• All Purchases made this month instantly go into the draw to win a USD $ 100.00 credit to your HoP account.
 
Page: 1234
Skulduggery
GOLD Member since Aug 2004

Skulduggery

Pirate Pixie Crew Captain
Location: Wales

Total posts: 8428
Posted:Saddam Hussien has been sentenced to death by hanging. I just heard it on the BBC radio 4 news. It hasn't appeared on their news website yet but I'll give you a link when it does.



I'm not sure there was ever any doubt that the death penalty would be given... I still feel uneasy about it though. I really don't believe in the death penalty, but is it different in cases like this?



http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6117910.stm
This is the web page so far.

EDITED_BY: Skulduggery (1162718478)


Feed me Chocolate!!! Feed me NOW!

Delete Topic

robnunchucks
BRONZE Member since Jul 2004

robnunchucks

enthusiast
Location: manchester uk

Total posts: 363
Posted:ok i think i see where were geting our wires crossed im not saying bush is a nice guy or bush is absolved of guilt for anything like what im trying to say is hes the lesser of two evils or more to the point that sadam is the greater of two evils that though bush and sadam have both done things wrong sadam crimes have show more sadistic cruly and inhumanity the only reason for my original post (which started all this) was because the poier said was trying to make out that saddam wasn't as bad as bush which i dont agree with at all in my eyes thats like compaireing jack the ripper to adolf hittler there in diffrent leauges. as for wether bush deserves to be put on trial for war crimes i dont know, there is a case to be made for it sure but thats for another arguemnt.



ok fair enough we've got our wires crossed to me properganda meens from the goverment and bias meens what you think of as properganda a quick internet search revelease that this is a common problem http://www.historians.org/projects/giroundtable/Propaganda/Propaganda8.htm
br>
i dout we're the first people to get in a muddle over this anyways were agreed on this point infact under your defintion yes i'ed agree that 90%-99% of media is properganda under my defintion its not so as with alot of arguments the reason we disagreed we because we were useing diffrent defintions of the same word sorry it was an honist mistake smile



as for the horrific implications of my statment statement the implications were yours not mine the only point i was trying to make was again that the methods used by bush arn't as evil as the methods used by sadam i am in no way argueing that they are moraly vaid or should be aloud the reason i said i was horifyed was because people been kiddnaped and tourched by ether party is a horific concept to me and so was and i was horifyed by it but given the choice i know who i would rather be tourched by (not that me or anyone wants to be toruched at all smile ). again its the lesser of two evils



finaly why is it a weak response? the subject of all US dealings with all of the 3rd world is a big subject and it would be dishonist of me to pretend i knew enough about it all i was asking was for you to tell me some examples of the US screwing over a 3rd world contry so i could understand your point of view and maby if there is a good case there switch to it. my only other options are to read the entire history of the subject to find the examples, stuborbly wade into the argument without knowing anything about it or simply except what your saying without any seeing any of the evidence. non of those appeal to me so i would ask you to reconcider please can you show me some examples or at least point me to someware i can read about them? i dont think its an unfair request there nothing wrong with wanting to learn more.



finaly i realy would like to reach some kind of agreement between us i think your under the impresion im trying to justify bushs actions by pointing to sadam and saying hes worse im not. im simply saying nether of them are good men both have done teriable things but of the two saddam actions are more numorus and more horific i was worry that the thread was going turn into a saddams not so bad because bush is worse thread. something i think would be an afront to the people who have suffered at the hands of this violent phycopath dictator.



ps. you have to also understand i like to play devils advocate something i think needs to be done but that can rub people the wrong way from time to time biggrin



i look forward to your reply

EDITED_BY: robnunchucks (1163165049)


My nunchucks vital statictics biggrin

weight: 500g
handle lenght: 16 inches
chain length: 2 inches

Delete

Nonky


Nonky

member
Location: Belfast

Total posts: 44
Posted: Written by: coleman


i'm not in agreement wholly with either rob or ado-p here.

i personally do not believe in a universal 'right' and 'wrong' or 'good' and 'evil'.
as such, i would argue that there are degrees of inhumanity, but these degrees are specific to each person - if you don't feel any guilt for an act after you have committed it, it is not inhuman to your mind.

most days, i don't feel guilty about walking past homeless people and not donating my time/money/food to them.
i would concede to ado-p's standpoint that this might be seen as an inhuman act by some and it is my own moral/ethical code that lets me go on thinking that it is not inhuman (or perhaps only 'a bit inhuman' as someone speaking from rob's standpoint might contend).

but in national and international societies, there are things called 'laws' that help to mark out moral lines for all of us to follow.
many laws are about stating what 'inhuman' (or 'non-selfless') acts are 'acceptable' and 'unacceptable' to the society as a whole.

in many cases, its not illegal to kill someone in self-defense.
i would venture that most people, if they were protecting themselves/their loved ones from an attacker intent on killing or seriously harming them and they accidentally killed that attacker, would not consider their act to be an inhuman one.
but killing another person *is* inhuman in most people's books - and if there truly are no degrees of inhumanity, the circumstances of the inhuman act should not even matter.
does the commital of the inhuman act of 'killing another person' not make the defender as bad as other killers (or proxy-killers cos i doubt bush has ever shot someone) such as bush or saddam?

is not the ordering of the deaths of people as much of an inhuman act as actually carrying out those killings?
and if so, why is it just saddam that is being put to death?
where are the people who pushed the button on those gas chambers...?

and on that note, i hereby submit this interesting article smile


cole. x




Great post Coleman


Delete

Sethis
BRONZE Member since Mar 2017

Sethis

Pooh-Bah
Location: York University

Total posts: 1762
Posted:I think "inhumanity" is a misleading word.

Humans are the only people who deliberately kill billions of their own species. Humans are the only species that commonly rape, torture and abuse members of their own family.

Sometimes I feel that to be called "inhuman" is a compliment in its implications. shrug

I feel that if you execute someone for a crime then it acts as a deterrent for other people considering committing the same crimes. That's why I'm not sure if it would be better to have the death penalty for murderers/rapists instead of politicians. After all, politicians don't really have much to fear from justice, do they?


After much consideration, I find that the view is worth the asphyxiation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I may disagree with what you have to say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.

Delete

faith enfire
BRONZE Member since Mar 2017

faith enfire

wandering thru the woods of WI
Location: Wisconsin

Total posts: 3556
Posted:well,
there are lemmings that jump off cliffs, but maybe suicide does not count
rape is a act of power in the animal world. i've seen guinea pigs get raped by other pigs. a dog humping another is a dominance thing
animals do torture or abuse each other. have you seen how runts of a litter are treated. or if it percieved as a problem to the community, i've seen mice and rats kill one of their own
ants will kill those that don't belong in their territory
wolves and horses will fight and sometimes kill an intruder


Faith
Nay, whatever comes one hour was sunlit and the most high gods may not make boast of any better thing than to have watched that hour as it passed

Delete

ado-p
GOLD Member since May 2004

ado-p

Pirate Ninja
Location: Galway/Ireland

Total posts: 3882
Posted: Written by: Sethis


I think "inhumanity" is a misleading word.

Humans are the only people who deliberately kill billions of their own species. Humans are the only species that commonly rape, torture and abuse members of their own family.





Check out ducks and dolphins dude... and a tiger will happily rip out your throat and not even eat you.... o we judge them by our notions or theirs?


Love is the law.

Delete

Stout
SILVER Member since May 2004

Stout

Pooh-Bah
Location: Canada

Total posts: 1872
Posted:On lemmings

Good ole nature, red in tooth and claw, but not without it's romantic appeal.


Delete

faith enfire
BRONZE Member since Mar 2017

faith enfire

wandering thru the woods of WI
Location: Wisconsin

Total posts: 3556
Posted:ok....i shall find some other mass suicide or murders-i swear ants do something like that or termites

Faith
Nay, whatever comes one hour was sunlit and the most high gods may not make boast of any better thing than to have watched that hour as it passed

Delete

FireTom


Stargazer


Total posts: 6650
Posted:bounce good to have you back, Sethis biggrin

 Written by: Sethis


I think "inhumanity" is a misleading word.

Humans are the only people who deliberately kill billions of their own species. Humans are the only species that commonly rape, torture and abuse members of their own family.

Sometimes I feel that to be called "inhuman" is a compliment in its implications. shrug




I have to disagree, that humans are the only species killing each others, raping, torturing, etc. Certainly the degree in which man(kind) to conduct any act is different to those of the animal kingdom. Certainly IF we assume humans to act consciously - and animals are not - the act itself gets a different quality, then we might have to define "consciousness", maybe.

But hey, the fairy tale of "bad" human "good" animal has long faded (along with "good" child/ "bad" adult, "good" Palestinian/ "bad" Israeli, "good" mothers/ "bad" dad's and loads of other stereotypes, no?

 Written by: Sethis

I feel that if you execute someone for a crime then it acts as a deterrent for other people considering committing the same crimes. That's why I'm not sure if it would be better to have the death penalty for murderers/rapists instead of politicians. After all, politicians don't really have much to fear from justice, do they?



Well yes and no. At least IMHO.

In some countries we do (still) have death penalty, still people kill people. We have all kinds of penalties for all kinds of crimes, yet people continue to commit them. Jails are full with people, who thought that they wouldn't get caught, or did it for various other reasons. Therefore it's deterring to a certain degree only.

Political Immunity has it's reasons and I guess it's okay - unless abused. Saddam Hussein's case is completely different, my guess is that he didn't enjoy immunity for a very long time already. But the lesson is that only if you mess with the USand a few other countries, you have to fear loosing immunity - OR if you get out of office (Donald Rumsfield faces criminal charges in Germany)

However, I would not call it "inhuman", if one human kills another. I'm willing to go as far to say, that it can also happen to be an act of mercy... The term "Euthanasia" might ring a bell? Very human (whatever that means) AND very INhuman - depending... A very perverted form has been "practiced" during the Nazi regime.

Yet: When it comes to death penalty - I think it is a completely inapropriate tool to teach anything, or even to deter others.

The attempt to prosecute people with faith - in order to teach a lesson, or to try deterring other people with similar belief systems and raise awareness that their action was wrong (by using death penalty) - is stupid.

We can only give them time to ponder. If we kill them, they only get what they are looking for: Deliverance.

To me, Death penalty is ignorance and denial - nothing more.

Saddam is not Escobar. Jail is NOT fun - especially not outside "Western Civilisation"... and especially not if it's really for life.

But isn't it funny how the current "ultimate evil" even turns otherwise peaceloving hippies into a bloodthirsty savaging mob... confused


the best smiles are the ones you lead to wink

Delete

faith enfire
BRONZE Member since Mar 2017

faith enfire

wandering thru the woods of WI
Location: Wisconsin

Total posts: 3556
Posted:wow tom i think we agree on most of that

Faith
Nay, whatever comes one hour was sunlit and the most high gods may not make boast of any better thing than to have watched that hour as it passed

Delete

ado-p
GOLD Member since May 2004

ado-p

Pirate Ninja
Location: Galway/Ireland

Total posts: 3882
Posted: Written by: FireTom


But isn't it funny how the current "ultimate evil" even turns otherwise peaceloving hippies into a bloodthirsty savaging mob... confused



Ah the mob *le sigh*


Love is the law.

Delete

FireTom


Stargazer


Total posts: 6650
Posted:Yes, "the mob"... *countersigh* wink



Not as in




Non-Https Image Link




but as in




Non-Https Image Link




Just ponder for a sec: What is the difference between demonstrators in the streets of Teheran or elsewhere, demanding cartoonists to get beheaded, or the valued HoPper demanding Saddam Hussein to get hanged - from behind his screen? umm wink

EDITED_BY: FireTom (1163498792)


the best smiles are the ones you lead to wink

Delete

robnunchucks
BRONZE Member since Jul 2004

robnunchucks

enthusiast
Location: manchester uk

Total posts: 363
Posted: Written by: FireTom



Just ponder for a sec: What is the difference between demonstrators in the streets of Teheran or elsewhere, demanding cartoonists to get beheaded, or the valued HoPper demanding Saddam Hussein to get hanged - from behind his screen? umm wink





well the diffrence is the danish cartoonists drew a picture in newspaper that some people were offended by, saddam murdered torchered and percicuted hundreds of thousends of men women and children as well as starting two wars that got over 2 million people killed ontop of that original figure of several hundred thousend. if saddams only crime was drawing an offensive cartoon i dout anyone (well any hoPers anyway, im sure some muslims would want to behead him) would even want him punished at all infact he'ed probly have amnasty international gunning for him. the crimes of the two are hardly comparable!!!

EDITED_BY: robnunchucks (1163688593)


My nunchucks vital statictics biggrin

weight: 500g
handle lenght: 16 inches
chain length: 2 inches

Delete

FireTom


Stargazer


Total posts: 6650
Posted:Maybe...

It's all in the eye of the beholder... ?!

To some blasphemy is a sin - much more than killing people... shrug

Who are we to judge?

And who deserves to get killed? The one who pulled the trigger, or the one who ordered to pull the trigger.... ?


the best smiles are the ones you lead to wink

Delete

the_poier
SILVER Member since Jul 2005

the 1337 poier
Location: england

Total posts: 346
Posted: Written by: robnunchucks


 Written by: the_poier


I dont agree that sadam should be killed or any other human being, and if you do kill him you would have to kill Bush and every other leader for that matter, as 200 deaths to your own people is alot better than thousands done by someone interfering with other peoples politics just because they want some oil.



if you think sadam killed 200 people you odviously know very little about the situation though the exact figure will probly never be know it was closer to 600,000 - 1.2 million. iraqies in a contry of 22 million people.

and while i agree bush is no saint you should be carfull about geting caught up in the anti-bush feaver while america may have killed ALOT of inocent civilens the US did at least make an effort to avoid colataral damage.

for example they never gassed entire villiges of men, women and children because of there race.

after riseing to power bush didn't force the people left from the old goverment to execute there comrades who refused to support him.

bush doesn't have his own supporters terrifyed that them and there familys will be executed for disobaying him.

bush never instituted public executions by beheading of those he concidered sinful mostly women accused of prostituion to bolseter the religous faith of the nation.

and while the storys of the methods used at gentanimo bay are certainly not plesent the acts of sadam make them look like primary school bulling as sadam used methods such as fingernail-extracting, eye-gouging, genital-shocking, bucket-drowning and secret police rapeing prisoners' wives and daughters to force confessions and denunciations.

while i dont beleave in the death penelty i find it moraly difficult to suggest any other punishment that comes close to matching his crimes.

as for bush im no fan of him and i for one think the world would be better if he never gained power but to compaire him to sadam is simply rediculus



i know that my statistic was wrong and i based the number on something i thought i had read in this forum but i was probably wrong but it doesnt matter, as stalin once said you kill one person it is an attrocity, you kill one million people it is a statistic.


ive got a fuzzbox and im not afraid to use it
R.I.P. gayfest

Delete

FireTom


Stargazer


Total posts: 6650
Posted:I repeat my query:

Who is to be punished? The one who pulls the trigger, or the one who ordered to pull the trigger?

"Saddam killed xxxx million of people!"... pretty busy man he must have been... shrug


the best smiles are the ones you lead to wink

Delete

robnunchucks
BRONZE Member since Jul 2004

robnunchucks

enthusiast
Location: manchester uk

Total posts: 363
Posted:the_poier fair enough we all make mistakes from time to time but it does matter if he killed 200 or 500,000 people remember that stalin only said that to ilustrate how you can get away with mass murder and not be held up as a dispicable monster. by not distingusing between 200 or 500,000 your helping people like saddam and stalin get away with it. which was stalins point.



FireTom yes he was a busy man and in answer to your query both should be punished however there is no golden answer to that question the degree to which both should be punished depends very much in the individual circumstances of the situation. but i'll have a go anyways i would argue that in iraq most of the blame should be placed with saddam people who disobayed him were executed along with there familys. people beneath him would have been given a choice between there lifes and there familys lifes or the people they were ordered to kill the only person in the equation who could have prevented the acts easly and without fear of reprisals was saddam. So i would say most of the blame rests with him



to ilustrate this point you odvious are not a bad person now suppose someone broke into your house and held you and your family at gun point before pulling a stranger off the street and saying beat this person death or i will gun you and your family down. Then find someone else to kill this person. what would you do? though a difficult choice you would proberly kill the person to save your family as your refusal to coperate would not ultimately save him just delay his death (assumeing of course you realy did have no other options)



in that situation who should be punished you or the man that broke into your house? which of you is the bad person?

EDITED_BY: robnunchucks (1164044225)


My nunchucks vital statictics biggrin

weight: 500g
handle lenght: 16 inches
chain length: 2 inches

Delete

simian


simian

110% MONKEY EVERY TIME ALL THE TIME JUST CANT STOP THE MONKEY
Location: London

Total posts: 3149
Posted: Written by: FireTom

I repeat my query:

Who is to be punished? The one who pulls the trigger, or the one who ordered to pull the trigger?

"Saddam killed xxxx million of people!"... pretty busy man he must have been... shrug


Military leaders are responsible for the actions of those acting upon their orders.


"Switching between different kinds of chuu chuu sometimes gives this "urgh wtf?" effect because it's giving people the phi phenomenon."

Delete

FireTom


Stargazer


Total posts: 6650
Posted:Rob: please use ".,!?" Hard to read your posts.

We had the problem in Germany after East and West got re-united. Soldiers who were working at the border were trialled, because they shot people who tried to flee the country. Very tricky, because at some point the court said: "you had to disobey the order for humanitarian reasons" i.e. "you could have shot over their heads"

Now IF Saddam is to be held responsible for giving such orders: how about Ronald Reagan and the other US presidents who supported Saddam with intelligence and weapons. Saddam started a war against Iran, 2 Million casualties... This war was initiated also because the US wanted it.

If we're talking about responsibility, we should follow the thread to the very start, shouldn't we?


the best smiles are the ones you lead to wink

Delete

simian


simian

110% MONKEY EVERY TIME ALL THE TIME JUST CANT STOP THE MONKEY
Location: London

Total posts: 3149
Posted:Responsibility as you point out is a tricky business.

"Are we not all responsible for not stopping what has occurred?"

well yeah but no



It's one reason military\governmental\corporate organisations have a clear chain of command (usually so responsibility can be fobbed off on someone just below the person actually responsible).



Saddam ordered the poison gas attack on Halabja.



Reagan may be partly 'responsible' for Saddam's actions, but Reagan never directly ordered several hundred-several thousand (differing estimates) men women and children of his own civilian population be slaughtered in a particularly horrible fashion. An important distinction I'd say.



Halabja Gas Attack report from Human Rights Watch - don't read this unless you want to feel upset


"Switching between different kinds of chuu chuu sometimes gives this "urgh wtf?" effect because it's giving people the phi phenomenon."

Delete

FireTom


Stargazer


Total posts: 6650
Posted:Simian: I disagree - US presidents supported Saddam Hussein (amongst others, who were slaughtering people) with clear knowledge what the money/ intelligence/ weaponry was gonna be used for. Even Osama Bin Laden was supported by the US government.

Therefore (if measured with a strong ethical background) they share responsibility for what has occurred - especially in the case of Saddam Hussein. He would never have gone to war with Iran, if not with US support.

You ever heard the expression: "Winners justice"?


the best smiles are the ones you lead to wink

Delete

simian


simian

110% MONKEY EVERY TIME ALL THE TIME JUST CANT STOP THE MONKEY
Location: London

Total posts: 3149
Posted:I'm a little puzzled about what you're disagreeing about.

Are you saying Saddam is not responsible for the deaths that he ordered? confused

 Written by: Firetom

US presidents supported Saddam Hussein (amongst others, who were slaughtering people) with clear knowledge what the money/ intelligence/ weaponry was gonna be used for. Even Osama Bin Laden was supported by the US government.


Yes, that's all true. But how is it relevant? Saddam isn't on trial for starting/fighting the war, or the loss of lives of those who fought in the war, etc. You can get away with that kind of thing when you run a country.
Saddam has been found guilty of crimes against humanity for his attempted genocide during the war against Iran.

i fail to see why you seem to be saying that Ronald Reagan is equally responsible for the deaths of the Kurds.

Incidentally, i don't believe Saddam should be executed.
a) i feel very strongly that sanctioned murder by a justice system is inherently wrong.
b) i suspect that his execution will cause further violence.


"Switching between different kinds of chuu chuu sometimes gives this "urgh wtf?" effect because it's giving people the phi phenomenon."

Delete

FireTom


Stargazer


Total posts: 6650
Posted:Simian: Saddam killed Kurds (amongst other crimes against humanity) and even though this was known to western politicians, he still got supported.

How can one claim to have supported him "only in the war against Iran but not in the genocide against the Kurds"?

IMHO if one goes to bed with dogs, one wakes up with fleas...

Wouldn't you agree?


the best smiles are the ones you lead to wink

Delete

simian


simian

110% MONKEY EVERY TIME ALL THE TIME JUST CANT STOP THE MONKEY
Location: London

Total posts: 3149
Posted:Yes I would agree with all that.



I still hold Saddam to be responsible for the acts of genocide he ordered. Culpability of western politicians is far more tenuous.



If I choose to help someone out in some way, even though they're killing people, that makes me an accomplice, and a nasty person. But surely the person who decides to kill the people is the one mainly responsible for their deaths.



i'm still unsure if we're actually disagreeing about something here, but your posts seem to indicate you think western politicians are the ones "to blame" for atrocities when they had no motivation to cause them, and Saddam was actually the one with executive power who initated them. This seems a bit of a stretch.


"Switching between different kinds of chuu chuu sometimes gives this "urgh wtf?" effect because it's giving people the phi phenomenon."

Delete

faith enfire
BRONZE Member since Mar 2017

faith enfire

wandering thru the woods of WI
Location: Wisconsin

Total posts: 3556
Posted:i think that it is whether or not they can be held responsible as well, they had plenty of motivation economically and politically
iran was not cooperating so they backed iraq, now iraq took the inch and went a mile


Faith
Nay, whatever comes one hour was sunlit and the most high gods may not make boast of any better thing than to have watched that hour as it passed

Delete

FireTom


Stargazer


Total posts: 6650
Posted:Simian - I am certain that we do not disagree on anything here... We both want to see Saddam serving life, instead of taking the "easy way out", we both think that western politicians' responsibilities are very umm and should be under review - maybe even with consequences...

Saddam shouldn't get away, but he's also a pawn - a very nasty one that is...

Faih: I am not certain whether I get your post, but you are right that Iran did not cooperate and was therefore dragged to war with Iraq...

This phrase I really do no understand:

 Written by: faithinfire

now iraq took the inch and went a mile



the best smiles are the ones you lead to wink

Delete

faith enfire
BRONZE Member since Mar 2017

faith enfire

wandering thru the woods of WI
Location: Wisconsin

Total posts: 3556
Posted:we set them up with technology and money in return for fighting the then-big-bad, and since have run with that and become the current-big-bad
i don't care what you say about wmd. the geneocide happened and hussein ran with what was given and did whatever he felt would benefit him after he started taking over


Faith
Nay, whatever comes one hour was sunlit and the most high gods may not make boast of any better thing than to have watched that hour as it passed

Delete

FireTom


Stargazer


Total posts: 6650
Posted:The deed is done

Past years resolved

May his soul find mercy and deliverance


the best smiles are the ones you lead to wink

Delete

Rouge Dragon
BRONZE Member since Jul 2003

Rouge Dragon

Insert Champagne Here
Location: without class distinction

Total posts: 13215
Posted:I think it's a pity they executed him before he could be tried for EVERYTHING he should have been tried for.

i would have changed ***** to phallus, and claire to petey Petey

Rougie: but that's what I'm doing here
Arnwyn: what letting me adjust myself in your room?..don't you dare quote that on HoP...

Delete

Mr_Chutney
SILVER Member since Apr 2003

Mr_Chutney

Tosser
Location: Herefordshire

Total posts: 1711
Posted:Even having only partial knowledge of the atrocities he has committed, I feel shocked having seen this this morning.

Lets hope it serves at some catalyst for resolution to the ongoing mightmare that is Iraq at the moment.


Delete

Sym
BRONZE Member since Sep 2004

Sym

Geek-enviro-hippy priest
Location: Diss, Norfolk

Total posts: 1858
Posted:I am far too angery to post anything too long, but lets just say for now that I wish he wasn't dead.

I'm waiting for the Bush trial to start.


There's too many home fires burning and not enough trees

Delete

Page: 1234

Similar Topics

Using the keywords [saddam hussein] we found the following similar topics.
1. Forums > Saddam Hussein [109 replies]
2. Forums > Should Saddam be removed at any cost? This weeks Poll [18 replies]
3. Forums > Why bush Senior didn't remove saddam from power [8 replies]
4. Forums > Saddam execution= death of 10 yo? [24 replies]
5. Forums > War and Peace,.....did Saddam get the memo? [9 replies]

     Show more..