Pubs selling shit art.
If someone produced good art which they planned to sell at a reasonable price, would they need to display it in a place where people habitually become drunk?
Adult editions of children's books.
If you must follow the adventures of a public school conjuror, even though you are a notionally grown adult, why attempt to conceal the fact behind a different cover, as if fellow passengers will assume after a casual glance that you're actually reading Thomas Mann in the original German?
Adventurers/mountaneers/explorers.
The world being largely explored now, is there really any need for a load of posh blokes to try to reach the South Pole living only on roasted peat and using equipment they bought in the Blacks sale? If they do set out over the Pacific in an 8-foot dinghy, risking almost certain drowining, would it be unreasonable to suggest that when they do capsize, rather than expect a multi-thousand pound rescue operation and media furore, they could at least have the decency just to drown, quietly?
These posh weirdies say things lie, 'If you make a mistake in that situation, you're dead.' Well, don't do it then, you twat! Because it's at least feasible that you'll make a mistake! Also: 'If the weather closes in, you're dead.' Well, forgive me, but isn't that what the weather does in the mountains? 'At that point, the weather started to close in!' Of course it did. You were climbing up a fucking mountain.
Powerpoint.
The Microsoft tool that encourages people to talk like fuckheads.
Expose documentaries which are not.
In recent years, channel 5 has left behind all that wispy-drapes rumpo to become a proper TV channel, fulfilling an urgent public service brief to keep the public informed on today's vital issues: mummies, dictators and how to fly in a Spitfire.
Sometimes, though, they let their rigorous standards slip and put out hack pieces with no new facts or footage but with a sexed-up title and risque trailer promising to blow the lid off all sorts of dark and sultry secrets.
Secrets of the Beatles promised to expose years of the Fab Four secrecy - the build-up looked like it was going to tell how they were all secret lovers in league with the devil. In the event, the programme revealed that they were very popular in the 60's and that Ringo was a fake name.
This is unsatisfactory all round. If you really want to sex it up to get the punters in, why no just completley make the documentaries up? Here's a few to get you started:
*Full Egyptian Sex.
*Mummified D-Day Shag Bandits.
*Hitler, mummified, At It-In colour.
*I'm a nude Dunkirk Tommy - Get me out of here!
Advice Slips.
In what meaningful sense does a reciept from a cash point constitute advice? All it says is: 'You haven't got any money.' That's not advice.
It would only be advice if they said: 'My brother's just won some money on a horse. I expect he'd lend you a couple of quid until you get paid.' Or, 'If you turned up to work on time occasionally, mayber you'd get promoted and we wouldn't have to go through this pathetic charade every month.'
Cafe's that charge excessive amounts for a mug of shit tea.
A pound? A fucking pound? I know what tea costs! I make it all the time!
Cafe's that offer you butter but really give you margerine.
It's the lies i can't stand.
Tits out for Charity.
On occasion, all the diseases and disasters, the billions afflicted worldwide poverty, the endless oceans of distress, the maimed unfortunates desperate for some kind of relief, fill one with need to help in the only way thats appropriate. That's right, folks, it's bikini carwash time!
This is, after all, a fitting way to raise money for Cancer Research UK. How better to highlight the hardships of all those middle-aged women undergoing untensive radiotherapy on their breasts, than to parade some healthy, pert, soaped-up jubblies around a supermarket carpark in Surrey?
Once in a lifetime Charity trips.
Previously, people booked a holiday and paid for themselves. You didn't say to your workmates; 'I fancy two weeks in Ibiza, getting ripped to the tits on Ecstasy tablets and contracting an STD: fancy chippin in?'
Now, though, people are quite happy to say: 'Go on, it's only 50 quid and it's for the disabled kiddies.' But then they mumble: 'Except half of it pays for me to go camel trekking in Mongolia.' And when you ask them to repeat the second bit louder, they show you a picture of a child who's been blown up by a mine.
Other similar gambits might include: 'If you pay for me to go to the pub tonight, i'll put your change in the charity box - go on, it's for the lifeboats you stingy cunt.
The Chuckle Brothers.
Disturbing.
Inane adverts.
Dogs are stupid and will happily run around with bog roll in their mouth, but cats are always 'discerning.' The laws of ad-thropomorphism dictate that cats must always sound upper class and sleepily self-satisfied, like Leslie Phillips drinking fine wines in a jacuzzi. They come on like they own half of Mayfair, when in fact they'd fucking starve if you didn't give them mashed up animal genitals out of a tin. Assholes.
The Daily Mail.
The concentration camps- about which 'gross and reckless accusations have been made' - were just full of dirty Reds. The only people who suffered were a few troublesom 'minorities.' Like, for instance, the Jews.
Il Divo.
Italian for 'The Divs.'
DVD's with adverts you can't skip.
The target group for these ads is quite small - the sort of person who wants to watch the same clip from Only Fucking Fools and Bastard Horses EVERY SINGLE TIME THEY USE THEIR DVD.
The other thing DVD production bastards do is stop you skipping the copyright information - and then put it in 782 different languages, with a running order of seven hours. Just in case you thought it was perfectly legal to burn copies of DVD's but only if you went to Norway and did it.
Thursday, 31 May 2007
Wednesday, 9 May 2007
Bringing them to justice
After reading two articles in leading broadsheets in February 2007, I have asked myself the question; “Why was Serbia cleared of Genocide when there seemed to be so many inconsistencies?”
This question asks what happened twelve years ago in Bosnia and why has no one significant been prosecuted for such disgusting crimes?
Since I was not there at the time and have no real recollection of the events unfolding, I have searched through many articles and papers, and spoken to people involved with trying to raise awareness and convict the individuals and states accountable for the ‘systematic ethnic cleansing.’
Between 1992 to1995 the Bosnian war was taking place and in response the U.N set up a ‘safe-area’ in the Bosnian town of Srebrenica, to protect Bosnians from being massacred by Serbians.
As is becoming more clear regarding the U.N’s ever increasing actions of ‘too little, too late,’ they deployed a small unit operating under the mandate of United Nations Protection Force (UNPROFOR,) to secure Srebrenica and protect its civilians. Unfortunately, being outnumbered, the town was taken over by the Army of Republika Srpska in July 1995.
Approximately 8,000 Bosniak men and boys were arbitrarily killed by the Serbian government backed forces.
Although most of us were either too young to remember the full impact, or have merely forgotten, the International Criminal Court finally tried Serbia on the grounds
of Genocide in February of this year. Many eye witnesses, bodies and testimonies had to be taken and accounted for, in order to present a full case to the court.
Although being given the ‘not-guilty’ ruling from the court, this has caused controversy and outrage, especially among the survivors and those who lost loved ones in the conflict. The decision took the form of several votes and by an outstanding vote of 13 to 2, Serbia was cleared of Genocide.
Ironically, the court stated that “Serbia had violated the obligation to prevent Genocide.”
Judge Rosalyn Higgins said; “[Serbia] had not shown that it took any initiative to prevent what happened or any action on its part to avert the atrocities which were being committed.”
So, if this is the case and the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia gave it the name ‘Srebrenica genocide’, why then are they willing to clear Serbia? Why are they not being held accountable for their actions, especially after the Republika Srpska issued a formal apology for the massacre? This implies they are admitting to their actions. And what about those people affected by the decision? Those families hoping to find justice, or those families from the other side who feel ashamed of their countries previous actions.
Julie Scott, who works for the Srebrenica Justice Campaign says; “What is the point of having a criminal court there to seek justice, if justice won’t be delivered? It seems that they are scared to make the first move towards convictions like this. As history has shown us, we are not learning from our mistakes, merely repeating them over and over again. The international community must realise we need to focus on punishment for the guilty instead of turning a blind eye.”
Since the International Criminal Court was established 60 years ago, this is the first case where a ruling could determine whether a country was guilty of committing genocide or not, but the result has brought much disappointment to the country of Bosnia who brought the case forward.
As stated in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, set up in 1945 after the atrocities of World War 2, it clearly defines what constitutes Genocide.
“In the present Convention, Genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group.” (Steiner and Alston, 2000.)
The key word regarding this statement is ‘intent.’ Whether or not Serbia managed to commit Genocide means that the intent to do so, is punishable under the original declaration.
Clearing Serbia of Genocide clearly contradicts the human rights laws already set in place, as Serbia did intend to commit Genocide and did nothing to prevent it happening against Bosnia. A fact already stated by Judge Rosalyn Higgins.
If this inconsistency is so glaringly obvious, why then did the ICC not prosecute or put forward a case to prosecute in future, Serbia on the intent that they did nothing to stop the Genocide in Bosnia?
Nicola Duckworth, the Programme Director of Europe for Amnesty International says; “Ten years after the end of the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina, the women of Srebrenica are still waiting for the men who killed their sons and husbands to be brought to justice.”
The failure to bring the two key individuals of the massacre to justice, Radovan Karadzic and Ratko Mladic, highlights the ever growing errors, and often seemingly complacent feelings, in the international justice system.
Although a number of minor individuals involved have been brought to justice, the ICC still seems reluctant to take the first step to convict a state on this crime.
Tony Hill, 26, who works within the media industry says; “I feel one of the reasoning’s behind the reluctance to prosecute Serbia, may have been because the uncertainty of what punishment should be applied.”
This indeed does raise the question of how could you punish a state on a crime that has never before led to a conviction? This leads to new policies and governmental discussions and practices that take time and effort. Perhaps effort that the people behind the courts are not ready for.
To highlight the lack of awareness within the same age bracket, Simon Hamby, 25 a student from Kingston University says; “I cant remember the genocide taking place and any details regarding it. It may seem close minded, but at the time I was quite
young and thought as it was another country, I felt it didn’t apply to me. Today, it seems such a long time ago, it hard to form an opinion and I feel quite detached.”
After being told of the glaring evidence pointing towards Serbia being responsible and the inconsistencies shown within the trial, he goes on to say; “However, it does seem that the issue is still as important to the people affected as it ever was. If families were torn apart by the killings, it should be the courts duty to prosecute those responsible.”
In all the reports that are available to read, Serbia comes across as the clear persecutor in the war. The eye witness accounts of U.N soldiers and Bosnian civilians clearly back up testimonies that say Serbia was behind the attack on Srebrenica. Coming so close and then allowing the country to be cleared leaves unanswered question, and for those that had placed all their hopes on justice prevailing at the trial, it seems to leave a strong taste of dissatisfaction and disgust.
This question asks what happened twelve years ago in Bosnia and why has no one significant been prosecuted for such disgusting crimes?
Since I was not there at the time and have no real recollection of the events unfolding, I have searched through many articles and papers, and spoken to people involved with trying to raise awareness and convict the individuals and states accountable for the ‘systematic ethnic cleansing.’
Between 1992 to1995 the Bosnian war was taking place and in response the U.N set up a ‘safe-area’ in the Bosnian town of Srebrenica, to protect Bosnians from being massacred by Serbians.
As is becoming more clear regarding the U.N’s ever increasing actions of ‘too little, too late,’ they deployed a small unit operating under the mandate of United Nations Protection Force (UNPROFOR,) to secure Srebrenica and protect its civilians. Unfortunately, being outnumbered, the town was taken over by the Army of Republika Srpska in July 1995.
Approximately 8,000 Bosniak men and boys were arbitrarily killed by the Serbian government backed forces.
Although most of us were either too young to remember the full impact, or have merely forgotten, the International Criminal Court finally tried Serbia on the grounds
of Genocide in February of this year. Many eye witnesses, bodies and testimonies had to be taken and accounted for, in order to present a full case to the court.
Although being given the ‘not-guilty’ ruling from the court, this has caused controversy and outrage, especially among the survivors and those who lost loved ones in the conflict. The decision took the form of several votes and by an outstanding vote of 13 to 2, Serbia was cleared of Genocide.
Ironically, the court stated that “Serbia had violated the obligation to prevent Genocide.”
Judge Rosalyn Higgins said; “[Serbia] had not shown that it took any initiative to prevent what happened or any action on its part to avert the atrocities which were being committed.”
So, if this is the case and the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia gave it the name ‘Srebrenica genocide’, why then are they willing to clear Serbia? Why are they not being held accountable for their actions, especially after the Republika Srpska issued a formal apology for the massacre? This implies they are admitting to their actions. And what about those people affected by the decision? Those families hoping to find justice, or those families from the other side who feel ashamed of their countries previous actions.
Julie Scott, who works for the Srebrenica Justice Campaign says; “What is the point of having a criminal court there to seek justice, if justice won’t be delivered? It seems that they are scared to make the first move towards convictions like this. As history has shown us, we are not learning from our mistakes, merely repeating them over and over again. The international community must realise we need to focus on punishment for the guilty instead of turning a blind eye.”
Since the International Criminal Court was established 60 years ago, this is the first case where a ruling could determine whether a country was guilty of committing genocide or not, but the result has brought much disappointment to the country of Bosnia who brought the case forward.
As stated in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, set up in 1945 after the atrocities of World War 2, it clearly defines what constitutes Genocide.
“In the present Convention, Genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group.” (Steiner and Alston, 2000.)
The key word regarding this statement is ‘intent.’ Whether or not Serbia managed to commit Genocide means that the intent to do so, is punishable under the original declaration.
Clearing Serbia of Genocide clearly contradicts the human rights laws already set in place, as Serbia did intend to commit Genocide and did nothing to prevent it happening against Bosnia. A fact already stated by Judge Rosalyn Higgins.
If this inconsistency is so glaringly obvious, why then did the ICC not prosecute or put forward a case to prosecute in future, Serbia on the intent that they did nothing to stop the Genocide in Bosnia?
Nicola Duckworth, the Programme Director of Europe for Amnesty International says; “Ten years after the end of the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina, the women of Srebrenica are still waiting for the men who killed their sons and husbands to be brought to justice.”
The failure to bring the two key individuals of the massacre to justice, Radovan Karadzic and Ratko Mladic, highlights the ever growing errors, and often seemingly complacent feelings, in the international justice system.
Although a number of minor individuals involved have been brought to justice, the ICC still seems reluctant to take the first step to convict a state on this crime.
Tony Hill, 26, who works within the media industry says; “I feel one of the reasoning’s behind the reluctance to prosecute Serbia, may have been because the uncertainty of what punishment should be applied.”
This indeed does raise the question of how could you punish a state on a crime that has never before led to a conviction? This leads to new policies and governmental discussions and practices that take time and effort. Perhaps effort that the people behind the courts are not ready for.
To highlight the lack of awareness within the same age bracket, Simon Hamby, 25 a student from Kingston University says; “I cant remember the genocide taking place and any details regarding it. It may seem close minded, but at the time I was quite
young and thought as it was another country, I felt it didn’t apply to me. Today, it seems such a long time ago, it hard to form an opinion and I feel quite detached.”
After being told of the glaring evidence pointing towards Serbia being responsible and the inconsistencies shown within the trial, he goes on to say; “However, it does seem that the issue is still as important to the people affected as it ever was. If families were torn apart by the killings, it should be the courts duty to prosecute those responsible.”
In all the reports that are available to read, Serbia comes across as the clear persecutor in the war. The eye witness accounts of U.N soldiers and Bosnian civilians clearly back up testimonies that say Serbia was behind the attack on Srebrenica. Coming so close and then allowing the country to be cleared leaves unanswered question, and for those that had placed all their hopes on justice prevailing at the trial, it seems to leave a strong taste of dissatisfaction and disgust.
Friday, 4 May 2007
Blicks and Wytes
Endevouring not to do some work due for tuesday im going to have a little rant. Spurned by a conversation with Don Juan i have too many thoughts in my head. If you dont want to read something that may be miscontrued to ignorent minds as racist and offensive, dont read on. You have been warned and i dont want to deal with the unneccessary backlash from small minds.
Right, are you sitting down? Here we go.
Im sick and tired of rascism. This isnt some rant about how its sickening blah blah blah. Thats a given, we all know its wrong. But...(and people who especially live in London will testify,) people have forgotten it works both ways.
Admittidly, back way yonder, it was blacks who were persecuted and turned over to the slave trade. No respect and treated like possesions and animals. But today, modern day, in a society where we are all too P.C suddenly everyone neglects the fact it is also whites that suffer at the hands of racism too.
Ive walked down the corridors in uni so many times to have a group of black people push me out the way, slam doors in my face and generally dont give a fucking shit im there, because i dont need respect apparantly. Common courtousy is shot to shit and im sick of it to be honest.
I would like to state that i am genuinly the least rascist person i know and i even have 'know your rights' tattooed on my shoulders, and that wasnt there just to apply to little ol' white me.
It seems to me that the atrocities black africans especially endured before means that the younger white generation are still being punished for it. Its almost like a huge chip on their shoulders that they carry around with a big fucking attitude.
Dont think im generalising of course. I try to take everyone on an individual basis. I mean you dont judge people on their race, sex, clothes etc. Well, in this politically correct world you shouldnt anyway.
Before christmas i had an argument with a black girl in my human rights class regarding race. She of course only thought rascism was a white on black thing and couldnt comprehend the idea of it being reversed. Simply not true!
We were discussing the news article about the 15 year old scottish lad who was kidnapped by Asian gang members and taken to a waste ground and murdered. He was heard screaming something horrific along the lines of 'im only 15 and dont know you, what have i done?" as they shoved him in the boot of the car. The details are becomming hazy but i think he was stabbed numerous times and set alight and left.
When they caught the guys who did it, the only reason they gave was that it was a revenge attack for one of their mates being jumped in a pub or something crap like that. They didnt even know him.
This girl in my class said that the only reason we heard about this story was because the newspapers are rascist and want to pick up on minority attacks against white people. I could see her point, but id like to belive that they reported it regarding the severity of the case. I dont think because they were different skin colours that takes it away in any shape or form.
She mentioned you never hear about black people being attacked and got on her high horse. I threw Stephan Lawrence and Damilola Taylor back in her face and she had nothing to say.
Another case, i was in the library and this guy had nicked my computer chair and there obviously is none spare because one per computer. I went up to the two black guys and said to one 'excuse me but could i have my chair back please as i need it to finish my work.' He looked at me like id shat on his kids and grunted something, without looking at me, that there was another chair around the corner. I couldnt find one, so looking slightly pissed off i strolled back to my computer. He swung round and barked at me 'take that chair!' Pointing to a chair by another computer, which was being used. A coat was on it, water bottles around pc, work on screen. You get the idea. So i said to him 'im not TAKING someone ELSES chair as they are using it!!!!' Now, i can guarentee that if i was a black girl, hed have been all manners and such to her. But because i was white he already thought i was having a go at him. Maybe im the one making assumptions? But you had to be there.
I guess what im trying to say is, im not rascist, for christ sake i went to school with so many different nationalities that i dont give a rats arse hole where your from. I take you on who you are and i always show manners, or try to, to whoever it is in the corridor or whatever.
Im just getting sick to death of being treated like i am a rascist because other people have hang ups. Surely those people that judge me and make assumptions are just as bad as the people they are complaining about?!
Right, are you sitting down? Here we go.
Im sick and tired of rascism. This isnt some rant about how its sickening blah blah blah. Thats a given, we all know its wrong. But...(and people who especially live in London will testify,) people have forgotten it works both ways.
Admittidly, back way yonder, it was blacks who were persecuted and turned over to the slave trade. No respect and treated like possesions and animals. But today, modern day, in a society where we are all too P.C suddenly everyone neglects the fact it is also whites that suffer at the hands of racism too.
Ive walked down the corridors in uni so many times to have a group of black people push me out the way, slam doors in my face and generally dont give a fucking shit im there, because i dont need respect apparantly. Common courtousy is shot to shit and im sick of it to be honest.
I would like to state that i am genuinly the least rascist person i know and i even have 'know your rights' tattooed on my shoulders, and that wasnt there just to apply to little ol' white me.
It seems to me that the atrocities black africans especially endured before means that the younger white generation are still being punished for it. Its almost like a huge chip on their shoulders that they carry around with a big fucking attitude.
Dont think im generalising of course. I try to take everyone on an individual basis. I mean you dont judge people on their race, sex, clothes etc. Well, in this politically correct world you shouldnt anyway.
Before christmas i had an argument with a black girl in my human rights class regarding race. She of course only thought rascism was a white on black thing and couldnt comprehend the idea of it being reversed. Simply not true!
We were discussing the news article about the 15 year old scottish lad who was kidnapped by Asian gang members and taken to a waste ground and murdered. He was heard screaming something horrific along the lines of 'im only 15 and dont know you, what have i done?" as they shoved him in the boot of the car. The details are becomming hazy but i think he was stabbed numerous times and set alight and left.
When they caught the guys who did it, the only reason they gave was that it was a revenge attack for one of their mates being jumped in a pub or something crap like that. They didnt even know him.
This girl in my class said that the only reason we heard about this story was because the newspapers are rascist and want to pick up on minority attacks against white people. I could see her point, but id like to belive that they reported it regarding the severity of the case. I dont think because they were different skin colours that takes it away in any shape or form.
She mentioned you never hear about black people being attacked and got on her high horse. I threw Stephan Lawrence and Damilola Taylor back in her face and she had nothing to say.
Another case, i was in the library and this guy had nicked my computer chair and there obviously is none spare because one per computer. I went up to the two black guys and said to one 'excuse me but could i have my chair back please as i need it to finish my work.' He looked at me like id shat on his kids and grunted something, without looking at me, that there was another chair around the corner. I couldnt find one, so looking slightly pissed off i strolled back to my computer. He swung round and barked at me 'take that chair!' Pointing to a chair by another computer, which was being used. A coat was on it, water bottles around pc, work on screen. You get the idea. So i said to him 'im not TAKING someone ELSES chair as they are using it!!!!' Now, i can guarentee that if i was a black girl, hed have been all manners and such to her. But because i was white he already thought i was having a go at him. Maybe im the one making assumptions? But you had to be there.
I guess what im trying to say is, im not rascist, for christ sake i went to school with so many different nationalities that i dont give a rats arse hole where your from. I take you on who you are and i always show manners, or try to, to whoever it is in the corridor or whatever.
Im just getting sick to death of being treated like i am a rascist because other people have hang ups. Surely those people that judge me and make assumptions are just as bad as the people they are complaining about?!
Thursday, 3 May 2007
Fuck raindrops and roses..this is what i want
People and things i think are legendary:
David Hasslehoff.
Steve Irwin.
Receeding hairlines.
Comb overs.
Neighbours.
Arm bands for swimming pools.
My thoughts when im stoned.
A room full of books.
Stupid dogs.
Terrible vinyl covers.
Superhero's and their pants.
Home-made gig flyers.
Karl Kennedy's midlife crisis.
Moronic people.
Susan Kennedy's wise words.
Jimi Hendrix hair.
Simon's sadness.
Firemen.
Birds flying into windows...thats timeless.
The image 'vasalene' conjours up.
Photos were im pulling a 'mong' face.
Zombies.
Cheesy films were the acting is top notch.
Colombo.
Sharon Stones crotch.
Tea.
Dogging on wye hill.
Stewie Griffins madness when it goes wrong.
Sellotape when it gets stuck to your shoe and you cant get it off.
The word 'vaginal'
The word 'ooze'.......i must stress the last two are not good together, so ive heard.
Pamela Andersons acting.
Lemmy's alcohol and drug intake.
Santa's beard.
Tony hart and his un natural fascination with playdo.
Garys trousers...i think he gets sewn into them.
My emo hair...shocking it really is.
The new Cravendale advert..."all around the world..."
David Hasslehoff.
Steve Irwin.
Receeding hairlines.
Comb overs.
Neighbours.
Arm bands for swimming pools.
My thoughts when im stoned.
A room full of books.
Stupid dogs.
Terrible vinyl covers.
Superhero's and their pants.
Home-made gig flyers.
Karl Kennedy's midlife crisis.
Moronic people.
Susan Kennedy's wise words.
Jimi Hendrix hair.
Simon's sadness.
Firemen.
Birds flying into windows...thats timeless.
The image 'vasalene' conjours up.
Photos were im pulling a 'mong' face.
Zombies.
Cheesy films were the acting is top notch.
Colombo.
Sharon Stones crotch.
Tea.
Dogging on wye hill.
Stewie Griffins madness when it goes wrong.
Sellotape when it gets stuck to your shoe and you cant get it off.
The word 'vaginal'
The word 'ooze'.......i must stress the last two are not good together, so ive heard.
Pamela Andersons acting.
Lemmy's alcohol and drug intake.
Santa's beard.
Tony hart and his un natural fascination with playdo.
Garys trousers...i think he gets sewn into them.
My emo hair...shocking it really is.
The new Cravendale advert..."all around the world..."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)