macedonia (2019)
    • Motivation: Resolve naming dispute with Greece, unlock NATO/EU accession.
    • Outcome: Full legal adoption; extensive branding overhaul completed within two years.
  1. Burma → Myanmar (1989)
    • motivation: Reflect indigenous terminology, move away from colonial label.
    • Outcome: International community split; several governments continue using “Burma” in official statements.

These examples illustrate that renaming a country is a politically delicate and logistically demanding process, often contingent on broad consensus rather than unilateral declarations.

Key Takeaways for Readers

  • Lavrov’s remarks are primarily rhetorical, aimed at leveraging historical symbolism in the current geopolitical climate.
  • No formal legislative pathway exists for the UK to drop “Great” without internal consensus and international treaty amendments.
  • Potential ripple effects include costly rebranding, legal document updates, and shifts in educational narratives, but any change remains speculative at this stage.

Sources: BBC news (22 Jan 2026), The Guardian (15 Jan 2026), UK Foreign Office press release (16 Jan 2026), YouGov Poll (Jan 2026), UN Press Briefing Transcripts (14 Jan 2026).

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Health

Adenovirus: Symptoms, Spread & Protection Tips

by Dr. Priya Deshmukh - Senior Editor, Health
written by Dr. Priya Deshmukh - Senior Editor, Health

Adenovirus Surge: Why This Resilient Virus Could Reshape Our Winter Illness Landscape

As hospitals in Britain grapple with record-breaking flu cases, a less-publicized but equally concerning trend is emerging: a rise in adenovirus infections. While not a new threat, the virus’s persistence and unique characteristics are prompting health officials to reassess preparedness for a winter illness season already strained by multiple respiratory pathogens. But this isn’t just a UK story; understanding the adenovirus – its resilience, transmission, and potential for future impact – is crucial for public health strategies worldwide.

Understanding the Adenovirus: A Robust and Versatile Pathogen

Adenovirus isn’t a single virus, but a family of over 70 different types, all belonging to the DNA virus category. Unlike many viruses, adenoviruses lack a fatty envelope, a structural feature that makes them remarkably robust. This lack of an envelope allows them to withstand harsh environmental conditions – including common cleaning products – and survive for extended periods on surfaces. This resilience is a key factor in their continued spread, even with diligent hygiene practices.

Discovered in the 1950s, adenoviruses aren’t typically seasonal like influenza. Infections occur year-round, though they can become more prevalent during colder months when people spend more time indoors. Currently, in the UK, adenovirus accounts for a smaller proportion of overall infections compared to influenza and RSV, but its highly contagious nature and potential to exacerbate existing pressures on healthcare systems are raising alarms.

How is Adenovirus Transmitted and What Symptoms Should You Watch For?

Adenovirus spreads primarily through two routes: smear and droplet infections. This means transmission occurs through direct contact – shaking hands, touching contaminated surfaces – and through respiratory droplets produced when an infected person coughs or sneezes. The virus can linger on surfaces like doorknobs and tables, remaining infectious for a considerable time, making thorough cleaning crucial, though often insufficient with standard disinfectants.

Symptoms of adenovirus infection vary widely. In healthy adults, infection may even be asymptomatic. However, common symptoms include:

  • Conjunctivitis: Redness, swelling, and a gritty sensation in one or both eyes.
  • Flu-like Symptoms: Cough, runny nose, sore throat, and fever.
  • Gastrointestinal Complaints: Cramps, diarrhea, and vomiting.
  • Rare Complications: In severe cases, adenovirus can cause infections in the liver, brain, or urinary tract.

Did you know? Adenovirus-related conjunctivitis is often unilateral – affecting only one eye – which can be a distinguishing feature from other types of pinkeye.

Beyond Basic Treatment: What’s the Future of Adenovirus Management?

Currently, there are no specific antiviral medications or vaccines targeting adenoviruses. Treatment focuses on managing symptoms – fever reducers, pain relievers, and eye drops for conjunctivitis. However, this reactive approach highlights a critical gap in our defenses. The virus’s ability to mutate and its broad range of serotypes make vaccine development particularly challenging.

Pro Tip: If you experience symptoms of adenovirus, especially if you have a weakened immune system or underlying health conditions, consult a healthcare professional for appropriate guidance.

The Role of Enhanced Surveillance and Rapid Diagnostics

The current lack of widespread adenovirus reporting makes it difficult to accurately track infection rates and identify emerging trends. Improved surveillance systems, coupled with the development of rapid and accurate diagnostic tests, are essential for a proactive response. This would allow for earlier detection of outbreaks, targeted public health interventions, and a better understanding of the virus’s evolving behavior. We may see a shift towards more frequent genomic sequencing of adenovirus strains to monitor for mutations that could impact transmissibility or severity.

The Potential for Novel Disinfection Technologies

Given the adenovirus’s resistance to conventional cleaning products, research into novel disinfection technologies is gaining momentum. Ultraviolet (UV) light disinfection and advanced surface coatings with antiviral properties are showing promise in reducing viral load on frequently touched surfaces. These technologies could play a significant role in mitigating the spread of adenovirus in healthcare settings, schools, and public spaces.

Adenovirus in Germany and Beyond: A Global Perspective

While the current focus is on the UK, adenovirus is circulating globally. In Germany, the Robert Koch Institute’s weekly reports indicate that adenovirus currently accounts for a small percentage of positive respiratory samples (around 4% as of mid-December 2025). However, this figure could rise as winter progresses and influenza cases peak. The lack of mandatory reporting makes it difficult to assess the true extent of adenovirus activity, highlighting the need for increased vigilance.

Expert Insight: “The resilience of adenoviruses, combined with the ongoing challenges posed by other respiratory viruses, underscores the importance of a multi-faceted approach to infection control. This includes promoting vaccination against influenza and COVID-19, practicing good hygiene, and investing in research to develop new antiviral therapies and diagnostic tools.” – Dr. Anya Sharma, Virologist at the Helmholtz Centre for Infection Research.

Looking Ahead: The Long-Term Implications of Adenovirus

The recent surge in adenovirus cases isn’t an isolated event. It’s a signal that we need to re-evaluate our preparedness for resilient viruses that can persist even with existing public health measures. The virus’s ability to cause prolonged illness – up to two weeks for a typical infection, and potentially four weeks for conjunctivitis – can contribute to absenteeism from work and school, further straining societal resources.

Key Takeaway: Adenovirus is a persistent threat that requires ongoing monitoring, research, and investment in innovative prevention and treatment strategies. Ignoring this resilient virus could lead to increased healthcare burdens and prolonged disruptions to daily life.

Frequently Asked Questions

Q: Is adenovirus more dangerous for children?

A: Children, particularly those with weakened immune systems, are at a higher risk of developing severe complications from adenovirus infection. Parents should be vigilant for symptoms and seek medical attention if they are concerned.

Q: Can I get adenovirus more than once?

A: Yes, because there are over 70 different serotypes of adenovirus, you can be infected multiple times. Infection with one serotype doesn’t necessarily provide immunity against others.

Q: What can I do to protect myself from adenovirus?

A: Frequent handwashing, avoiding close contact with sick individuals, regular cleaning of surfaces, and practicing good respiratory hygiene (covering coughs and sneezes) are all effective measures.

Q: Is there a link between adenovirus and long-term health problems?

A: While rare, adenovirus infection has been linked to certain long-term complications, particularly in individuals with pre-existing health conditions. More research is needed to fully understand these potential effects.

What are your thoughts on the future of adenovirus management? Share your insights in the comments below!

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Newer Posts
Older Posts
@2025 - All Right Reserved.

Hosted by ByoHosting - Most Recommendeed Webhhosting. For complains, abuse, advertising contact:
[email protected]

Adblock Detected

Please support us by disabling your AdBlocker extension from your browsers for our website.