India - China: Relations And Developments-2

[ramana]

Mudy, Relate this to your own comments on the Global Economy thread. War is the only way to distract the masses.

[Guest]

China can just march into WB and WB will repeat what they did with Robert Clive.
They can easily cut India into two. Indian Foreign policy was a complete faliure and impotent seating in PMO is not doing any good.
General Election is must but China can use it to its favor.

[shamu]

Chicken neck in WB. Nepal has maoist govt.

[Husky]

http://rajeev2004.blogspot.com/2008/11/tox...s-may-have.html
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Sunday, November 09, 2008
<b>Toxic Chinese milk products may have entered India</b>
nov 9th, 2008

the chances are very high that most of the 88,000 kg has gone to kerala. two reasons: the comrades are in power there, and there is a chronic milk shortage.
(IMO the poisoning need not be localised to Kerala, but could affect other parts of Bharatam as well.)

so we can anticipate huge problems for kerala adults a few years hence.

thank you, hu jintao.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Girish

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Toxic_C...how/3692859.cms

Milk products import from China was a paltry 186 kg in 2005-06 which rose to 665 kg the next year. However, <b>the imports grew to more than 7,000 kg in 2007-08 and stood at 88,000 kg in the first six months of the current financial year</b> before it was banned.
(Why such an immense rise all of a sudden?)

Children who eat chocolates and biscuits with high milk content infected with melamine run the risk of organ failure or other long-term effect that may cause irreparable damage to other body organs.
Posted by nizhal yoddha at 11/09/2008 07:16:00 PM 2 comments <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Reason for Hindus in Bharatam to use only wholesome milk from cows owned by local Hindus (at least one can do this in villages, not so easy in towns let alone cities). Spares their health <i>and</i> supports their community in one go.

[Bodhi]

Hu Jintao is to arrive in India, day after tomorrow, on November 20.

The selection of date seems very conspicious to me. It marks the anniversary of the final Indian humiliation in Indo-China war of 1962. Now, why have the babus of MEA planned to host chInAdhipati on that particular date?

I would love to have comments from <b>Ravish Ji</b> who is a firm upholder of the insightfulness of the Indian government and its bureaucracy.

[Bodhi]

They fought to the last man for India
November 18, 2008
Tarun Vijay

India may have lost the 1962 war with China, but it was not completely a saga of defeat. Hamstrung by an indecisive leadership and poor military equipment, the Indian army put up a valiant resistance along the McMahon Line. It is another matter the political leadership of the day did not back them.
One such spot where our soldiers fought back, and repelled, the Chinese incursions was at Razang La near Chushul, in the Himalayan heights. On November 18, 1962, 114 soldiers of the 13th Kumaon fought till the last man, and last bullet, in sub-zero temperatures, to beat back the huge Chinese army. A grateful nation acknowledged their valour by posthumously conferring the Param Vir Chakra on Major Shaitan Singh.

Forty-six years later to the day, Tarun Vijay undertook an emotional journey to Chushul and Razang La, site of a memorial to commemorate the brave souls who died so we may live in peace and security, to file this audio report.

'Sir, a national crisis has been created as a result of the Chinese attack on the northern border. China has expansionist designs, it has set its eyes like a vulture on 48,000 square miles of land belonging to India.

'On August 25, 1959, while speaking on the Kerala debates the prime minister (Jawaharlal Nehru) had stated that India would not remain India if per chance it becomes Communist. The same thing applies to China as well. The defence minister (V K Krishna Menon) has a doubtful past and his present conduct is dubious. He has Communist leanings. In his message on the Territorial Army Day he said that India should not keep a large army because keeping a large army was not compatible with our morality.' -- Atal Bihari Vajpayee in the Lok Sabha, December 22, 1959

The ironies of history take strange shapes. In 1962, Nehru didn't listen to the warnings of the erstwhile Jana Sangh, believed 'the Chinese can never attack us' and lost face and land both to his 'bhai'-like friends. Then the government arrested more than 400 top Communist leaders on charges of sedition and invited volunteers of the Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh to participate in the 1963 Republic Day Parade at Raj Path in New Delhi in full uniform, recognising its services during the war.

In 2008 the Communists have become the darlings of the Congress that still sources its legacy to Nehru, and the RSS is sought to be banned.

By 1962, China had taken Aksai Chin and invaded NEFA.

In 2008, China is still occupying Aksai Chin and has rebuffed our foreign minister with a renewed claim on Arunachal Pradesh (formerly known as NEFA).

But can the nation forget the 1962 war? Who were those who fought and died? For who? And to what avail?

One of the stories India can never forget is the battle we fought in the Indus valley, near Chushul village.

The battle of Rezang La, fought at an altitude of 17,000 feet, is one of the most incredible sagas of valour and courage that Indian soldiers have showed. That was November 18, 1962, exactly 46 years earlier. They fought and died for Indian soil.

In 2008, we are still waiting for a leader to show any will or resolute action to indicate we are serious to take back the land that China grabbed.

The Congress changed post-Nehru, so did the others. Politics and immediate interests have overpowered security concerns, and distinctions between the identities of the enemy and patriots are as blurred as they were in 1962.

Unanswered questions

Forty-six years later, the question remains still unanswered: why did we have to fight a war, and why was it that the brave 114 soldiers of the 13th Kumaon had to offer their supreme sacrifice fighting till the 'last man and last bullet' in sub-zero temperature (minus 15 degrees Celsius) at Rezang La on November 18, 1962? What were the causes of that war and what happened afterwards? Who remembers them except a few ex-soldiers and the patriotic crowd at Rewari (Haryana), hometown of most of the martyred Ahirs who had fought at Rezang La? Why does no politician think it a matter of honour to send his children to join the army? Why do we have an important road in Delhi named after Krishna Menon, the disgraced defence minister of the '62 war, and nothing significant to honour the men who gave their lives to save India in Chushul?

These were the thoughts on my mind when I set out for Chushul last fortnight to get a feel of 'November in Rezang La' and pay my homage to the bravehearts.

The 1962 war with China is a sad story of a completely incapable leadership, favouritism at the top echelons of the army, and a disregard of the nation's security needs by those who were hailed by the people as their saviours. Neville Maxwell, a British journalist, writes in his famous book India's China war: 'At the time of independence, [B M] Kaul appeared to be a failed officer, if not one disgraced. But his courtier wiles, irrelevant or damning until then, were to serve him brilliantly in the new order that independence brought, after he came to the notice of Nehru, a fellow Kashmiri Brahmin and, indeed, distant kinsman.'

Text, images, and audio: Tarun Vijay, director, Dr Shyama Prasad Mookerjee Research Foundation

http://specials.rediff.com/news/2008/nov/18sd1.htm

[Guest]

<!--QuoteBegin-Bodhi+Nov 18 2008, 01:04 PM-->QUOTE(Bodhi @ Nov 18 2008, 01:04 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->Hu Jintao is to arrive in India, day after tomorrow, on November 20.

The selection of date seems very conspicious to me.  It marks the anniversary of the final Indian humiliation in Indo-China war of 1962. <b> Now, why have the babus of MEA planned to host chInAdhipati on that particular date?</b>
[right][snapback]90346[/snapback][/right]<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Because they are traitors and on China payroll.

[Husky]

http://rajeev2004.blogspot.com/
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Monday, November 24, 2008
<b>China Plans for 'Partial War'</b>
Here's a piece from SAAG on China's plans for a 'partial war' against India in the future.
Posted by san at 11/24/2008 04:54:00 AM 0 comments
Labels: china, india <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Chinese communistas are telling their own populace that India is planning for a war with China, in order to condition Chinese to be willing to go for war with India.
http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/%5Cpapers...Cpaper2939.html
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->  Paper no. 2939

    24-Nov-2008

    <b>China: Strategic Experts Talk About a ‘Partial’ Sino - Indian War</b>

    by D. S. Rajan

    Since the last visit to Arunachal Pradesh in early November by the Indian Minister of External Affairs, Mr Pranab Mukherjee, views are being expressed at regular intervals by a section of the strategic community close to the authorities in the People’s Republic of China (PRC) that a fresh Sino-Indian border conflict may be possible. While the official Chinese response to what was stated during the visit by Mr Mukherjee, has mainly remained confined to reiteration of Beijing’s territorial position and expression of ‘deep regret’, the studies of the PRC’s experts are in the nature of looking at the boundary issue in a strategic dimension, especially in the context of their perceptions about India’s alleged military reinforcements in the border and counter-measures required for China. What is important is that they are not ruling out the eruption of a ‘partial border war’ between the two nations. <b>At this juncture when Sino-Indian relations are being described officially by China as marking the ‘best period’ in history, it is imperative for New Delhi to understand the real meaning of such views, which are being conveyed through Chinese language publications meant for the domestic audience.  </b>
   

    <b>First deserving attention</b> is the comment (in Chinese language, China Institute of International Strategic Studies, 20 November 2008) of  “Zhan Lue”, believed to be a high level cadre. He visualises  ‘two crises’ for the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) in the immediate sense – Situation in North Korea if Kim Jong Il succumbs to his reported illness and India’s border provocation to divert attention from its economic crisis resulting from the global financial meltdown, began in October 2008. Regarding the former, the strategist feels that the PLA cannot afford to remain a silent spectator if the US and South Korea intervene in North Korea once Kim is dead. On India’s provocation, he points out that in recent years, the economic development factor has been responsible for promoting that country’s military and nuclear weapon development programme; this may encourage New Delhi to incite Beijing. Already, since June 2008, India has been intruding into China’s territory in the border many times in an attempt to create incidents. In the opinion of the analyst, New Delhi would like to shift attention from the emerging contradictions in India’s economic structure following the global meltdown, to provoking China, even launching a ‘partial war’ against China.   

    Zhan Lue also refers to another source of challenge that can contribute to a ‘new large-scale Sino-Indian military clash’- India’s opposition to China’s proposal to carry out  projects aimed at diverting Brahmaputra river waters to its Northeastern parts. Expected to be protracted, such a clash may result in setback for China – damage to Tibet highways and railways. <b>The analyst adds that the PRC should be prepared for India’s projection of its military strength vis-à-vis China in the border including the Western sector, and also in the Indian Ocean; Beijing should also take into account the possible ‘restriction’ at the same time of China by the US and Russia, respectively in Taiwan Straits and Ussuri river border.</b> 

    It may be worth referring to what another article said two days earlier (zhong hua.net, military section, Chinese language, 18 November 2008). It observed that the border issue is only a symbol of Sino-Indian friction; the basic point concerns New Delhi’s thinking that Beijing is the ‘greatest obstacle’ to India’s rise. <b>Saying that India’s occupation of ‘Southern Tibet’ (China’s name to Arunachal Pradesh) is a security threat to China, it suggests that to counter, the PRC may adopt a strategy aimed at weakening the control of the Indian central government through steps like  ‘splitting’ and ‘dismembering’ India. In that way, India, which is inferior to China in terms of comprehensive national strength, cannot challenge the PRC in future.</b>     

    The subject of another war with India is also figuring in contributions of Chinese analysts, most of them from military, to the Bulletin boards of several strategic research and military websites, all apparently receiving supervision of the government. It is true that by their very nature, they cannot be said to reflect official opinions, but what could be important is that their publication would not have been possible without some sort of patronage if not acquiescence from the authorities.   

    Worth mentioning are four such articles. One raises (Global Times net, by a Tibetan cadre, 19 October 2008) a key question as to why some Chinese experts are making references to ‘disputed border’ with India, whereas the entire Southern Tibet, now under Indian occupation, is a Chinese territory without any dispute It demands that the Central Government should tell the public clearly about its position – whether it would recover Southern Tibet or maintain status quo. A second report alleges (chinaiiss.org, 27 October 2008) that India is building in large-scale, new airports and military installations in the border, for ‘defeating China in a war’. According to a third comment (chinaiiss.org, 15 November 2008), if a war breaks out again with India, the Chinese aim should be to recover Southern Tibet; as such that war would be basically a ‘partial’ one, without affecting other border fronts. In this war, China should make Pakistan as its ally and help the latter in recovering Kashmir.     

    Catching attention is also a fourth Bulletin Board report authored by a possible high level military analyst, entitled “Tibet Military District is fully prepared to deal with a possible Sino-Indian border clash” (bbs.news.sina.com.cn, 17.November 2008). Alleging that discordant notes regarding the Sino-Indian border have very recently emanated from a ‘certain big power’ in South Asia (unmistakable reference to India, though not by name), it focuses on China’s military preparedness in Tibet in response. Revealing that the 52 and 53 Mountain Brigades and the 149th Mobile Division of the 13th Group Army, act as mainstay in China’s defence of Tibet, it, in an unusual manner, gives out enormous data on the Orbat in Tibet Military District, particularly on the formation of various Brigades.  The article further points out that in recent years, facilities for communications and transport could be improved in Tibet; through the newly built Qinghai-Tibet Railway, troops and material can be quickly transported.  New highways have been established in the Ali region and the latest building of airports like Linzhi, have contributed to mobility of troops, including that of Second artillery. At the same time a negative factor is that the Air Force is not permanently stationed in Tibet.     

    Why there is a talk in China now on the possibility of a limited Sino-Indian war? It definitely looks like a scenario building exercise undertaken by the Chinese strategists. However, there seems to be a hidden sense of urgency on the subject among them; explaining this as their rationale that India’s new border infrastructure initiatives are in the nature of provoking China. While it cannot be denied that if another war breaks out, even partial, Sino-Indian relations would undoubtedly suffer much, the question arises - can such a war really erupt? The answer could be no, considering the present comfort level in Sino-Indian ties. It would be pertinent to note in this connection that latest views of Chinese specialists are not in tune with the official line of the PRC, which considers that each country is not a threat to the other and that bilateral relations can be developed looking beyond the complex border dispute, which may take time to solve. India is in agreement with this line. Also, their sentiments run counter to the excellent atmospherics now surrounding the bilateral relations at the moment- mutual economic dependence level has increased, trade volume is going up, joint military exercises have started and the ties are said to have assumed a global character.   

    At the same time, one should not fail to notice that China is speaking in two voices on Sino-Indian ties. It would, however, be wrong to take them as contradictory to each other; they only go to distinguish the different policy priorities of key agencies in China. To explain, a border war, as conceived by Chinese strategists, may reflect the calculations of the military and security establishment in China for which no compromise is possible on the issue of national sovereignty (for e.g Taiwan and Tibet). On the other hand, in the diplomatic front, Beijing needs to show a benign face, hence its soft line towards India under the ‘harmonious world’ foreign policy concept. But even here, Beijing does not hesitate to admit the existence of ‘cold peace’ with India (PRC Ambassador to New Delhi, Zhang Yan, Ifeng journal, 21 June 2008). In any case, it should be borne in mind that the Chinese policy making mechanism at top levels provides space to integrate such differing priorities.   

    As far as India is concerned, such talks of war in China, to say the least, may have an ‘unsettling’ effect on it. <b>A partial war with China may look illogical for India at the moment; but prudence demands New Delhi to keep an eye on any surprise Chinese move along the border.</b> In a larger perspective, however, it would be important for India not to over react to signals, howsoever conflicting they may look, emanating from China, taking into account the long term benefits that may accrue to it from a policy of ‘engaging’ China.   

    (The writer, D. S. Rajan, is the Director of the Chennai Centre for China Studies, Chennai, and India. Email: dsrajan@gmail.com) <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Christo AmeriKKKa, christocommunist ruled China - they are all into dismembering India. That's why christos and communistas in India are into helping them.

[Shambhu]

http://www.ndtv.com/convergence/ndtv/mumba...75995&type=News
China blocked ban on Lashkar three times at UN

Bloody commies need 10% GDP just to sustain themselves....Bhagawaan, please let them implode...

[Guest]

Didn't our red ant Baradhan just mention that we don't have any business attacking Pakistan or L-e-T.
Didn't Hamid Gul advise us to listen to CPI folks like Bardhan/Yechuri/Karat.

Given the backdrop, China's stance is totally understandable. Our comrades are still looking out for interest of the 'fatherland'.

[G.Subramaniam]

John Garver's book also lists Chinese complicity in 1965 Pakistan war

[dhu]

Japan in '65 sought US nuclear shield versus China

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Japan's longest-serving prime minister — a Noble Peace laureate — asked the U.S. in 1965 to deploy nuclear weapons against China if war broke out between the Asian rivals, according to newly declassified government files obtained by Kyodo news agency.</b>

During his first trip to Washington as the Japanese leader, Eisaku Sato told then-U.S. Defense Secretary Robert McNamara that American military forces could launch a nuclear attack on China by sea if needed, Kyodo said Monday.
..
But the new details of Sato's discussions with the U.S. reveal a more complicated picture behind his strong public stance against nuclear weapons as well as his intense distrust of China.

His comments came a day after his talks with President Lyndon Johnson on Jan. 12, 1965, during which he sought to reconfirm a U.S. promise to defend Japan under the U.S.-Japan security treaty, according to Kyodo. The documents show that Johnson assured the Japanese leader of Washington's commitment to the pact.

China triggered Japanese and U.S. concerns about the country's emergence as a nuclear power after Beijing tested its first atomic bomb on Oct. 16, 1964.

Sato, in office from 1964 to 1972, also told McNamara that although Japan was technically capable of building atomic weapons, it had no intention of doing so, according to documents that were routinely declassified by Japan's foreign ministry after 30 years and obtained by Kyodo.

..<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

[Naresh]

<b>Shoe attack on Chinese leader</b>

<b>A protester has thrown a shoe at Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao - but missed.

The shoe landed on the stage about a metre from Mr Wen, who was delivering a speech on the global economy at Cambridge University.</b>

The protester, who was held by university security guards, shouted "how can the university prostrate itself with this dictator?" and "how can you listen to this unchallenged?", according to witnesses.

A police spokeswoman said the man is being held in custody and questioned on suspicion of committing a public order offence.

The shoe attack was reminiscent of events in Baghdad in December last year, when Iraqi journalist Muntazer al-Zaidi hurled both his shoes at George W Bush.

Unlike Mr Wen, the then-US President was forced to duck to avoid the flying footwear.

The Chinese Premier, who earlier met Prime Minister Gordon Brown for economic talks, described the incident as "despicable".

The first two days of Mr Wen's visit were marred by noisy protests over human rights abuses in China and Tibet.

Five men were arrested for public order offences outside the Chinese Embassy near London's Regent Park on Sunday.

Mr Brown said a £400 billion fiscal stimulus announced by Beijing will create huge opportunities for British exports to China.

He added: "The strength of the relationship between China and Britain will be a pivotal force in helping us through the downturn and a powerful driving force behind our future growth and prosperity."

Cheers <!--emo&:beer--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/cheers.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='cheers.gif' /><!--endemo-->

[Guest]

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Shoe attack on Chinese leader<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Why UK failed to provide proper security after attack on Bush?
Violence is not good for freedom of speech, I don't understand why these liberals are first to resort to violence against individual. Why they think they are any good then dictator?

[Pandyan]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=02A8ZEyMR9E

Go to 2:44. We have to be very careful with these gooks, they are slowly eating away at land in the North east and have done many illegal forays into Indian territory. While Indian moron babus are pretending to deal with jihadis, the gooks will prove to be a much more serious chink in the armor.

[G.Subramaniam]

The chinese follow a book called 'Legalism'
it is more intelligent form of islam

if you look at wiki, and see the map of china
you can see that until 200 BC, it was very small

It grew by forcibly assimilating neighboring tribes like islam
The DNA of south chinese shows that north chinese invaded south china about 200 BC, and killed off the men and raped the women

[Bodhi]

Indian media that went in overdrive on Shoe-attack on Bush, has not even shown the news of similar attack on chInAdhipa.

[Hauma Hamiddha]

<!--QuoteBegin-G.Subramaniam+Feb 2 2009, 08:42 PM-->QUOTE(G.Subramaniam @ Feb 2 2009, 08:42 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->The chinese follow a book called 'Legalism'
it is more intelligent form of islam
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Good point -- Legalism which was enforced by Shi Huang Di indeed describes most of chIna political behavior. There is no doubt Mao saw himself as a better and superior version of Shi Huang Di armed with the Red book interpreted through the lens of legalism.

Examples of legalism in action: Shi Huang buried over 400 dissenting scholars alive. When a meteorite fell somewhere in China some body wrote the words on it that Shi Huang would die. Shi Huang immediately butchered whole towns in the vicinity of where the stone had fallen.

[Naresh]

<b>China declares emergency as drought hits</b> <b>Friday, 06 Feb, LIDONG :</b> China has declared an emergency over a drought which could devastate crops and farmers' incomes, official media said on Thursday, threatening further hardship amid slumping economic growth. The drought gripping parts of central and northern China has sent Zhengzhou wheat futures prices up 5 percent this week but physical prices have not moved, with most investors confident the country's reserves and last year's big harvest can offset any fall in wheat production this spring. But the drought could hurt the incomes of farmers in Henan, Anhui and other populous provinces when many have lost factory and construction jobs after China's growth faltered in late 2008. The national Office of State Flood Control and Drought Relief declared a 'level 2' emergency, <b>calling it a 'severe drought rarely seen in history',</b> the People's Daily and other official media reported.

Cheers <!--emo&:beer--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/cheers.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='cheers.gif' /><!--endemo-->

[Husky]

timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Paks-Jamaat-signs-deal-with-Chinas-Communist-party/articleshow/4162917.cms
via http://rajeev2004.blogspot.com/2009/02/how...ohammed-is.html
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Pak's Jamaat signs deal with China's Communist party</b>
20 Feb 2009, 2126 hrs IST, Saibal Dasgupta, TNN

<b>BEIJING: The atheist Communist Party of China has recently signed an agreement with Pakistan's main Islamic party, the Jamaat-e-Islami. The
Chinese move has given the oft-criticized JI some sort of international acceptability</b> while putting Pakistani president Asif Ali Zardari under significant political pressure.

<b>CPC has signed accord with Communist parties in different countries including the Indian Communists.</b> But this is the first time that it has inked a deal with a foreign political party, which makes no bones about its religious cause. JI kept away from the last election and is generally arrayed against the Zardari government.

The deal will limit Zardari's options in choosing friends in the western world and tie him more closely to Chinese leaders, who now have some influence in the country's Islamic politics, sources said. It was signed a few days before Zardari landed in Wuhan this evening on a four-day visit to China.

It also comes at a time when the Pakistani president is being criticised in western countries over the peace deal in Swat, the settled area of Pakistan. The Swat deal is seen in some quarters as a sign of weakening in the face of Taliban forces.

China observer said Beijing's Communist leaders have entered into an informal agreement with JI leadership that it would do nothing to encourage Islamic separatists in the border Xinjiang region, which is the hotbed of the East Turkmenistan movement. China's Public Security Bureau had earlier indicated that several of the Xinjiang separatists have been training in camps in Pakistan.

The Chinese leadership has remained silent about the accord with the JI. But the Islamist group has gone on record in Pakistan saying that the agreement covered the fields of justice, development, security and solidarity. JI has also issued a statement quoting party leader Qazi Hussain Ahmad as saying that Zardari should get closer to China in order to extricate Pakistan from "the clutches" of the United States.

"Pakistan is trapped in a tight US grip where Islamabad is not allowed to independently deal with its internal affairs," the JI statement said.

Zardari is not visiting Beijing on his second visit in four months as the Chinese leaders are busy hosting Hilary Clinton, the US Secretary of State, visiting the Chinese capital for three days from today. He will use the opportunity to visit cultural centres run by the Chinese Communists and the government in Wuhan and Shanghai.

Cultural centres are usually used as tools for political campaign in China and Zardari is obviously keen on taking a first hand look at them. He will also visit hydropower projects and financial institutions.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->