Topic: Mr Obama, where are your tears now? | |
---|---|
Edited by
Sojourning_Soul
on
Fri 12/21/12 03:06 PM
|
|
Should we ban the military or the CIA?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gZn-Pq38B_Y&feature=youtu.be Talk about a forked tongue! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mvOU-czQnl8&feature=youtu.be He doesn't even realize the truth as he speaks it! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zqvGRIVr1G8&feature=youtu.be |
|
|
|
Edited by
msharmony
on
Fri 12/21/12 03:08 PM
|
|
I believe I posed the question before as well,,,why the outrage over one persons death in an obviously dangerous area where they agreed to go and were ( I imagine) aware of the risks,,,,,
but not the dozens of violent deaths that happen in america everyday? why do we have outrage about those killed in towers here in the USA, but not those killed in towers in a muslim country? ,,simplest answer is that we can choose to feel outrage everytime and in every instance, but wed spend our lives miserable media cannot choose to report EVERY instance of such misery because they just dont have the airtime,,, it is a positive, that we hear about tragedies,and that are still able to empathize with victims it is a shame that there is so much of it that we cant really afford to draw tears and be miserable everytime it happens people tend to get most emotional about things closer to home,, thats fairly natural if something happens next door to me, in my community, in my city, in my town, my state, or even my country,,, I think its easier to imagine 'that could be me' if something is happening in another country, with another culture, with different circumstances politically and geopolitically,, there is probably not the same tendency to feel like 'that could be me' |
|
|
|
Edited by
Sojourning_Soul
on
Fri 12/21/12 03:14 PM
|
|
I believe I posed the question before as well,,,why the outrage over one persons death in an obviously dangerous area where they agreed to go and were ( I imagine) aware of the risks,,,,, but not the dozens of violent deaths that happen in america everyday? why do we have outrage about those killed in towers here in the USA, but not those killed in towers in a muslim country? ,,simplest answer is that we can choose to feel outrage everytime and in every instance, but wed spend our lives miserable media cannot choose to report EVERY instance of such misery because they just dont have the airtime,,, it is a positive, that we hear about tragedies,and that are still able to empathize with victims it is a shame that there is so much of it that we cant really afford to draw tears and be miserable everytime it happens people tend to get most emotional about things closer to home,, thats fairly natural OH, so it's ok to kill children in a nation we are not at war with, but not at home? That's liberal thinking for ya! AND TOTALLY UNDEFENSIVE IN REALITY! So the police blow up your home, kill your family, to get the criminal next door it's ok? |
|
|
|
I believe I posed the question before as well,,,why the outrage over one persons death in an obviously dangerous area where they agreed to go and were ( I imagine) aware of the risks,,,,, but not the dozens of violent deaths that happen in america everyday? why do we have outrage about those killed in towers here in the USA, but not those killed in towers in a muslim country? ,,simplest answer is that we can choose to feel outrage everytime and in every instance, but wed spend our lives miserable media cannot choose to report EVERY instance of such misery because they just dont have the airtime,,, it is a positive, that we hear about tragedies,and that are still able to empathize with victims it is a shame that there is so much of it that we cant really afford to draw tears and be miserable everytime it happens people tend to get most emotional about things closer to home,, thats fairly natural OH, so it's ok to kill children in a nation we are not at war with, but not at home? That's liberal thinking for ya! AND TOTALLY UNDEFENSIVE IN REALITY! So the police blow up your home to get the criminal next door it's ok? who says its 'ok'? lots of things that are not ok, and they dont all bring about the same emotions its not ok for my child to be killed or anyone elses, but I think the attachment and proximity may make me quite a bit more emotional about my c hilds death thats not liberal thinking, thats honest and human attachment and proximity matter,,,with billions on the planet, it would be emotionally draining and probably dehabilitating to become outraged/saddened/ angry everytime something that wasnt 'ok' happened anywhere in the world |
|
|
|
Edited by
Sojourning_Soul
on
Fri 12/21/12 03:35 PM
|
|
I believe I posed the question before as well,,,why the outrage over one persons death in an obviously dangerous area where they agreed to go and were ( I imagine) aware of the risks,,,,, but not the dozens of violent deaths that happen in america everyday? why do we have outrage about those killed in towers here in the USA, but not those killed in towers in a muslim country? ,,simplest answer is that we can choose to feel outrage everytime and in every instance, but wed spend our lives miserable media cannot choose to report EVERY instance of such misery because they just dont have the airtime,,, it is a positive, that we hear about tragedies,and that are still able to empathize with victims it is a shame that there is so much of it that we cant really afford to draw tears and be miserable everytime it happens people tend to get most emotional about things closer to home,, thats fairly natural OH, so it's ok to kill children in a nation we are not at war with, but not at home? That's liberal thinking for ya! AND TOTALLY UNDEFENSIVE IN REALITY! So the police blow up your home to get the criminal next door it's ok? who says its 'ok'? lots of things that are not ok, and they dont all bring about the same emotions its not ok for my child to be killed or anyone elses, but I think the attachment and proximity may make me quite a bit more emotional about my c hilds death thats not liberal thinking, thats honest and human attachment and proximity matter,,,with billions on the planet, it would be emotionally draining and probably dehabilitating to become outraged/saddened/ angry everytime something that wasnt 'ok' happened anywhere in the world Guess you were a Hitler fan too huh? So according to his statements in the 3rd video......what? OOPS! I lied? Like Nixon said..."When the president does it it's not a crime!"? Bush may have started this carnage, but this fool escalated it ti new levels! It's his to control, his to be responsible for the actions of it. He's killing women and children, we're involved, taxpayer dollars are funding it! Where is the outrage for these actions? “Are we,” Obama asked on Sunday, “prepared to say that such violence visited on our children year after year after year is somehow the price of our freedom?” It’s a valid question. He should apply it to the violence he is visiting on the children of Pakistan. |
|
|
|
the tangents are getting harder and harder to follow
hitler? perhaps this conversation can continue being a monologue..... |
|
|
|
Edited by
Sojourning_Soul
on
Fri 12/21/12 04:13 PM
|
|
the tangents are getting harder and harder to follow hitler? perhaps this conversation can continue being a monologue..... When any form or reason of killing another human being is considered to be justified, or approved of, without cause or validity, humanity is lost! At least it is a monologue I can feel good about believing. Killing any child is unjustifiable, unreasonable, senseless and inhumane! Your glorious leader is killing women and children under the guise of spreading peace and liberty.... How insane is that?! |
|
|
|
Edited by
msharmony
on
Fri 12/21/12 04:31 PM
|
|
the tangents are getting harder and harder to follow hitler? perhaps this conversation can continue being a monologue..... When any form or reason of killing another human being is considered to be justified, or approved of, without cause or validity, humanity is lost! At least it is a monologue I can feel good about believing. Killing any child is unjustifiable, unreasonable, senseless and inhumane! Your glorious leader is killing women and children under the guise of spreading peace and liberty.... How insane is that?! noone said anything was justified or approved of,, the issue was about emotional responses,,,, so spend every moment of life miserable, cauee not one second of our life is a child somewhere not dying whether from malnutrition, or intentional physical harm, its always a shame,, but there is also alot of beauty in the world to focus on a balance is what I strive for,,,and that balance is my personal choice and what I belive to be the healthier one,,, so yes, it is a shame when someones child is kidnapped, but I will probably cry much harder and hurt much more if its MY child or a child I know and it is a shame when someone anywhere in the world is raped, but I will probably cry much harder and more often if it is me or someone I know or love or have some more immediate 'connection' to and it is a shame when someone anywhere in the world is starving, but I will probably be much more emotionally invested in it if that someone is a neighbor or a loved one I understand that life has good and bad and that death is inevitable for us all, its not about condoning it anymore than I would need to condone a person breathing,,,,its part of life its a sad part of life, and everyone will have their own emotional connections to others and express it appropriately although it sounds ideal and beautiful, there is not the same connection with strangers half way around the world in a different culture andenvironment, as there are with those who share a culture or a land or a house ,,,,anyone that wishes to see that reailty as 'condoning' the terrible things that happen to people is free to do so,, as I am free to re state that 'condoning' has nothing to do with my reaction or lack of reaction to the reality that is death , illnees, or suffering,,, |
|
|
|
“Are we,” Obama asked on Sunday, “prepared to say that such violence visited on our children year after year after year is somehow the price of our freedom?” It’s a valid question. He should apply it to the violence he is visiting on the children of Pakistan. OBAMA is not the problem. |
|
|
|
Nor is he the answer
|
|
|
|
no one man is
starts with the village,, |
|
|
|
Edited by
Sojourning_Soul
on
Fri 12/21/12 07:37 PM
|
|
Pardon me, but I thought the CIC controlled the actions of the Joint Chiefs and their subordinates.... the miltary?
One man is to blame or he's not much of a leader! Read up on Lt. Col. Hal Moore if you want an opinion on true leadership in time of conflict! The movie "We Were Soldiers" was written from his biography. He took responsibility for every command given under his leadership, even by subordinates. His men followed him to HELL knowing he was leading the charge! |
|
|
|
Edited by
msharmony
on
Fri 12/21/12 11:16 PM
|
|
Pardon me, but I thought the CIC controlled the actions of the Joint Chiefs and their subordinates.... the miltary? One man is to blame or he's not much of a leader! Read up on Lt. Col. Hal Moore if you want an opinion on true leadership in time of conflict! The movie "We Were Soldiers" was written from his biography. He took responsibility for every command given under his leadership, even by subordinates. His men followed him to HELL knowing he was leading the charge! was there anyone amongst those children posing a threat to others besides the shooter? really, comparing military actions with civilian mass murder is beyond the pale of intellectual honesty were those regions affected during strikes ordered by the CIC, otherwise safe and free from innocents being targeted? so isnt it a great strategy if Im a bad person or a bad group to hide out indefinitely amongst the innocent? wars are hell, no doubt, and there isnt a way to really assure that 'innocents' dont get caught in that crossfire,,,however we can (and through drones we actually do) decrease the numbers who get caught just like we can do here in America yeah, when it comes to military operations, the CIC along with those who ADVISE him from experience (captains and military experts,,etc,,) are responsible for military decisions but children in an elementary school in Connecticut are not a military zone ,,,,,and what happens to THEM is not under the control of the CIC or any other one man,,, |
|
|
|
OBAMA is not the problem. Who is the problem then if not the Commander-in-chief? If not him, then who accepts responsibility for American foreign & domestic policy? If it is true, then: NIxon wasn't responsible for Watergate Johnson wasn't responsible for the Mai Lai massacre Truman wasn't responsible for Hiroshima and Nagasaki (so much for the buck stopping there eh?) Hitler wasn't responsible for persecuting the Jews Stalin wasn't responsible for the purges & other atrocities under his watch Mao wasn't responsible for the cultural revolution that killed some 70,000,000 Chinese. If I'm not mistaken, the Commander-in Chief IS responsible. I believe it is written into the laws of war in the Geneva conventions. It was proved at Nuremberg. Tell me again that Obama isn't responsible for what happens under his command, because that's exactly what you said when you said "Obama is not the problem." |
|
|
|
http://www.gopusa.com/commentary/2012/12/21/salvato-pulling-the-trigger-on-sandy-hook/
I spent the better part of yesterday afternoon helping out in my wife, Nancy’s second grade classroom. It was the day before Christmas break and her class was having a Christmas party. As I watched the children cavort and play, I couldn’t help but think of the tragedy that beset the community of Newtown, Connecticut. Nancy’s pupils were just a year or so older than the ones slaughtered in Newtown. Calling upon the training I went through as an Advanced Trauma Life Support Paramedic in my years as a firefighter, my thoughts were filled with the gruesome images of so many small lifeless bodies strewn around the classroom. A more helpless, frustrating and depressing scene cannot be imagined by first responders; a scene that will live with each of them for the rest of their lives. And a more painful reality for those directly affected by this senseless tragedy cannot be comprehended. It is with great and earnest sorrow in my heart that I offer my personal condolences to each and every person directly affected by this tragedy: parents, siblings, friends and family, as well as those who will be scarred with the demonic visions only a first responder can know; visions that haunt dreams as well as thoughts throughout the day. Through it all there are some who chose to do the right thing; that chose to mourn, simply, honestly and sincerely. Then there are those who chose to exploit this true tragedy for opportunistic gain, whether for their advocacy of a special interest or for media ratings. I stand with the former and condemn the latter. Toward the latter, we can see a perfect example of just how selfish and self-serving our society can be. Yes, this was an important story that needed to be told. But when the facts of the story have yet to be determined it is the compassionate that put a grieving community before the need to “be the first” to air the story. The media, in its extended and unmerciful coverage of this event, was shameless. I agreed with FOX News Channel’s Eric Bolling when he curtly chastised some on his show’s panel about the stories insensitive over-exposure, pleading for an appropriate moratorium on the issue for grieving. But perhaps the most selfish of all those who chose to exploit this unimaginable horror, were the opportunistic special interest ghouls, including many in elected office and our President, Barack Obama. I watched the initial White House news conference and was impressed and sympathetic to President Obama, going so far as to outwardly recognize his sincerity of grief. For one short moment I was actually proud of him. He displayed compassion without getting political (a rarity for Mr. Obama) and for a fleeting moment the nation – the world – was afforded a peak at Mr. Obama’s heart; the heart of a Father; the compassionate heart of a singular member of our American society coalesced into one soul bearing a tremendous grief. But that display of compassion was soon to turn from one born of honest sincerity to one masking the agenda of an ideologue. Instead of calling for an honest examination of why a troubled child with a functional wherewithal would shoot his Mother in the face and then turn weapons on children; instead of calling for an examination of how our society could ever produce such a person; a person with such hopelessness; such selfishness; such a desire to inflict evil upon the lives of others in numbers grotesque to consider, Mr. Obama joined the ranks of the special interest opportunists who seek any “crisis” to affect an advance to their agenda, in this case gun control. To put it succinctly, banning “assault weapons” (and this definition is nefarious at best) because of this tragedy is equally as absurd as it would be to ban automobiles because of drunk driving fatalities. It isn’t the cars that kill the innocents, it is the drunk drivers. To wit, it isn’t the weapons that kill the slaughtered; it is the person that shoots the guns that kills the innocents. Milton Wolf, MD, points out that the worst school massacre in US history was not a shooting: “The mainstream media uses the term ‘school shootings’ because it fits nicely into their narrative that guns are to blame and therefore law-abiding citizens should be disarmed. But by limiting their discussion only to shootings, they ignore the worst school massacre in US history which wasn’t a shooting at all.” He points out that in Bath Township, Michigan, in 1927, Andrew Kehoe, school board treasurer, unleashed pure evil on the Bath Township School by detonating dynamite, firebombs and pyrotol. 45 people were killed and not a single shooting death. “An alarm clock detonates a 500lb dynamite and pyrotol bomb that Kehoe had hidden in the north end of the school basement. The explosion lifted part of the building several feet before it collapsed. First-grade teacher Bernice Sterling: ‘After the first shock I thought for a moment I was blind. When it came the air seemed to be full of children and flying desks and books. Children were tossed high in the air; some were catapulted out of the building.’ Volunteer rescuer Monty Ellsworth: ‘There was a pile of children of about five or six under the roof and some of them had arms sticking out, some had legs, and some just their heads sticking out. They were unrecognizable because they were covered with dust, plaster, and blood. There were not enough of us to move the roof.’” Now, I cannot definitively say what was going through the minds of the likes of Andrew Kehoe or Adam Lanza as they set about laying waste to large swaths of human life, nor do I claim to have all the answers. But I can’t help but feel that through it all, we, as an increasingly socially engineered society – thanks to the aggressive totalitarianism of the Progressive and politically correct – have unwittingly provided at least access to a ‘trigger’ that allows people like Lanza – and to a lesser extent Kehoe, to rationalize their actions prior to executing the unthinkable. When an education system sets to brainwashing children into believing that “everyone is a winner” and that they each, as individuals, “are the best”, while robbing them of the valuable lessons of: a) learning from failures, and b) manifesting diligence to attain achievement, the stage is set for a fairly brutal realization when these children – deceived into accepting a false sense of self-esteem – come face to face with their first real life failure. The frustration has to be enormous when the reality that there are no “white picket fences” or “knights in shining armor,” that every dream does not, in fact come true, is realized for the first time; when they realize that they are just one more grey block in a socially engineered world, where opportunistic social engineers – elitist oligarchs, one and all – push government dependency onto the masses like drug dealers selling heroin to junkies. When we allow the social engineers of the Progressive Movement to rob our children of an education that is strictly based on affecting critical thinking skills; when we accept an education system that teaches our children “what to think” instead of “how to think,” we have not only failed our children, we are setting them up for that brutal moment in time when they realize they are not all winners; when they realize that failure and the inability to learn from failure have consequences that can affect their lives in very debilitating ways. When we settle for the stupidity of “It takes a village to raise a child”; for the cruelty of social advancement over true education (read: the attainment of critical thinking skills), we, in part, provide a “fuse” for the Lanzas and the Kehoes of the world. Is it any wonder why these troubled souls overwhelmingly pick schools to lash out in, considering it is the education system that has been lying to them about how “great” and “fantastic” they are over the full course of their educational experience; when it is the Progressive education system that has foisted falsely elevated self-esteem onto them? Perhaps there is a method to the madness, literally. I don’t deny that there needs to be an open and honest dialogue about how such events come to pass; about how our society may have played a role in fomenting the catalyst – in whole or in part – for such tragic actions. I just don’t believe politicians should be trusted with a task meant for true public servants, and today, there are very few – if any – true public servants in elected office. As to those who attempt to exploit tragedies like this to advance an ideological movement, only one word comes to my mind to describe them; their sickening irreverence enough to illicit outward contempt: they are ghouls; selfish, self-serving, insensitive and heartless ghouls. These people, dishonest in their “dialogue” about the facts of the matter are indeed the scum of the Earth, especially in the memory of all those slaughtered in Newtown, Connecticut. In the end, it was not the inanimate objects that killed those 27 souls on December 14, 2012, it was a person loading weapons with ammunition, aiming the weapons and shooting them who took those lives, including his own. Troubled throughout his life or not, this act cannot escape the diagnosis of desperation. The question is this: how much of that desperation could have been avoided if we had only insisted that we actually teach our children “how to think” instead of “what to think.” With prayers for all those departed and all those who grieve... |
|
|
|
Is it any wonder why these troubled souls overwhelmingly pick schools to lash out in,
..this is not true a common misperception is that if it is reported often in the news it happens often, or that if the news doesnt report it often it is rare 'mass shootings' have happened in a variety of surroundings, the common denominator isnt a school, its an emotionally unbalanced person who feels some sort of rejection that they cant handle,,,, its also not exploitation just because there is a discussion on gun violence, some things are definitely serious enough to talk aboutm and with our ranking compared to other western cultures,, our propensity for such violence is one of them,,,, |
|
|
|
Edited by
Sojourning_Soul
on
Sat 12/22/12 06:58 AM
|
|
Let's take medicines off the shelves... they kill as many as they help.
Remove cars....traffic deaths are the highest death tolls per year. Ban wars.... they kill millions, most being innocents. Let's cut off the electricity....cancer clusters are a proven problem Ban manufacturing... their contaminants pollute our air and streams Ban food... it causes obesity, heart conditions, and death. Ban airplanes... 3,000+ deaths in one day could have been avoided The list could go on and on! Any of the items above kill more people each year than psychos with guns in public places! Where is the outrage to these "killers"? Guns are NOT the problem! You may say "people with guns is the problem!"... so do we ban people? After all, being crazy enough to carry out these attacks is the reason some use to desire a gun ban. Do they start using nerve gas, anthrax, bombs instead? No, they will continue to use guns because the manufacturing of them will never stop, regardless of the peoples "right" to own them! Such a ban would only help to make criminals of honest citizens seeking the best protections for themselves and their families! So we take away these guns from citizens, will that stop the criminals from getting them? That worked well with drugs didn't it? Now only criminals have drugs, ruthless cartels and gangs profit at the expense of the people, crime rises, taxes/debt raise to house the offenders in jails, grow gov't, better arm the police, and further reduce our liberties. Prohibition has NEVER worked! It raises crime, risk, and illegal profits, growing gangs and a police state! The people lose! Anyone who believes otherwise is fooling themselves! They are the problem! Big Pharma is the problem! TV and video games, computers are the problem! Biased media, corrupt politicians, bad leadership, that is the problem! Loss of liberty, lack of a decent wage or jobs to provide one, gov't regulations, and the results of them are the problem. Blaming a tool for a violent act is as foolish as blaming the children for being there! Children will continue to go to school, companies will continue to make guns, criminals will continue to get guns regardless of the laws.... that's why they are called criminals! Get your head on straight! It's best to be able to defend yourself against the obvious than to become another victim to it! |
|
|
|
Edited by
JustDukkyMkII
on
Sat 12/22/12 06:43 AM
|
|
its also not exploitation just because there is a discussion on gun violence, some things are definitely serious enough to talk about ...and a ban on so-called "assault rifles" shouldn't be one of them. You had a ten year ban on these things that sunsetted in 2004. Many studies were done by various agencies that showed no significant difference between murders with or without the ban. I note that facts seem to have nothing to do with policy, however, and many attempts have been made by politicians on both sides to re-institute the ban. Such a ban has been a part of Obama's agenda since he was elected in 2008, and crocodile tears notwithstanding, I suspect he is inwardly very happy about the murders of those little kids. We have to ask ourselves WHY politicians try to implement these weapon bans year after year, when they have already been shown to make no difference in the gun crime, yet sensible legislation regarding things like SSRIs and proper weapons handling & training are totally ignored in favour of the reintroduction of stupid legislation that has been tried before and shown to be worthless. Clearly, the agenda isn't saving lives... The agenda must be to subvert the American Constitution and disarm the American people. The agenda appears to be treason...Let's talk about that! |
|
|
|
its also not exploitation just because there is a discussion on gun violence, some things are definitely serious enough to talk about ...and a ban on so-called "assault rifles" shouldn't be one of them. You had a ten year ban on these things that sunsetted in 2004. Many studies were done by various agencies that showed no significant difference between murders with or without the ban. I note that facts seem to have nothing to do with policy, however, and many attempts have been made by politicians on both sides to re-institute the ban. Such a ban has been a part of Obama's agenda since he was elected in 2008, and crocodile tears notwithstanding, I suspect he is inwardly very happy about the murders of those little kids. We have to ask ourselves WHY politicians try to implement these weapon bans year after year, when they have already been shown to make no difference in the gun crime, yet sensible legislation regarding things like SSRIs and proper weapons handling & training are totally ignored in favour of the reintroduction of stupid legislation that has been tried before and shown to be worthless. Clearly, the agenda isn't saving lives... The agenda must be to subvert the American Constitution and disarm the American people. The agenda appears to be treason...Let's talk about that! Well said my friend....well said! ![]() |
|
|
|
Let's take medicines off the shelves... they kill as many as they help. Remove cars....traffic deaths are the highest death tolls per year. Ban wars.... they kill millions, most being innocents. Let's cut off the electricity....cancer clusters are a proven problem Ban manufacturing... their contaminants pollute our air and streams Ban food... it causes obesity, heart conditions, and death. Ban airplanes... 3,000+ deaths in one day could have been avoided The list could go on and on! Any of the items above kill more people each year than psychos with guns in public places! Where is the outrage to these "killers"? Guns are NOT the problem! You may say "people with guns is the problem!"... so do we ban people? After all, being crazy enough to carry out these attacks is the reason some use to desire a gun ban. Do they start using nerve gas, anthrax, bombs instead? No, they will continue to use guns because the manufacturing of them will never stop, regardless of the peoples "right" to own them! So we take away these guns from citizens, will that stop the criminals from getting them? That worked well with drugs didn't it? Now only criminals have drugs, ruthless cartels and gangs profit at the expense of the people, crime rises, taxes/debt raise to house the offenders in jails, grow gov't, better arm the police, and further reduce our liberties. Prohibition has NEVER worked! It raises crime, risk, and illegal profits, growing gangs and a police state! The people lose! Anyone who believes otherwise is fooling themselves! They are the problem! Big Pharma is the problem! TV and video games, computers are the problem! Biased media, corrupt politicians, bad leadership, that is the problem! Loss of liberty, lack of a decent wage or jobs to provide one, gov't regulations, and the results of them are the problem. Blaming a tool for a violent act is as foolish as blaming the children for being there! Children will continue to go to school, companies will continue to make guns, criminals will continue to get guns regardless of the laws.... that's why they are called criminals! Get your head on straight! It's best to be able to defend yourself against the obvious than to become another victim to it! again the difference between regulation and banning is being lost here death is inevitable as is tragedy, the point of regulations or laws is not to STOP tragedies completely, that is not possible the point of regulations or laws is to try to make tragedies occur LESS OFTEN,,, everything being erroneously compared to guns , in that they can cause death too, is regulated,,,,, |
|
|