Warblog ArchivesSaturday, 02 Feb 2002Semi-Short Stuff  - I've added yet more newblogs. I am trying to make my own version of the Unablogger's meta warblog list. People are going to get the wrong idea about me if I keep running over there to get links. I'll admit if he had pictures of men, I'd be there for more than the links! I can't, unfortunately, link him from here because of my host's rules against linking to adult sites. However, he's at blogspot.com -- I'm sure you can figure it out. I'm not introducing the blogs this time, since there are just too many, but I have put asterisks next to the new ones, so you can tell which I added.
- One of the blogs I added has a rant (or three) on my earlier (yesterday) post on 'unborn children'. I understand his position, even if I don't agree with most of it. (I do agree that abortion should not be trivialized -- and I do support serious restrictions past the first trimester). Just to clarify: I was, in my post, referring with my finger to the 17% in the Gallup poll who would make abortion illegal under all circumstances. That group includes much of the 'religious right'. At any rate, this should prove I link even to those who disagree with me!
- I'm afraid those who believe Daniel Pearl is still alive are indulging in wishful thinking. I'm indulging in some myself despite my fears.
- More on SOTA: I don't really approve of government agencies for things -- but I advocate that we on the more libertarian side join the 'Citizen Corps' if possible, specifically because it is a group that could be easily misused. We need people in it who are willing and able to fight the possibility that some sections of it could be used for things other than terrorism (especially the police and informational sections). The AmeriCorps and Senior Corps are also in great need of some people with common sense. Peace Corps has some good things going, but could use a good kick in the butt on some of their ideology.
- The Citizens' Preparedness Guidebook has a lot of good common sense advice, but it is very general. I would advise downloading it and reading it, since much of it also applies well to non-terrorist emergencies. I live in an area that is prone to hurricanes, so most in my neighborhood have a lot of their suggestions going already. I would have liked to see some more specific suggestions for terrorist attacks such as "what to do in case of chemical/nuclear/biological attack". It seems to have been compiled from various already long-extant emergency handbooks, with a bit added about spotting and reporting possible terrorists.
13:53 EST Start or join a forum discussion!
I'm not getting into that I will not argue abortion, for the same reason I will not argue religion. However, I will argue that the attempt by Mr. Thompson to define a fetus as an insurable person from conception is an attempt to override the Supreme Court and the US Constitution without a constitutional amendment. Furthermore, his wording would not make the pregnant woman insurable, only the fetus. Her health would be covered only as far as necessary to insure the health of the fetus. Just so you understand why I have said that his attempt also is religiously intolerant, here is a list of religious organizations in the US that support choice.
19:42 EST Start or join a forum discussion
Friday, 01 Feb 2002Three in one Bush did a very nice speech the other night (the 'State of the Union Address' -- aka SOTA). I put up a quote I liked from that address. His administration has -- since his speech -- attacked three of his "non-negotiable demands of human dignity.When I heard the speech, I was hoping he meant that he considered himself (now, if not originally) -- and his administration to be part of "America". I was wrong. Tommy 'ineffectual on emergency health problems' ( note how long it's been since he's been in the news on anthrax) Thompson has come up with the idea to declare fetuses 'unborn children' (how very original) and thus to allow state governments to cover pregnant women under "SCHIP". It would have been just as easy to suggest changing the wording of the SCHIP to say "children and pregnant women". Nope... they would rather redefine fetus as "unborn child". Thompson was one of those appointed to make the radical right happy. He's just ignored any rule of law -- and has unilaterally declared that the US Supreme court is irrelevant. I doubt that the president was unaware of the attempt to overrule the supreme court. Bush believes that his religion's ideas of abortion should overrule all others. That is religious discrimination. He also believes that his worldview should undo the fact that the majority of the US people do not want stricter abortion laws and that the ones who do want the restrictions limited. The president's team wants abortion outlawed -- no matter what. They obviously don't respect women. They are among the 17% of the US who don't care if a woman will die of the pregnancy... they just want abortion illegal. This Gallup poll shows this is a religious divide (page down and look at the religion portion). I happen to be one of those women who would likely die if I got pregnant and did not miscarry within a few weeks. I'm just thankful I've never had to make the choice -- but I'm very glad that choice was there (at least since I was adult). You on the religious right would sentence me to possible death if I were raped, became pregnant, and did not immediately miscarry. Can you see my middle finger?
17:47 EST Start or join a forum discussion!
Thursday, 31 Jan 2002Unofficial blog watch Bush's Freedom Foundation President Bush's new Freedom Corpslooks pretty interesting. There's an overview of the ideas at whitehouse.gov. There will be a new "Citizen Corps", which I and the other Bellicose Women and Men will probably find interesting -- it's the defense branch! The Citizen Corps has its own website here (the link from whitehouse.gov is messed up at the moment). They have a "Citizens' Preparedness Guidebook" in pdf format, which I have downloaded. I will review it after I've had a chance to read it. You can get a print copy by calling 1-800-937-7383. The Freedom Corps will also include AmeriCorps, Senior Corps, and the Peace Corps. The intention is to expand all three, and at least double the size of the Peace Corps program over the next five years (I'm delighted at this). If Bush succeeds in getting the funding for this (I think he will), it is going to create a bit of consternation in the rather leftist gang of three above, and I think that will be a Very Good Thing. If we must have government backed volunteer agencies, it will be great to have them invaded by people who insist on programs with practical results -- rather than happy-fuzzy feel-good programs.
17:47 EST Start or join a forum discussion! Short Stuff - Dawson.com has posted a very sarcastic letter from Claire to Pilger. You go, girl!
- Charles at Little Green Footballs has a few words to say about Pilger and a cheer for Tony's and my rants. [I'm blushing.]
- My spell checker keeps wanting to change "Pilger" to "piglet". I find that very appropriate.
- Some young Bellicose Women™ are lobbying for the right of students at Mt Holyoke to carry firearms. I wish them success.
- The domestic terrorist organization, Earth Liberation Front, has claimed responsibility for a fire at the University of Minnesota. When I look at their success -- in carrying out attacks and in evading authorities -- it does not give me a whole lot of confidence in "homeland security".
- I'm impressed with Bravenet. I got a scam-spam e-mail, purportedly from support@icq.com (a chat program) this morning that asked for passwords (I got one the other day and issued a warning to ICQ users here). This letter's return went to an account at bravenet.com. I sent them a copy of the letter, with all the info, and they sent me a reply that the account has been deleted. Same day --less than 6 hours. I'm pleased -- many of these free sites take several days to deal with abusive users.
15:27 EST Start or join a forum discussion
Pilger "figures" traced! Dan Hartung (of Lake Effect fame) sent me an e-mail. He found the source of Pilger's figure of " between 7,000 and 10,000 Somalis killed." Dan says: I found a source for the "7000 to 10,000 Somalis" ... with the comma retained intact by Pilger. (Who knows what the Guaradependent style guide says, but it amused me.)
http://www.defencejournal.com/oct98/combating_regoinal.htm
This article says "CIA officials privately concede the US military may have killed as many as 7000 to 10,000 Somalis ...", attributed to Charles Maynes, editor of Foreign Policy (and a member of the Center for Defense Information). The footnote leads to ... an article in the Frontier Post (Pakistan) by ...
Noam Chomsky. The footnote says:"4. Noam Chomsky: No country has a monopoly on the guilt of war, The Frontier Post (Pakistan) August 8, 1995." Unfortunately, the Frontier Post archives don't go back that far. All I can say on these figures is that I distrust anything in which any "officials privately concede" any information. I can't imagine any CIA official even talking to Mr. Chomsky, let alone conceding any sensitive information to him. I'll let you all decide whether these figures are likely to be accurate -- or not. Just...consider that Chomsky is the source. Many thanks, Dan, for digging up that information.
08:52 EST Start or join a forum discussion!
Wednesday, 30 Jan 2002Yet More blogs added I have added more new blogs in addition to Grasshoppa's blog, which I linked because he(?) caught me being stupid. - Andrew Olmsted: "Personal Observations on current events, politics, baseball, and whatever else enters my twisted mind." He may have a twisted mind, but it's a pretty intelligent twisted mind.
- Ranting and Roaring by David P. Janes:"Now less useless than a nuclear submarine!" That's pretty damned useful!
- The Blogs of War by Dr. Frank:"Don't go back-- we'll be right away". Ummm, ok. If you say so.
- Quare by Eve Kayden: "All the news I can stand." Awww, c'mon -- you can stand some more...
- Protein Wisdom: "Welcome to protein wisdom, the weblog of Creatical.com, maintained by a loose alliance of fiction writers, poets, university educators, and wannabe pundits." Welcome to my links list, all of you.
- Insolvent Republic Of Blogistan by Justin Slotman: "The call and response of blogmaking continues --everyone has one and everyone says they're no sweat to have. I figure, why not put my thoughts out there? So here they are." You've got some good thoughts there, glad you put them out. By the way, I love your blog title.
- Other Blog News: I've changed the link previously named Jane Galt (at janegalt.blogspot.com) to her proper blog title of "Live from the WTC". The libertarians reading this may appreciate why I delayed changing it.
The Daily Pundit was previously known as The Blogical Suspect (a blog name I loved) but he is switching to a real site (like mine) at dailypundit.com, so I decided to respect his wish to be the Daily Pundit.
16:38 EST Start or join a forum discussion!
Short Stuff Just in case anyone is wondering, Short Stuff was started because I'm too darned lazy to do a separate post for every single interesting news item I found. Some are ones I just think readers might like a 'heads up' on, or might enjoy reading. It's my version of a news blog. Since I do this by hand, with no blogging program, it's a pain to keep uploading a home page and archive page for every short post. The title is also a kind of personal joke, since I'm pretty damned short. So... back to Short Stuff. - You may notice I have a quote from last night's speech at blog-top today. I think it is a pretty good statement, though I'd have been happier if he'd also advocated respect for men and children. I put it up there to remind me to keep an eye on everything he advocates that violates those "non-negotiable demands". I intend to send a letter to the White House every time I see a piece of legislation that he might sign that violates them. Sigh... he's likely to get a letter almost each day that one or the other legislature is in session.
- I was watching Fox News for the speech last night, but I turned it off before their "analysts" came on, because I found their "teaser" so damned offensive. It was "What did President Bush really say?" Excuse me? I really do think I can understand him fine for myself. I don't need condescending media to explain plain English to me. If it had been William F. Buckley making the speech I could understand that teaser -- but the president rarely uses words of over three syllables. If you didn't watch the speech, you can read it here
- Tony Adragna also did a fact check on Pilger, with lots of commentary and Damian Penny checked it against a checklist of stereotypical "anti-war, anti-American writing" They both linked my rant. I love the blogosphere.
- Suggested motto for Will Vehrs' Pundit Watch page :"What did the pundits really say?" He's got a new one up, by the way. I read it. Go thou, and do likewise.
- Michael Kelly has a rant about the Cardinals and Bishops who covered up the activities of the pedophile Priest. His main focus is on Cardinal Law, and Kelly thinks Law should resign. I don't think Mr. Kelly goes far enough. Law should resign and all of those should be investigated by the justice system for aiding and abetting. Priestly 'confidence of confession' is one thing, deliberately reassigning a known pedophile to a position where he can easily continue his activities would get any non-church official prosecuted right along with the pedophile. It should also get churchmen prosecuted. Just think what would happen to a school principal who reassigned a teacher known to be a pedophile to another school.
- One more small comment on Bush's speech (I'm still thinking about some aspects.) I am glad he included 'Homeland Security' and the Peace Corps in his "4,000 hours" suggestion. I was very afraid he was going to tell us all to be good little citizens and let the government take care of it all.
15:27 EST Start or join a forum discussion
More on Pilger Grasshoppa, whose blog has been newly listed on the left, has pointed out that I missed a very obvious error (or lie) in the Pilger article I critiqued yesterday. I feel pretty dumb for missing that one. But I have a new blog to read, so some good came of my embarrassment.
12:50 EST Start or join a forum discussion!
Tuesday, 29 Jan 2002New Sontag award nominee John Pilger's latest article in the London Daily Mirror, THE COLDER WAR, is misleading at best -- and more probably deliberately disingenuous. I decided to follow Ken Layne's direction and fact check his ass (or arse, since he's an Aussie living in the UK). He has so much nonsense that I would like to quote it sentence by sentence, but that would take two weeks, and would probably be a copyright violation besides. So, I'm picking out the worst of his statements. If you go to read the whole article, you might want to take a tranquilizer first. Pilger says: "The recent statements of British Ministers about the "vindication" of the "outstanding success" in Afghanistan would be comical if the price of their "success" had not been paid with the lives of more than 5,000 innocent Afghani civilians and the failure to catch Osama bin Laden and anyone else of importance in the al-Qaeda network."
Five thousand? I must assume he thinks Al Qaida and Taliban fighters are innocent civilians. Even the discredited figuring of Marc Herold only came up with 4,000. Later in the article, he comes up with some more interesting figures: "In 1993, in the last days of George Bush Senior's presidency, 18 American soldiers were killed in Somalia after the US Marines had invaded to "restore hope", as they put it.
A current Hollywood movie, Black Hawk Down, glamorises and lies about this episode.
It leaves out the fact that the invading Americans left behind between 7,000 and 10,000 Somalis killed." Now this one is interesting. I love the quotes around "restore hope" and the way he just snuck in the word "invading" without supporting it. I went to look up the casualty figures for Somalis during the incident. I found estimates ranging between 300 and 500 dead, with a total of about 1000 casualties. I found an article in the Philadelphia Inquirer that gave a bit of detail on the death estimates:
"Official US estimates of Somalian casualties at the time numbered 350 dead and 500 injured. Somalian clan leaders made claims of more than 1,000 deaths. The United Nations placed the number of dead at ``between 300 to 500.'' Doctors and intellectuals in Mogadishu not aligned with the feuding clans say that 500 dead is probably accurate."
That is no where near "7000 to 10,000 Somalis killed". I became curious about where he found the figures he used, assuming he didn't make them up (a big assumption). The only figures I could find that were close were from a 1993 NY Times article quoted on this site, plus a couple of interviews with Noam Chomsky, in which he quoted the same NY Times article (the article is not available on the web). The site mentioned above says:
"During the weeks from June 5 to October 3, 1993, U.N./U.S. forces inflicted 6,000 to 10,000 casualties on the Somali resistance, said Eric Schmitt in the the December 8, 1993, New York Times. Schmitt confirmed the account with US military intelligence, relief workers, UN officials and the US special envoy to Somalia. US Marine Corps General Anthony Zinni estimated that two-thirds of the casualties were women and children."
Chomsky also used these figures, and the word "casualties". Casualties are not the same as "killed", which Mr. Pilger should know, since he has been a war correspondent. He also fails to mention that it was both UN and US. I can find no online figures at all on how many of those casualties were deaths.
Pilger also makes this claim: "Brzezinski not long ago revealed that on July 3, 1979, unknown to the American public and Congress, President Jimmy Carter secretly authorised $500million to create an international terrorist movement that would spread Islamic fundamentalism in Central Asia and "destabilise" the Soviet Union.
The CIA called this Operation Cyclone and in the following years poured $4billion into setting up Islamic training schools in Pakistan (Taliban means "student")." I looked up Operation Cyclone but could only find it mentioned on anti-war sites, some referencing an article in the UK Independent from 1998 (not online). It appears to have been the "operation" involved in funding and arming the mujahideen against the Soviet Union. Here's a typical example of anti-war coverage (I link, you decide). I'm fairly sure this is as slanted as Pilger's article, but I don't have the information necessary to figure out which parts are dead wrong and which have some truth to them. If he -- or they -- want me to believe this, I'd like some proof from a neutral party.
Pilger continues with some partial information: "At that time, the late 1970s, the American goal was to overthrow Afghanistan's first progressive, secular government, which had granted equal rights to women, established health care and literacy programmes and set out to break feudalism.
When the Taliban seized power in 1996, they hanged the former president from a lamp-post in Kabul." Mr. Pilger somehow forgot to mention that the government was also communist and that it -- and the President -- had been installed by the Soviets. He also fails to acknowledge that the Soviets (and American influence) been out of Afghanistan for several years when the Taliban took over. The US did not back the Taliban, or even recognize them as a government when they took over. The rest of the article continues... mentioning: that the stock in armament companies went up after the attacks of September 11 (duh), oil pipelines, the School of the Americas, and lots and lots of things (presented as fact, with no information sources) that he says the US has done wrong. Undoubtedly some of the things he lists are US faults, but after finding all his faults in the beginning of the article, I am not going to believe anything more he says. Or bother hunting any more information.
[Thanks to an alert forum member --and fellow Bellicose Woman -- for the heads up on this article]
12:50 EST Start or join a forum discussion! Short stuff - It is interesting to note that I have seen nothing about the US ending the arms sale ban on India in any US media.
- Samizdata is engaging in a picture-orgy. My favorite is still the earlier referenced "sexy picture", but I think that the picture of Natalije will get most of the attention. I could hate a woman with legs like that... if I didn't like her writing so much.
- Unremitting Verse has been added to the blog list. If you would like a chuckle, go read "Jonah Goldberg's Dictionary".
- There's another new e-mail virus going around. "The e-mail arrives with the subject line, "new photos from my party," and purports to contain the URL to a Web page containing pictures of a friend's party. But what appears to be the URL www.myparty.yahoo.com is in fact an executable attachment capable of infecting a local machine with a copy of the virus."
- If you use the ICQ chat program... there has been an e-mail going around supposedly from "support@icq.com" asking you to fill in your user number and password in order to keep using ICQ. Don't do it -- the e-mail is not from ICQ and the user number/password gets sent to someone at a free server.
- NRO's blog, "The Corner" has an interesting discussion over the whether the detainees should be considered prisoners of war or unlawful combatants. Start at the link and work up. [Just an aside -- from the links, it appears The Corner group uses blogger to post...]
- Happy Birthday to Megan McArdle and Will Vehrs.
07:39 EST Start or join a forum discussion!
Monday, 28 Jan 2002The Lady Bought a Gun And she's not afraid to use it I'd like to welcome her to the ever-growing ranks of the Brigade of Bellicose Women. I may be a bit early on this, but I do think the attacks on September 11th will eventually be responsible for turning the vast majority of the nation against the anti-gun groups. The people have realized that it is up to us to provide our own defense. Police can rarely stop a crime in action and, while government may be able to defend us against other nations, it cannot do much to defend us against individual madmen. I'm a sentimental sort. That article brought both a big grin... and damp eyes.
16:09 EST Start or join a forum discussion! Short stuff - A note to the supercilious Charlotte Raven on her article about Charles Bishop: Heaven help the English misfit.
- We are (kind of) torturing the prisoners in Gitmo: "However, the United States has announced with pride that the prisoners are guarded by military personnel who include women. That is against every aspect of Taliban culture and a humiliation far worse than being denied a prayer mat." I suggest we send more female guards down there, and enthusiastically indulge in this one particular form of torture; I'd dearly love to see the liberals object to that! (So would the author of the article.)
- The US should loudly protest UN human rights violations -- selling people kinda qualifies as a human rights violation, don't you think? [link via Alex Knapp]
- My idea of a very sexy picture. (page down to the picture under "The tools of liberty in use")
- Get rid of the warlords in Afghanistan, this guy says. Easier said then done.
- It is again safe to go to the hospital in Kandahar. All the holed up Al Qaida in the hospital are dead.
- Seems the US government has finally admitted that the Saudis do want us out. I assume they had some overriding "security reasons" for denying that last week....
- Osama bin Laden's alive. No, he's dead. Whatever. I still expect one of our tabloids to announce he's been spotted working at Burger King -- or that he's been picked up by space aliens.
- Even China does pay some attention to world opinion. They've sentenced the bible smuggler to two years in jail. That's better than a death penalty.
- The Captain of the USS Clueless talks about the kidnapping of Daniel Pearl and makes an excellent point: "It is amazing that only five months since thousands of "non-combatants" were slaughtered in NYC that this lesson has already faded: there are no non- combatants in this war. Every American has a target painted on his chest." Remember that, especially if you are in hostile territory.
11:32 EST Start or join a forum discussion!
Sunday, 27 Jan 2002Whimsy I was much amused -- and impressed -- by Will Warren's "Hiawatha versus the Bloggers" on Unremitting Verse. I was also, shall we say, inspired -- and mildly insulted that I was not mentioned. I rarely write poetry (except for limericks -- if you call those poetry) and almost never inflict what I little I do write on the unsuspecting public. However, considering the late controversy about web logs, and political blogs in particular, I have started a bit of a song for warbloggers -- with only a few verses done so far, but I will add to it as the muse strikes. Since I do like my readers, and I'm not into torture of people I like, I have posted it on its own page where no one will have see it unless they are crazy enough to click on the link.
18:41 EST Start or join a forum discussion! Iraq: conspiracy theory I was listening to someone on Fox going on about why we should attack Iraq the other day. I commented to a friend that I thought that the enthusiasm for attacking Iraq was fueled at least in part by ego. Since we left Iraq without getting Saddam Hussein, I had decided that "getting him" was a matter of pride. My friend said there was just as much argument for the theory that Rupert Murdoch wants us to attack Iraq. Since Murdoch owns Fox and the NY Post in the US, and both seem rather enthusiastic about attacking Iraq, I thought that was a reasonable conspiracy theory. If you keep saying something should happen, and that "sources say" it may well happen... eventually someone in the government will start thinking it's a good idea. Then I thought again. It isn't just Fox, or the NY Post, or even all the media outside the US that is owned by Murdoch that have this "US will attack Iraq" obsession. All the media, in most countries, seem to have it. Whether they present it as a "the US should think again" story or "go baby, go" story -- almost everything I've read or heard seems to be -- secretly in some stories, overtly in others -- hoping we will attack. I have developed a new conspiracy theory. All of the media wants the US to attack Iraq. Why? Ego. The media, both right and left, misjudged Afghanistan. They didn't understand the war (with a few exceptions), how it worked, or why it is working as it does. They also hated being kept in the dark about special forces, and reporting on a war from the country next door. They have; however, found out that an active war results in much higher news viewing. So, they want a war with masses of tanks lined up, and lots of ground troops. They want a war they can understand, and one where they can follow massive troop deployments -- ones that are not hidden and then given them as a press handout two weeks later. They want a war they can watch, and predict, and star in. So they are all going to yap about Saddam Hussein in the hopes we will go attack just to shut them up.
16:32 EST Start or join a forum discussion! Short stuff - The unvarnished and interactive Sunday Pundit Watch is up.
- Stupidity watch: "How can we stay silent when Afghani detainees are shackled, goggled in a prolonged sitting position and even muzzled?" Excuse me? As far as I know, we have never detained any Afghan money, in or out of shackles. Even if we ignore that misuse of the language, there are detainees from 25 countries in Gitmo, and 24 of those countries are not Afghanistan. I'd also be very curious to know what this person is defining as a "muzzle". In fact, I'd recommend that whole sentence as an excellent example of bad grammar (but that's a different rant).
- Happy Fun Pundit gets letters!
- Seems the school bus driver who went astray Thursday was a nutcase, but intended the children no harm. He wanted to take the kids on a field trip to Washington, DC.
- The latest Palestinian suicide bomber was a woman. Let's drop this idea of "profiling", ok? It's much safer to be suspicious of everyone.
- A letter from Gitmo. Kathleen Parker writes a really good one now and then.
- I wonder if Mushareff would like to grab some money.
- I wouldn't be surprised if the CIA or FBI shows up at my door someday, wondering why I access sites like the one above... and list them on my blog links page.
15:17 EST Start or join a forum discussion!
No tolerance! I got up this morning, and began browsing around. I soon found two very sickening articles on the Guardian, describing videos that are being used to recruit British Muslims. One of the videos shows -- and celebrates -- graphic scenes of murder.I did some further browsing, and ran across an excellent post by Bjørn Stærk regarding a Kurdish immigrant who murdered his daughter because she had a Swedish boyfriend. I'm all for respecting other cultures -- but only when they deserverespect. Some things should be neither respected, nor even tolerated, in free countries. I truly believe that if we do not fight the idea that all cultures are equally good, if we do not cease being tolerant of abuse and hate, simply because it is cloaked in "multiculturalism" or hiding behind "religious tolerance", we will destroy ourselves. Immigration has, and will continue to, enrich all of our societies -- but only if the immigrants accept our laws and certain basic assumptions of our cultures. If they refuse to accept these, they should be tossed out immediately. Back when the British had an empire, they understood that some things are intolerable. They banned suttee in India (and rightly so). Now they put up with people who distribute snuff films that advocate killing their citizens -- they ignore those who force daughters into unwanted marriages and advocate abuse -- because they are afraid someone will accuse them of "racism" or "religious bigotry". Gentlemen and ladies of Britain -- stop it right now, arrest them and/or deport them. People who do such things do not deserve to live in your country. Or mine. Or any free country. There is a big difference between respecting differences and tolerating hate and abuse. I call on all free citizens and free countries to draw that line, and stop tolerating the intolerable.
09:27 EST Start or join a forum discussion! |
