Z,

I will state some facts, and those who wish to form their own opinions are free to do so. Hopefully you will be able to understand the position of posters such as myself.

The basis for my statement concerning the topic of disclosure is the Brunetti/Intercell deal that was announced October 21, 2003 in a press release.

The controlling interest referenced in the PR was facilitated by a private placement offer undertaken by Intercell.

The private placement was promoted early in September 2003 by Intercell. According to the PR it must have been completed on or before October 21, 2003.

I found it personally disturbing that the County of Los Alamos issued a letter to Brunetti on July 29, 2003 stating in part: ``Due to this protest, all procurement proceedings in the award of a contract for these services must be stayed pending resolution of the protest, pursuant to County of Los Alamos Procurement Code Section 20-231(f).`` (In other words, the County was telling Brunetti the project phase II was on hold.)

Do you feel that information such as that should have been shared with potential investors?

That is exactly what I mean by: ``Reality is based as much on what we are not being told as that which we are being told.``

I am not presenting this position a lawyer. I am presenting this position as an investor who will never take things at face value again.

Jeff