War against terror

[walker 0]

Hi Miles Teg

Well that is down to the Mosques issuing a fatwa condemning the bombers of civilians to hell. I think the average Iraqi would welcome it as well as the average Londoner. Myself I do not believe in it but if that floats your boat in London get out and do it, thousands of the millions of Londoners are muslims, same as they are jews, christians, punk rockers, anarchists, budhists, hindus, believers in the force and Luke Skywalker, athiests, agnostics, crystal worshipers, wikas, druids, hells angels, satanists, socialist workers party, any dance party, the pub or whatever...

@ Bernadotte we have already won that one, there were thousands of new people moving to live in London yesterday same as any other day. We will always win that one.

Kind Regards walker

[Apollo 0]

Quote[/b] ]Think a little harder Apollo....  

Trying to think as hard as marble now!

Quote[/b] ]how will you eliminate all the terrorists.

If you just need to illiminate them... simple ,shoot them ,or put them behind bars ,or let them blow themselfs up even works to. (although less optimal) Problem is not erradication itself ,it's finding them.

Quote[/b] ]how do you even know who's a terrorist and who's a friendly Muslim?

Ah the core of the problem. (btw terrorists can also be from other religion ,Timothy McVeign for ex.)

Well you can caught them in the act easily ,but that isn't much good.You can try to intercept communications and funds ,or you can check whos buying strange stuff like explosion material or just doing weird stuff (like ordering plane lessons withought being interested in learning how to land) ,thats actually the way most terrorist arrests are achieved.Why can't they always achieve?Terrorists work often with sleeper cell's ,they can be good citizins of a western nation for 10 years and suddently they activate and boom.This makes it very hard to find them ,especially if they are working fully individually.

Other options:

-Infiltrate the network (fat chance ,and volunteers not lining up i presume)

-Get a high al-Quaida member to rat out the network (kinda like How costra nostra ended in the USA)

-Plainly find a list of their connections ,well there probably exist some.

-Get Al-quaida to disband (fat chance)

-Limit their recruiting potential by stigmitazing them among their natural supporters and showing youre morally better (worked wonders for spain VS the ETA)

-Also ,improving the rights and living standards of ethnic and religious minority's tend to help for that matter ,otherwise said ,win the "hearts and minds".

Well ,just some thoughts of the bat ,but as i said sleeper cells are just extremely hard to find ,especially if they work fully independant and do not rely on orders and suply's.

Quote[/b] ]ow do you combat an enemy hidden in sovereign nations allied to the West that even those countries are having difficult destroying or are ignoring???

By being scrupulous ,if you find them just send someone in to kill em ,or let the nation alligned to you do it if they can.Afcourse again the problem is to find them ,if the nation is allied to you then coorperation in inteligence and investigations shouldn't be a problem.

Quote[/b] ] From what I've heard and read, Islamic extremism is only growing and not shrinking in this war on terror.

Well i do not even see the Iraq war in the context of the war against terrorism ,it just blatantly has nothing to do with it ,atleast innitially ,now Iraq has become a terrorist magnet though.

conclusion ,USA ,get youre priority's right?

[Garcia 0]

Think a little harder Apollo....    how will you eliminate all the terrorists....how do you even know who's a terrorist and who's a friendly Muslim?   How do you combat an enemy hidden in sovereign nations allied to the West that even those countries are having difficult destroying or are ignoring???   From what I've heard and read, Islamic extremism is only growing and not shrinking in this war on terror.

Chris G.

aka-Miles Teg<GD>

Last thing I heard was that the numbers of people reqruited to terrorist organisations have increased by about 33% since USA and UK invaded Iraq...ooooh, if this continues, there won't be long until there's not 1 terrorist left

[Bernadotte 0]

Quote[/b] ]Panda, Apollo and anyone else with an opinion, by all means please feel free to describe what you believe victory will look like in the War on Terrorism.

You might notice that actually i have no real fitting answer on youre question...

Good, because anyone who thinks there is a way to achieve military victory over terrorism is just kidding themselves.

But there have been victories over terrorism.  Take for example the French victory over Algerian terrorists.  Several years ago a group of them hijacked an airliner with the intent of crashing it into the Eiffel Tower (sound familiar?).  The pilot convinced the terrorists they had to refuel in Southern France.  Special Forces captured/killed them when they landed.

What do you think the French did when they found out who the organisation's leaders were?  Did they hunt them down, smoke them out of their holes and kill them?  Did they bring them to justice?  No.

They offered large quantities of money to all the leaders and their families if they stopped attacking France.  They also promised to kill all the leaders and their families if they continued attacking France.  I admit their solution gives me a real sick feeling in my stomach, but they probably saved countless French lives and a huge amount of money.

Of course, I'm not suggesting anyone payoff Al Qaida. I'm just pointing to one example of what a recent victory looked like.

[Apollo 0]

Quote[/b] ]Of course, I'm not suggesting anyone payoff Al Qaida. I'm just pointing to one example of what a recent victory looked like.

Hey ,any precedent of a succesfull anti-terorist opperation must look good in a world that does not seem to know how to erradicating it.

[Bernadotte 0]

@ Bernadotte we have already won that one, there were thousands of new people moving to live in London yesterday same as any other day. We will always win that one.

Guess that explains all the celebrating, huh?  

[Nemesis6 0]

The bombers are pussies. Frightened little lonely pussies. Londoners are not afraid of pussies.

Hey, maybe we can get the hooligans on them! I mean, pull the military back and send in the hooligans. Like, after Chelsea and Manchester United have their next game, "extract" the hooligans one by one when they are at maximum rage. Freeze them down somehow, while managing to retain their rage. Give them sufficient furniture and alcoholic beverages in glass-bottles(Very important!, and they'll do it.

Ok... that was kind of a theory. Hooligans are funny!

[walker 0]

Hi all

If you want to contribute to the London Bombings Relief Fund you can through the link in this article in the London Evening Standard.

Quote[/b] ]The Mayor is working with the Red Cross and the Evening Standard to set up a fund to help victims of the London bombings and their families.

The Standard has already pledged Å100,000 to the fund and its parent company, Daily Mail and General Trust, will contribute a further Å150,000.

Chairman Lord Rothermere said: "Everyone at DMGT feels deeply shocked and sickened by yesterday ' s horrific events.

"We are proud that the company has donated a substantial sum of money to this appeal." He called on other companies to follow suit.

Some have already responded with substantial offers of financial support for the fund, which will be administered by the Red Cross.

Ken Livingstone appealed to the extraordinary generosity of individual Londoners.

He said: "Yesterday a group of cold-blooded murderers attempted to terrorise London.

"They struck at ordinary Londoners without discrimination as to their beliefs, their race, their occupation or anything else. Such pure criminals had no chance of success in defeating our city at all or of diverting it one inch from its course.

"But what they could and did do is to kill or maim individuals.

"I believe it is the wish of Londoners that those who have suffered deaths of their loved ones or serious injury should also be helped by all Londoners. Because they have suffered for an attack on every one of us. It could equally have been your son or daughter, your husband or wife, your loved one, or yourself who was struck.

"The overwhelming majority of us were lucky. But some Londoners paid a price for an attack on all of us.

"I know that the main job in caring for those who suffered must be carried out by the emergency services, by our health and support services all of whom showed again yesterday just what a debt Londoners owe to them. But your contribution now can help make a decisive difference to someone whose life has been changed for ever.

"We cannot make up for what the victims have lost. But every single thing that can be done will be done.

"That is why I have agreed to establish, with the Red Cross, the London Bombings Relief Fund.

"Your donations will be held in trust to assist by any means the victims of the attack, their families and dependants; and to assist with any other appropriate project that the funds allow."

Payments can be made to London Bombings Relief Fund.

http://www.thisislondon.com/news....rd&ct=5

@Bernadotte

Quote[/b] ]Guess that explains all the celebrating, huh?  

Londoners will hold wakes and celibrate the dead, they will weep at the funerals, hold masses and prayer meetings, sign books of condolence, hold silent vigils, sing songs, light candles, raise a glass in the pub or even just ignore it and get on with life. Londoners will do all that and more and by doing it we will win. It is as inevitable as the next terrorist attack, most Al Qaida bombers cannot conceptualise what a city of millions realy is.

I will quote myself again:

Quote[/b] ]The odd bomb and a few dead and injured is not going to bother a Londoner there are are millions of us and thousands more join us every day, the IRA bomb that blew up Holborn it shook my flat and rattled the windows, I cycled to work at the University the next day right past it same as all the rest of London's commuters did and will again on this Monday.

Londoners will be going to the pubs and clubs tonight or going to the cinema, climbing in their local climbing wall, watching plays in the theatres, going to church on Sunday and yes mosque on Friday. They will be visiting the nice restaurants of Stoke Newington, Soho and Islington, for good meals of every thing from Indian curry to Tibetan thupkas to Iranian sweets to US hamburgers, to italian pizzas, restaurants they will have learned about in their copy of Timeout along with the thousands of films that were on and and the plays filling the theatres. They will go to the thousands of night classes listed in city lit. Taking visiting family around the museums and art galleries. They will be shopping in Oxford street, buying houses in mayfair, having raves in warehouses, going to the Spanish festival, watching the fire works on the river by the south bank, protesting about wars and poverty, doing business deals in the city, fighting for and against fox hunting. Taking the kids to the park, swimming at the lido. We are Londoners we do all that and more, all the bomber has is their bomb.

If some idiots think a few bombs scare a Londoner they need to try dodging black cabs on a bicycle in the rush hour before we had congestion charging or perhaps remember we survived the blitz.

Kind Regards Walker happy to soon be back being a Londoner

kind regards walker

[Bernadotte 0]

Quote[/b] ]Of course, I'm not suggesting anyone payoff Al Qaida.  I'm just pointing to one example of what a recent victory looked like.

Hey ,any precedent of a succesfull anti-terorist opperation must look good in a world that does not seem to know how to erradicating it.

Here's an example of a recent attempt that appears to be failing:

Country A is under attack from terrorists but does not want to fight them on the streets of Country A.

Country A needs to create a battlefield closer to the home nations of the terrorists.

Country A invades Country B, which is next to or very near the home nations of the terrorists.

Country A leaves the borders of Country B wide open so that the terrorists can get to the battlefield as easily as possible.

Country A eventually realises that a military solution is not enough to defeat the terrorists.

Country A justifies the attempt by telling its citizens that, at least most of the civilian lives lost were not citizens of Country A.

[SPQR 0]

Part One...

If you want to know how every country fight the terrorism, you'll fight this interesting (if not been given before here) :

Country Reports on Terrorism 2004 (April 2005) from the Office of the Coordinator for Counterterrorism - US Department of State

[Panda-PL- 0]

Quote[/b] ]

Quote[/b] ]Of course, I'm not suggesting anyone payoff Al Qaida.  I'm just pointing to one example of what a recent victory looked like.

Hey ,any precedent of a succesfull anti-terorist opperation must look good in a world that does not seem to know how to erradicating it.

Whoopie~! F***n briliant!

Hooray for France!

But what do you think they did with the cash?

Because I'd say they used it to organise terrorist acts - only somwhere else. The history seems to confirm that thesis.

The France have still a lot to lern if They dare to call supporting terrorism a succes.

Now tell me: what would happen if everyone did just as France and bribed the terrores? We'd get, say, five years of peace, and then a total armageddon.

[edit]At least from reading the report it seems that they realized their mistake.

Quote[/b] ]Poland continued to play an active role in the war on terrorism

as a leader in Central and Eastern Europe. In 2004,

Poland's active Financial Intelligence Unit  the General

Inspectorate for Financial Information (GIIF) amended

legislation to include non-profit organizations and legal

practitioners as institutions obligated to file reports. The

GIIF suspended five transactions worth 650,000 Euros, and

blocked 12 accounts worth 2.1 million Euros in cases involving

money laundering.

This shows the report is not a reliable source. Poland does nothing, and the actions mentioned were about organised crime, not international terrorism. At the same time the raport ommits Polish intelligence succeses in Iraq before the american strike. We've had some. Like for example evacuation of american goverment employees. Just don't ask for details, because we don't know any.

About fighting terrorism:

1) limitation and reglamentation of explosives is highly ineffective - the terrorers are either independent froim legal sources (and buy from army - like in Russia), or they produce on their own.

And it's not gunpowder that they manufacture - but for example octogen , AkA HMX(High Melting eXplosive) and cyclotetramethylene-tetranitramine. You can make it in your garage, and the information on how is public. If you reinforce it a bit it becomes close to C4 or even better, and that again is not a problem if you have someone who finished chemistry on a university. The HMX itself is good for taking down concreate or steel constructions as it creates extreamly high temperature when exploding.

We're lucky that the terrorers are so lazy. Or maybe it is because the HMX was developed only recently and they are still not up to date?

2) The old creed "follow the money" is still actual. Work out how they are financed and cut their resources. Modern terrorism is really expensive, without sponsors it'll end.

3) Punish the countries that support terrorism. That becomes hard, because a lot of them have now nuclear weaponry. The West has waited for too long.

4) Eliminate "charity" organisations related to fanatics. They often use schools and orphanages to indoctrinate kids that will later become shahids. Now if I'd met someone dooing this ...

Indoctrinating and brainwashing kids is horrible. Imagine You're 8 and You go to school: art practice - theme "blood of a mortyr"; music practice - "I will gladly die for Allah"... Horrible.

5) get a "tail" for every suspicious islamic leader. Also watch all muslims studying chemistry or learning to fly a plane.(I know it's not dooable, but at least be aware of some patterns).

6) what You should watch carefully is bacteria samples from science institutes. Thare was a case few years ago(not made public in many countries) of a transfer mistake - and the institute or laboratory in Bagdad got a sample of plague instead of some vaccine.

[SPQR 0]

But there have been victories over terrorism.  Take for example the French victory over Algerian terrorists.  Several years ago a group of them hijacked an airliner with the intent of crashing it into the Eiffel Tower (sound familiar?).  The pilot convinced the terrorists they had to refuel in Southern France.  Special Forces captured/killed them when they landed.

What do you think the French did when they found out who the organisation's leaders were?  Did they hunt them down, smoke them out of their holes and kill them?  Did they bring them to justice?  No.

They offered large quantities of money to all the leaders and their families if they stopped attacking France.  They also promised to kill all the leaders and their families if they continued attacking France.  I admit their solution gives me a real sick feeling in my stomach, but they probably saved countless French lives and a huge amount of money.

I'm curious. Have you got a link, please ?

[Bernadotte 0]

I'm curious. Have you got a link, please ?  

I've heard and read about this in a few places away from the internet, but I'll try to find a link. Naturally, the French authorities didn't openly admit to any of this, but the results kind of speak for themselves.

[Bernadotte 0]

@ July 09 2005,04:10)]Whoopie~! F***n briliant!

Hooray for France!

Cool.  Someone else who is familiar with this case.  

@ July 09 2005,04:10)]But what do you think they did with the cash?

Because I'd say they used it to organise terrorist acts - only somwhere else. The history seems to confirm that thesis.

History?  What historical examples are you referring to?

[Panda-PL- 0]

Quote[/b] ]Cool.  Someone else who is familiar with this case.  

No. I only heard about it some time ago. I'm waiting for the link too.

History?  What historical examples are you referring to?  

Iran-Contra and related events.

Quote[/b] ]One side benefit of the Iranian arms sales was supposed to be the release of American hostages being held in Lebanon. A handful of hostages were in fact released. But the ongoing arms deals created a market for U.S. hostages, and the net total of Americans held in captivity actually increased as a result of this policy initiative.

Quote[/b] ]

the average American citizen was evidently valued at 260 TOW anti-tank missiles and 10 HAWK anti-aircraft missiles. Meanwhile, a French hostage was worth 2,000 TOWs.

Well there is no proof on how were the arms used later.

What do you think happend to all those TOWs? I dunno.

Anyways that proved my point. You cannot bribe terrorers - it'll bring the opposide effect.

Anyway Iran-Contra was according to US constitution a treson. The same would apply to the franch case propably - that is if supporting an enemy is considered by France as a betrayal, because that's exactly what they did.

[Bernadotte 0]

@ July 09 2005,05:17)]Anyways that proved my point. You cannot bribe terrorers - it'll bring the opposide effect.

Anyway Iran-Contra was according to US constitution a treson. The same would apply to the franch case propably - that is if supporting an enemy is considered by France as a betrayal, because that's exactly what they did.

So far, this article comes closest to discussing what happened.  Nothing in it about paying off terrorist leaders, however 85% of the group's Islamist fighters accepted the Algerian government's amnesty offer, turned in their weapons and returned to civilian life. They don't appear to have run off to join other struggles.

[philcommando 0]

Apollo

Quote[/b] ]Listen phil ,you know i have respect for you as an addonmaker ,but i'm not going to continue with you in discussion because it's no discussion ,if i handle youre remarks point by point then you just reply the same thing all over withought expanding onto the discussion in a rational way

Apollo, please do not get upset. I am an open minded person and will never launch a personal attack on another man or boy's personal thought-out view. I respect your views as well, and showed you mine in a rational manner whether it pertains to or not to the topic. I will only attack those cynical idiots who argue just for sake of needling and attacking a person's view based on prejudice or personality and will not hesistate to show them up for what they are - a kid who thinks he is 'cool' and whose points are better suited arguing the merits of Mickey Mouse in the kindergarten than posting here on a subject as serious and crucial as war againts terror.

Where does emotions end and rationality begins?

To seek justice is not rational?

To seek justice is emotional?

To express the cause of criminal acts is not rational or intelligence?

To post one's personal idea or method of eliminating further acts is exhuberance of anger?

There is no need to convince anyone of our points of view, for inborn in each human is the capacity to determine what is right and what is wrong as we learn to compromise and share this planet together in harmony. There will be teething problems, of which can be solved over time.

Some may assume my posts are repetitive and philosophised the issues worthed only 2 cents. So be it that they make such assumptions. There are many social ills in the world but we can only tackle them one at a time. And the time here on this board and thread is war against terror. Many chosed the defeatist attitude that things will never change, no one will listen to us here or give a damn.

I take no such defeatism and only seek to reason out with an international audience here, people of whom may pray to the same God the criminals had hijacked, that they may see for themselves the pain a gentle religion had caused to innocent men, women, children and babies. While it may not change anything, at least they are aware of it and some will take action to seek it in the hearts and start asking questions. I dont need the majority to make a change. I only need one, for one is enough to set the course of change to charge the destiny of war on terror to a newer and hopeful course once it gathers speed. And if i had been able to change one, i would have done my duty. Better than writing tomes and volumes based on subjective statistics and matters that are out of our control and never change anything to help stop terror amongst our loved ones.

Regards.

[Panda-PL- 0]

As for the cynical attitude: tooday I saw on TV some british opposition politician who said something like "thanks to Blair's and Bush's policy England becomes a hated country". He didn't say anything about the strike, however between the lines everyone understands what that ment .

Hatered for british muslims rises...

I'm affraid that theese two facts mean that terrorists did achived a very limited victory. The muslims, that were more or less integrated into society, now may be pushed appart from it. The other thing is that muslim societies were quite hermetical even before the series of terrorist strikes, now if they also recive threats they might isolate themselves even more.

And Al'quida would be happy to see muslims and christians not meet and talk anymore - the less understanding, the better the ground for terrorers.

As for "it doesn't change anything"...

What we can change is attitude, attitude to the problem, and the counciousness of some. Since yesterday british muslims recived thousants of threats, this shows how little knowlage or common sense some have.

Now some of us are still kids, but when we grow up there is a slight chance that some of us will have something to say in their countries. Imagine what would happen if every game's players cared to share their thoughts and knowlage...

One more thing is that our knowlage of Islam is still limited, and understanding of avarage muslim's way of thinking in some cases next to none. Now wouldn't You all want to know when your faivorite politician or TV presenter is bull*** you ? I would.

The understanding of terrorism is also little... Often people mistake the excuses used or factors that only help terrorism for it's real cause.

[Bernadotte 0]

@ July 09 2005,05:17)]Anyways that proved my point. You cannot bribe terrorers - it'll bring the opposide effect.

In my example, the French paid off ringleaders to stop attacking them and threatened to kill them if they continued.  It worked and you've offered no evidence that the ringleaders continued fighting elsewhere.  Instead, you've compared it to a situation of Americans paying ransoms to free hostages, which didn't work.

If you really do have historic examples of ringleaders being paid to vanish and then returning elsewhere please tell us about those.  Kidnappers being paid ransoms is not the same thing and everyone already knows that it doesn't work.

[Bernadotte 0]

I will quote myself again:

...

Why?  That's like 3 times in a row.  

(I don't recall Londoners ranting and repeating themselves ad nauseum, even under the worst conditions.)

[Bernadotte 0]

@ July 09 2005,04:10)]Now tell me: what would happen if everyone did just as France and bribed the terrores? We'd get, say, five years of peace, and then a total armageddon.

[edit]At least from reading the report it seems that they realized their mistake.

What are you referring to?  I've found nothing in the report saying that France or Algeria "realized their mistake."  In fact, Algeria reports great success:

Quote[/b] ]According to Algerian authorities, fewer than 800 terrorists remain active in Algeria, down from a possible high of 28,000 terrorists in the mid-1990s.

Please explain.  

[Panda-PL- 0]

The report seemed optimistic on France part, but yes there's nothing about that in it. The problem is that the report in some places seems too optimistic, which I already pointed out. The report is in my oppinion written to support certain thesis.

Well if paying terrorers not to kill more Frenchman and paying terrorers not to kill the hostages is not the same...

It's all the same to me as if they hijacked an entire country.

The risk that supplying great amounts of money or weaponry to terrorers might cause is significant, however sometimes it works - in the case that terrorism is used not for political goal, but for profit.

It wouldn't work for Al'quida - it is a reach organisation already. And you cannot offer them what they want - power.

Anyway I see I cannot argue with French way of thinking - that you can make a deal with anyone, even if that is morally questionable, so let's leave it at this, ok?

[ran 0]

I think going "Khaled Kelkal" on them, even if not the perfect solution would be quite self satisfying and would answer to the revenge and bloodthirst of some as long as we find a way to prevent a martyrdom first on our own soil and then in the middle east.

(the chance of finding a booklet filled with the names and coordinates of half of the members of the terrorist network in question here are pretty small but hell ... It would make for some entertaining TV footage)

[philcommando 0]

By the 17th century, America was made of a 'whites' only society, highly religious and consisting of immigrants from all over Europe. They populated the lands and tame the jungles to create a new world. Slavery was introduced by the early settlers and helped to made America an economic trading power with its farm produce.

However, slaves were not by any means happy with their lot, and showed their displeasure in many ways. Some rioted, some rebelled and they were put in their place. A few americans felt it in their hearts that slavery is demeaning to mankind and voiced their concerns. However, slavery was a necessary asset to the landowners and a source of ego to the landless that they are free and a level above slaves in the heirachy of mankind. Their reasoning for allowing slavery to happen was based on a passage in the old testament of the bible that the sons of Ham were meant to be slaves, an almighty given right. Anyone else who argue against slavery were shown this passage and were ridiculed.

The few who voiced out against slavery received death threats from his fellow whites, and worse still, the slaves made no distinction on who is against or for them and continued to show their displeasure in several threatening ways. However, this did not deter the consciencious men, who continued to fight against slavery and the church, which at that age, held considerable power over american society.

It gathered pace, families broken as brother fought against brother, for each had to bravely take sides for their own convictions and finally culiminated in the American Civil War, at the end which saw the shackles of slaves being broken and given the opportunity to stand equal to whites, and the passage in the bible rendered a misinterpretation of man and not the Almighty.

While there may be many considerations and interpretations on the Civil War, this post is not meant to talk about these factors, but an example to show how some sane and humane men against every odds dared challenge the religious and secular authority and made a change for the betterment of mankind, benefits of which we can see in our own eyes today.

While i am sadden that muslims had been receiving threats, i can offer no solution that may ease the moderates mental strain based on the carnage we saw on criminals who scream Allah Akbar after each massacre. My only hope is that muslim countries in the middle east would stop their policies of 'Hate The West' slogans for once after 60 long years, actively check their mullahs, educate the pilgrims going mecca to stop hating the west and start seriously working with the rest of the human race to make Earth a better place. It is the Middle East that is the mecca of muslim influence, from which many muslims shape their thinking.

May it not be too late, for no one loves a battlefield (not even the criminal terrorists as they had shown, preferring to kill civilians at work or home.). When a time we comes that we have to stand and fight hard for our convictions, each will bravely do so, no matter how high the odds are, so that the next generation will be freed from terror which originated from some evil mind. Peace

[Bernadotte 0]

@ July 09 2005,17:59)]

@ July 09 2005,04:10)]At least from reading the report it seems that they realized their mistake.

What are you referring to?  I've found nothing in the report saying that France or Algeria "realized their mistake."

The report seemed optimistic on France part, but yes there's nothing about that in it.

So you just decided that seeming optimistic was the same as seeming to realize a mistake.  What utter nonesense.    

Welcome to my ignore list.