Well. truth is, Russia is getting more democractic while the US, Canada, UK (ANGLO-sphere) is getting less so.
Especially the US. It's the most fake democracy in the world. And they have the temerity to lecture others - and bomb them endlessly if disobedient to the Empire - about how to run their affairs.
Very impressive swallow. you've obviously done your homework. clap clap.
Thanks, but it only took me 15 seconds and one google search term to break the "blackout" and discover there's a lot of media coverage of Russia's election, so no great accomplishment.
Russia's economy has been in recession for 18 month
http://money.cnn.com/2016/08/11/news/economy/russia-economy-recession-si...
The Russian elections have come and gone, the conservatives are back in again, the Communists have declined a little - but still the leading Opposition Party - and the Western MSM, lacking any controversy, has reduced itself to sniping from the sidelines, either claiming "no opposition" in the "dreary" police state or magnifying the clearly reported election irrregularities molehill into a mountain.
In other words, the same old shit from the West, as ever.
Interestingly, the Communist leader noted that such a low turnout indicates unhappiness with the current administration. But they are not able to mobilize the other 2/3 of the voters. A similar problem, perhaps, to what we have in the left in the imperialist West.
Not that the Western left, so full of Russophobia itself, cares.
The Obama regime has, despite barbarous, but spurious, sanctions, failed to achieve the objective of undermining support for the Russian President. Instead, the latter's support has sky-rocketed. American plans for regime change, undoubtedly ongoing, have failed to deliver.
And now the US regime has amped up the conflict in Syria, with those elements of the barbarous Washington regime longing for face-to-face conflict with Russia seeming to get their way, worsening relations further. Thermonuclear war? "Yes, please, with extra potatoes," says the Western elites.
Russia will, once again, have to solve global problems with its own leadership, along with their much closer Chinese friends, as relying upon the Western barbarians is a fool's game. But Russia is used to saving the world, having done it against Napoleon Bonaparte and again against Hitler.
But Russia is used to saving the world, having done it against Napoleon Bonaparte and again against Hitler.
You know, I don't think anyone is going to deny the importance of Russia in the Second World War. The war could not have been won without them.
But I do think you are conveniently forgetting a point raised in another recent thread that the war very nearly was NOT won because of Russia's agreement with Hitler to invade Poland, support Hitler's navy with direct military aid (helping his navy with icebreakers), and them supporting the Nazis by selling them rubber, oil, and other raw material important to the war effort.
Between January 1940 and date of the German invasion the total Soviet export to the Germany estimated at 597.9 million Reichsmarks. The German deliveries accounted as 437.1 million Reichsmarks.[1]
The agreements continued Nazi–Soviet economic relations and resulted in the delivery of large amounts of raw materials to Germany, including over 900,000 tons of oil, 1,600,000 tons of grain and 140,000 tons of manganese ore.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German%E2%80%93Soviet_Commercial_Agreement...
And things would have been very different had Hitler accepted Stalin's request to join the Axis.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German%E2%80%93Soviet_Axis_talks
So you want to talk about Russia's important role in the world, fine.
Implying that they saved the world from Nazism? Not entirely true.
At the point where there was only one European nation left in the fight against Hitler, Russia was holding Hitler's coat for him, and providing oil to fuel the planes bombing London.
We can talk about this more in the thread about the invasion of Poland, if you wish. But since you make the claim here, I figured it was fair to mention it.
lolo. Trolling, trolling, trolling.....
No ikosmos.
A fair question about a claim which you make a lot, but which is not entirely true.
You don't want the question? Don't make the claim.
Like I said, we can go back and talk about it elsewhere if you want.
You don't want the question? Don't make the claim.Like I said, we can go back and talk about it elsewhere if you want.
You're going to lecture me about what I can discuss here and under what circumstances? <<chuckles>> What sort of reply were you expecting, I wonder? Other babblers have noted your policing of threads, used the metaphor of Roy Rogers with some pearl-handled pistols and sequined shirts, and had a good laugh. You really should read those memos when they come your way.
Policing threads is, in any case, a waste of time for anyone except the horribly underpaid moderator(s).
And this, while you have nothing to say about the recent elections in Russia?
I guess they don't fit the narrative of a nearly collapsing, ever malevolent, always sneaky and dangerous, terminally boring, sometimes hiding under the bed, uncultured police state society, huh?
Happy Trails.
You don't want the question? Don't make the claim.Like I said, we can go back and talk about it elsewhere if you want.
You're going to lecture me about what I can discuss here and under what circumstances?
Did I tell you what you can and cannot talk about? Where did I do that?
As you see in the quote you pulled, I even invited you to come talk about it elsewhere if you are embarrassed to do so here.
But my main point was that if you raise an issue, it is open for discussion, and that to respond with a reasonable point is not trolling.
In this case, you opened the door. You don't want people questioning your points? Then perhaps you should consider what you say.
As for your last comments in #58 - things which I neither said, nor believe - I'll just let that one pass.
The Russian elections have come and gone, the conservatives are back in again, the Communists have declined a little - but still the leading Opposition Party - and the Western MSM, lacking any controversy, has reduced itself to sniping from the sidelines, either claiming "no opposition" in the "dreary" police state or magnifying the clearly reported election irrregularities molehill into a mountain.
In other words, the same old shit from the West, as ever.
Interestingly, the Communist leader noted that such a low turnout indicates unhappiness with the current administration. But they are not able to mobilize the other 2/3 of the voters. A similar problem, perhaps, to what we have in the left in the imperialist West.
Not that the Western left, so full of Russophobia itself, cares.
The Obama regime has, despite barbarous, but spurious, sanctions, failed to achieve the objective of undermining support for the Russian President. Instead, the latter's support has sky-rocketed. American plans for regime change, undoubtedly ongoing, have failed to deliver.
And now the US regime has amped up the conflict in Syria, with those elements of the barbarous Washington regime longing for face-to-face conflict with Russia seeming to get their way, worsening relations further. Thermonuclear war? "Yes, please, with extra potatoes," says the Western elites.
Russia will, once again, have to solve global problems with its own leadership, along with their much closer Chinese friends, as relying upon the Western barbarians is a fool's game. But Russia is used to saving the world, having done it against Napoleon Bonaparte and again against Hitler.
More on the elections. There's a reasonable summary at The Duran over here: what the results of the election mean and for whom
It's a short read, so not much of a need to summarize. Both the Communists and the LDPR are legitimate opposition parties and remain so. Zhirinovsky, in the view of the author, doesn't deserve the caricature that is typical in Western MSM. But perhaps the most interesting remark had nothing to do with the election.
Demographically, older individuals tend to vote Communist, though this should not be thought of as a negative statement the way it is in the West. The West’s glorification of the vanity and stupidity of youth is not much of a social phenomenon in Russia, with society there on the contrary still tending to respect and value the contribution of those with life experience.
There's a real cultural difference and, frankly, it's us in the West who look the worse here.
Those with "life experience" here in Canada seem to overwhelmingly choose to use it try to steer us away from the rocky shoals of equal marriage, marijuana, brown immigrants and Facebook.
Bullshit ageism.
Bullshit ageism.
Conservative supporters are now equally spread across the age spectrum?
Political activists that are older have always been treated with respect in the political circles I have moved in here in Canada.
Depending on their age?
Or depending on their politics?
Duran author remarked: "The West’s glorification of the vanity and stupidity of youth is not much of a social phenomenon in Russia, with society there on the contrary still tending to respect and value the contribution of those with life experience."
Those with "life experience" here in Canada seem to overwhelmingly choose to use it try to steer us away from the rocky shoals of equal marriage, marijuana, brown immigrants and Facebook.Bullshit ageism.
Or Magoo's typical contrarian response on plenty of issues. Or Russophobia. meh.
Political activists that are older have always been treated with respect in the political circles I have moved in here in Canada. I think that's one way, perhaps, the left is actually able to show its ethical superiority to bourgeois cosmopolitanism and (a fake?) idolatry of youth. The expression from the author on the Russian elections was striking to me as I'd never read it expressed so baldly before.
Sidebar: ffs, we have all, if we have lived, heard expressions about/or seen the vanity and stupidity of youth: "young, dumb and full of c*m," or perhaps a relative who had a sadly shortened life, hockey riots or fights, and a million other ways....
And I think the shoe fits. The post WW2 generations and the bloated marketing and advertising Moloch combine to make this endless grasping at vain efforts to preserve youth, an ugly disdain for the natural aging process for women (eg, in film), a fake interest - except as a section of targetted advertising and fake coolness and the like - in young people while providing them no or little hope for a future, on and on it goes...
Political activists that are older have always been treated with respect in the political circles I have moved in here in Canada.[a]Depending on their age?
[b]Or depending on their politics?
a. yes.
b. untested claim as I was addressing only those who shared my, or similar views. Maybe someone else - like you Magoo - can address how conservatives or liberals treat their "veteran" members and supporters. I don't hang out with such people and I sure as hell don't belong to the same political organizations as them.
Political activists that are older have always been treated with respect in the political circles I have moved in here in Canada.
And that's kind of my point.
If someone is a 98 year old NDP stalwart who disagrees with the national census then sure, all good progressives agree that she has much wisdom to impart to us.
But if you're a 98 year old guy sitting at the back of the Tim Horton's railing on and on about immigrants, then who cares how old you are, grandpa? Go binge-watch Matlock or something.
Sidebar: ffs, we have all, if we have lived, heard expressions about/or seen the vanity and stupidity of youth: "young, dumb and full of c*m," or perhaps a relative who had a sadly shortened life, hockey riots or fights, and a million other ways....
And I think the shoe fits. The post WW2 generations and the bloated marketing and advertising Moloch combine to make this endless grasping at vain efforts to preserve youth, an ugly disdain for the natural aging process for women (eg, in film), a fake interest - except as a section of targetted advertising and fake coolness and the like - in young people while providing them no or little hope for a future, on and on it goes...
Bullshit agism.
It's not about youth. It's about capitalism.
Bullshit ageism.
Conservative supporters are now equally spread across the age spectrum?
Those with "life experience" here in Canada seem to overwhelmingly choose to use it try to steer us away from the rocky shoals of equal marriage, marijuana, brown immigrants and Facebook.
If you want to say inane things thats one thing but you need to own them when they cross some lines.
As a newly minted senior citizen I would like you to tell me which generations were involved in the battles for equal marriage, legalized marijuana and racial equality. I know that I have worked on those issues for many decades and some of the people I have worked with have been twenty years older than me. The battle over marriage equality was fought from the '80's until the turn of the century when the Charter challenges succeeded in court. Most of our youth had not even started school by then. Of course as in my generation the youth who could be described as vain and stupid are not all of the youth because there are many fine activists in all generations.
What happens to a pollster when Russia doesn't like the results:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/sep/20/ollster-russia-results-lev...
If you want to say inane things thats one thing but you need to own them when they cross some lines.
No need to take it personally. I wasn't referring to you, or your friends. I was just talking about demographics.
Am I using incorrect demographics? If there's no age skew then I'll correct my assumptions and retract. But I could have sworn that older voters skew strongly toward conservatism.
What happens to a pollster when Russia doesn't like the results:https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/sep/20/ollster-russia-results-lev...
Good on the Russian authorities for giving all foreign-funded N"G"O's the heads up; if you are funded by a foreign government [or a foreign funding source generally] , no matter how they hide the funding, you are on a list. And if you are funded by the US government, expect all the orifaces of your organization to be carefully examined. Because freedom, or whatever.
Leveda is number 141 by the way. Too f*cking bad for George Soros. Furthermore, anyone who claims that Leveda is being "picked on" for posting results "Russia doesn't like" can pick up their cheque from the US government on the way out. There's zero factual basis to back up such an incendiary claim.
There is, however, a "Patriotic Stop List" noted by the Federation Council that includes:
" ... George Soros' Open Society Foundations, the National Endowment for Democracy, the International Republican Institute, the National Democratic Institute for International Affairs, the MacArthur Foundation, the Charles Stewart Mott Foundation, the Education for Democracy Foundation, the East European Democratic Center, the Ukrainian World Congress, the Ukrainian World Coordinating Council and the Crimean Field Mission on Human Rights."
The list, submitted on July 8, consists of eight American, three Ukrainian and one Polish organization, and includes well-known bodies such as Freedom House, the MacArthur Foundation, the Soros Foundation and others. Senators believe that through these organizations “pressure is being exerted on Russian values and institutions” because, as a rule, these organizations are funded by foreign governments.
Leveda is not on that list. Paying attention, Doug? lol
Some background from last year ...
‘We are not naïve’
There are 15,000 foreign policy NGOs operating in the United States and some of them have budgets exceeding that of the Russian Foreign Ministry, said Federation Council speaker Valentina Matviyenko.
“It is clear what huge sums are being allocated under the guise of improving democracy <…> and it is clear to what end. We are not naïve,” she added.
See 2015 article for more detail, some critical I might add.
If you want to say inane things thats one thing but you need to own them when they cross some lines.No need to take it personally. I wasn't referring to you, or your friends. I was just talking about demographics.
Am I using incorrect demographics? If there's no age skew then I'll correct my assumptions and retract. But I could have sworn that older voters skew strongly toward conservatism.
"seem to overwhelmingly choose to use"
It is your hyperbole that I am objecting to. Root around in this age based statistics and you will find that support for the Conservatives is highest amonst 60+ voters but they are a plurality not a majority and certainly not an overwhelming majority.
http://abacusdata.ca/canadian-politics-a-generational-divide/
Then I formally withdraw my use of the word "overwhelmingly".
The West’s glorification of the vanity and stupidity of youth is not much of a social phenomenon in Russia
Conversely, Russia's glorification of the hidebound reactionism and nostalgia of the elderly is not much of a social phenomenon in the West.
Those with "life experience" here in Canada seem to overwhelmingly* choose to use it try to steer us away from the rocky shoals of equal marriage, marijuana, brown immigrants and Facebook.
But I'm glad that Baba knows best.
* left in situ for historical continuity, otherwise redacted.
summary of Sergey Lavrov’s speech to the UN General Assembly
There was plenty of good sense here, but perhaps the following would be of note to babblers ...
Lavrov then addressed the controversial witch hunt against Russian athletes saying that sport must never be used as a political instrument. Comparing the treatment of Russian athletes to the leniency extended to Western athletes, he pointedly referred to Orwell’s famous expression in Animal Farm that ‘all animals are equal but some are more equal than others’. The irony of a book hostile to Soviet Communism being quoted by a modern Russian Foreign Minister in criticism of Western actions should have been lost on no-one in the room, though I wouldn’t hold my breath waiting for Samantha Power and her ilk to understand this.
..................
"The irony of a book hostile to Soviet Communism being quoted by a modern Russian Foreign Minister in criticism of Western actions should have been lost on no-one... "
Now isn't that just delicious? C'mon Russophobes! Have at it!! lol.
Dude really, nothing like the pot calling the kettle black. If there are any "phobes" around here you one of them...
Not that your capable of seeing that.
So anyone who dares respond to that hates Russians?
Are you here to talk about things or just bait people and look for targets to throw things at.
I mean, that fucked up reading of Orwell is a nice piece of cheese, but I expect most here have figured that out for themselves.
Nice to see that Samantha Power has such solid babblers for friends. By the way, her latest memo is that Russia should be banned from the U.N. Still looking for the direct quote.
No, I'm not kidding.
Check her panic-stricken demagogery at the UN recently.
Rage, rage, against the dying of the light. Do not go gentle into that good night.
Given that Russia is now (seemingly) complicit if not outright responsible for shooting down passenger aircraft:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/29/world/asia/malaysia-air-flight-mh17-ru...
Perhaps some U.N.-backed sanctions are indeed in order.
Yeah, we had a rather lengthy discussion about MH-17. Have a look for the threads. The latest Russian sources seem to show that the BUK missile (if that is what was used) did not come from the resistance in Donetsk/Lugansk.
The NYT also was part of the campaign arguing that Iraq needed be invaded and bombed and occupied, killing a million children, when it turned out that their "evidence" was, well, a crock of shite.
It has already been remarked by others, e.g., P. Escobar, - given how these shoot-downs have been resolved in the past - that the issue will be settled in the courts. Families of the deceased will sue left and right and eventually the whole thing will work its way through the court systems.
Such was the case in the previous shooting down by pre-coup d'etat Ukraine of a passenger aircraft. Look it up.
Yeah, it beats the jet shot down story they tryed before that... LOL
And the zombie plane full of dead bodies story.
And the zombie plane full of dead bodies story.
Oh, heck. Spoilers for anyone who hasn't yet read John Varley's "Millennium".
Really? No, Igor Girkin actually threw that one out there. Apparently it was some dark ops thing they pulled off at Schipol. Loaded the plane up with dead bodies.
He said the bodies didn't look right. I guess he'd know, being in the business.
I think someone else came up with the one that this was why MH370 disappeared - because they needed a plane.
Ukraine Admits it Shot Down Russian Airliner
(previous atrocity of Ukrainian regime from 2001 - down the rabbit hole for upthread babblers)
Ukraine finally admitted yesterday that its military shot down a Russian airliner that crashed into the Black Sea last week, killing all 78 passengers and crew.Evhen Marchuk, the chairman of Ukraine's security council, conceded that the plane had probably been brought down by "an accidental hit from an S-200 rocket fired during exercises".
Russian investigators believe a missile exploded near the plane, spraying it with shrapnel. Russian and Israeli scientists found metal pellets in the victims and in the fuselage.
Vladimir Rushailo, the chairman of Russia's security council, said: "The investigation has found that the disaster resulted from a strike by a warhead from an anti-aircraft missile."
Although both Russia and Ukraine were almost certainly aware of the cause from the start, it took eight days for Ukraine to accept responsibility.
The Daily Telegraph is a very right wing publication, used to publishing stories such as "Putin killed my mom" and so on, so a pro-Russian bias in the reporting isn't plausible. Well, except for ....
So what is the lesson here?
That unlike Russia and the rebels, Ukraine admits when it accidentally shoots planes down? And a week after it happened too, as opposed to how long has it been now?
Probably saved a lot of people a lot of unnecessary grief in an already terrible situation.
lol. Yeah, just like the US bombing of Hiroshima "saved a lot of people a lot of unnecessary grief in an already terrible situation". I've got to remember your latest boilerplate. bwa ha ha ha.
But we aren't talking about WWII. We're talking about now. Try to focus.
And it is your example, ikosmos.
of a nation fessing up when it commits a terrible act.
In contrast to what the rebels, and the Russians who supplied the rocket, did NOT do.
... of a nation fessing up when it commits a terrible act.
Ukraine "fessed up" since the military and/or aiviation authorities in the Russian Federation had the evidence. And I will say that at least, at that time anyway, [unlike now] the Ukrainian government paid reparations to the families of the victims.
In contrast to what the rebels, and the Russians who supplied the rocket, did NOT do.
Misleading crap as usual. There's plenty of Russian media reports, in English, that addresses the kind of BUK rocket that was allegedly used, how that version is long expired from the Russian Fed's inventory, etc., etc..
A NATO member state, namely the Netherlands, heavily involved in propping up the brutal regime in Kiev and drawing them over to the dark side in the barbaric NATO alliance, makes a report in which the only premise allowed is that "Russia did it" [or the resistance supplied by the "dastardly Rooskies"] ; a report in which one of the key suspects [Ukraine] is allowed a veto over the entire report; a report in which the bulk of the "evidence" in supplied by [read: fabricated by] Ukrainian Intelligence, or off the internet for f*ck's sake; a report whose authors deliberately excluded, in advance, all the evidence provided by or offered by the Russian Federation, and you lap up this shite like the cat laps up the juice from the tinned salmon.
Taste good?
ikosmos, that's utter bullshit. The investigation was thorough, there is evidence. Russia won't cop to their involvement because... Well, we're not sure. Maybe Vlad's worried that taking responsibility will make people wonder about the size of his dick, who knows? But sputtering on isn't going to change the conclusion.
The "Russians can do no wrong" schtick is pretty worn out.
Ukraine "fessed up" since the military and/or aiviation authorities in the Russian Federation had the evidence. And I will say that at least, at that time anyway, [unlike now] the Ukrainian government paid reparations to the families of the victims.
So what was your point in posting about the fact that they admitted before, while the party found liable this time will not?
(excuse me for picking what seemed like the obvious one)
ikosmos, that's utter bullshit. The investigation was thorough, there is evidence. Russia won't cop to their involvement because... Well, we're not sure. Maybe Vlad's worried that taking responsibility will make people wonder about the size of his dick, who knows? But sputtering on isn't going to change the conclusion.
Are you being paid by a NATO fund to go online and insult Putin? You complain about another poster and then you go to size of Putin's dick as an argument. I see Ikosmos has managed to get you to crawl down in the gutter and now your covered in shit.
I think this report is like many reports before it, like for instance the Warren Commision report, I reserve the right to be somewhat skeptical given the source and the polltics involved.
Have you got a better explanation, k?
Now, if I were a paid troll, and my job was to insult Putin, I'd probably start a whole bunch of threads and go on about it in unrelated threads, ad nauseum. I'd threaten to open cans of whoop-ass and all manner of goofy things. I might run around calling everyone who disagreed with me a NATOphobe and implying they were stupid. Rather than make just the one clearly hyperbolic comment.
Frankly, you need some pretty concerted immersion to be as covered in shit as ikosmos. I don't think I'm quite there yet.
I see Ikosmos has managed to get you to crawl down in the gutter and now your covered in shit.
Actually, ikosmos is talking about people eating shit.
What is this, Rabble's dinner theatre production of The 120 Days of Sodom? Whatever the case, I am sure it is all helping us toward a progressive analysis of these international issues.
Here's pretty much every ikosmos post ever:
An obscure writer recently said something very important that supports my beliefs:
blah blah blah America Russophobia NATO bad blah blah
And as usual, deafening, humiliating silence from our resident Banderites and Nazi apologists.
You're not even making this difficult for me. It's like boxing a double amputee. C'mon, Russophobes! Knock this chip off my shoulder.
Hoo Rah. Because freedom. Bwa ha ha ha.
The investigation was thorough, there is evidence.
It was so "thorough" that evidence from the manufacturer of the alleged weapon used was excluded, as was even the offer of evidence from the Russian Federation generally. Ukraine had a veto over everything ... which is partly why the report took so long. And what "evidence" from that Banderist regime was from ... wait for it ... Ukrainian Intelligence.
You know. The same branch of the Ukrainian government that was recently implicated in a terrorist attack on Crimea.
And, of course, Netherlands is a full NATO member. NATO is the instrument or transmission belt of US foreign policy dictat. And US policy has been, and AFAIK, still is, support for this brutal regime no matter what.
The report is completely discredited. As I already noted, this will be resolved - secretly or not - when all the legal battles by the grieving families works its way through the court systems, etc.
The "Russians can do no wrong" schtick is pretty worn out.
The investigators simply did not look at other scenarios. Period. That is, to paraphrase another author, completely unscientific. If you don't investigate all the possibilities then it is impossible for the final report to be unbiased. The Russian views - as well as some substantial evidence - were simply excluded.
Given the enormous amount of US surveillance in Ukraine, then as now, they probably know exactly where, when, and by whom this incident took place. But they have failed to provide public evidence to back up their spurious claims. Instead, and this is really laughable because even the US military tried this garbage, when they know better, even the US military tried quoting various internet sources as "objective knowledge" etc., etc..
Absolutely pathetic.
That's pretty good, Magoo, fyi.
But you left out the part where I mock your mischievous, contrarian and inane remarks in which your apparent blissful indifference to human life really comes shining through.
Funny thing is, their denial of guilt and covering of tracks was less important than getting the murder weapon back.
I thought smart criminals tossed them in dumpsters, or torched them. I guess it speaks to how much mileage they think they can get out of lying, lying, lying, and knowing that there are gullible fools who will believe whatever they say.
A video reconstruction shown at the press conference revealed the Buk’s journey. It was seen leaving rebel-held Donetsk on a low-loader, heading east. After arriving in Snizhne on the afternoon of 17 July, the Buk was offloaded and drove to a field south of town. Early the next day it was taken back across the Russian border via the rebel-held city of Luhansk.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/sep/28/flight-mh17-shot-down-by-m...
Of course this is not the end. Apparently the next part of the investigation concerns who smuggled the BUK in, and who gave the order to shoot.
But you left out the part where I mock your mischievous, contrarian and inane remarks in which your apparent blissful indifference to human life really comes shining through.
And he forgot the "go get a swastika" line, or whatever nonsense it was.
I look forward to the day when the families of the victims get their say and their lawyers show, incontrovertibly, that the Ukrainian Banderist and quasi-fascist regime, born from a coup d'etat, bears the lion's share of responsibility for the loss of life by their flagrant disregard of safety by allowing civilian airliners to fly over a war zone.
And I hope they're made to pay through the nose.
