Radicalisation Of Indian Muslims -2

11-02-2006, 11:19 PM

Here you go again - Moron Singh And Queen's government logic at its best.

Centre adds fuel to fatwa fire, defends Shariat courtsQUOTE
Amidst raging debate over âfatwasâ issued by Shariat courts, the Centre has defended the Muslimsâ right to have such courts saying it was part of their fundamental right to freedom of religion guaranteed under the Constitution.

âThe functioning of Dar-ul-Qaza would be protected under the fundamental rights enshrined in Article 25 and 26(b) of the Constitution,â the Centre said in an affidavit filed in the Supreme Court in response to a PIL seeking ban on Shariat courts.

Article 25 guarantees freedom of conscience and free profession, practice and propagation of religion while under Article 26(b) every religious denomination enjoys freedom to manage its own affairs in matters of religion.

The petition filed by one Vishwa Lohan Madan last year sought direction to the Centre and other authorities to ban âShariat Courtsâ for running a âparallel judicial systemâ in the country.

But the Centre said, âFreedom guaranteed by Article 26 to every religious denomination or every section thereof to establish and maintain institutions for religious and charitable purposes and to manage its own affairs in the matters of religion would include the freedom to establish Darul-Qaza/Nizam-ul-Qaza to settle disputes between two persons professing Islam, according to Sharia.â
The Government emphasized that âit is not a parallel judicial systemâ as the Qazis or Darul-Qaza/Nizam-e-Qaza did not prevent Muslims to report matters to the Judicial Machinery set up under the law of the land.

âThose who do not resort to Darul-Qaza/Nizam-e-Qaza are at liberty and fully entitled to resort to the court of law. 

There is no question of compelling anyone not to report matters to the judicial machinery,â the affidavit filed by the Ministry of Law and Justice said. It also sought to dispel the impression that it created confusion in the minds of âuneducated multitude of Indian Muslim citizenryâ.

On the controversial issue of âfatwaâ issued by the âShariat Courtsâ, the Centre said âfatwaâ meant âopinionâ and even the seeker of opinion was not bound to follow it.

It submitted that âthe Mufti has no authority or powers to impose his opinion and enforce his âfatwaâ on anyone either by imposing any penalty as a fine or send him to jail.â
Howver, it termed as âfew bad examplesâ the âfatwasâ issued in cases relating to Imraana, Jyotsna Ara and Asoobi.

Justifying their role of âShariat Courtsâ in the Muslim society, the Centre said they âare conciliatory and/or mediatory for a, which strive to settle disputes outside the courts expeditiously in an amicable and inexpensive manner and have no real power or authority to enforce its orders.â

Terming the system of Islamic courts as a form of Alternative Disputes Redressal Forum, the Government said, âit mainly performs conciliatory role without any enforcement powers.â 

The Centre said that in a number of cases Courts of Law have accepted the decision of Darul-Qaza and made them rule of the Court and passed decrees accordingly.

âIt is also in vogue in many non-Islamic countries, for example, in England,, which has a population of about 15 lakh Muslims, unofficial Sharia Panchayat are functioning.â

11-03-2006, 02:53 AM

QUOTEDo these "other faiths" go on kafir-killing sprees? 

http://www.load-islam.com/artical_det.php?...=Misconceptions

Bharatvarsh · 11-03-2006, 03:09 AM

Nix I don't have the time nor patience to go through the entire apologetic article but we can have a straight forward debate if you want.

If indeed people are having misconceptions then why was it that through out Muslim rule these very same injuctions of killing kaffirs and making them pay jizya was followed, surely you cannot expect us to believe that all the Muslims including the four Caliphs were misinterpreting the verses through the last thousand years?

agnivayu · 11-03-2006, 05:27 AM

Is it ok to tell Muslims to have a blast on Ramadan, or is that inappropriate ?

QUOTE(Bharatvarsh @ Nov 3 2006, 03:09 AM)Nix I don't have the time nor patience to go through the entire apologetic article but we can have a straight forward debate if you want.

If indeed people are having misconceptions then why was it that through out Muslim rule these very same injuctions of killing kaffirs and making them pay jizya was followed, surely you cannot expect us to believe that all the Muslims including the four Caliphs were misinterpreting the verses through the last thousand years?
[right][snapback]60253[/snapback][/right]

11-03-2006, 10:34 AM

oh you mean all those Muslim conquests,Aurangzeb slaughtering Hindus.
personal ambition of leaders,I call it.
Even the Caliphs conquered lands for their own power and ambitions.

Non-Muslims are supposed to pay a small tax in Muslim countries in exchange of security and protection of rights,and they can have their own judiciary.that IIRC is called jizya.
that is in "Islamic theory".

Now its upto Muslims to practise Islamic laws the way they are supposed to be.If Muslim leaders turn out to be corrupt ,there's nothing else to be blamed about it.

QUOTEIs it ok to tell Muslims to have a blast on Ramadan, or is that inappropriate ?

what do you mean by blast?

I am not good at debates.if you want to meet other Muslims you can go here-
http://www.islamicboard.com/

they know more than me.I just know the basic stuff.I am a non-practicing muslim,but still a conservative.

okay can you summarise the "problems" you have with Islam and Muslims.I would like to view them.One is I guess is the terrorist thing.

11-03-2006, 11:17 AM

QUOTEoh you mean all those Muslim conquests,Aurangzeb slaughtering Hindus.
Oh Ya,
According to you barbaric conquest of Hindu India was a personal agenda; same should be of Persia or any other part of world. Have you verified ancestry of majority of Muslims in India and Pakistan, why they became Muslim?

Why Muslims slam planes on building or blast bombs in trains or blow themselves or burn live children and women?

QUOTENon-Muslims are supposed to pay a small tax in Muslim countries in exchange of security and protection of rights,and they can have their own judiciary.that IIRC is called jizya.
worst concept in any religion, Is it a part or religion or Arab tribal law of land.
What a religion which start from discrimination?

QUOTEokay can you summarise the "problems" you have with Islam and Muslims.I would like to view them.One is I guess is the terrorist thing.
Anything good do they have, other than locking woman under black clothes or blasting people or simple word violence.

11-03-2006, 02:26 PM

I am a western woman, so I can offer an objective view on this matter. But if my posts are altered or if I am abused, I'll leave.
QUOTEOh Ya,
According to you barbaric conquest of Hindu India was a personal agenda;
Didn't Hindu kings fight each other even BEFORE islamic invasion? So what's the difference between hindus slaughtering people, and muslims doing the same? None.
QUOTEWhy Muslims slam planes on building or blast bombs in trains or blow themselves or burn live children and women? 
You can ask the same questions vis-a-vis Vietnam war, nuclear holocaust etc.

QUOTEworst concept in any religion, Is it a part or religion or Arab tribal law of land.
What a religion which start from discrimination?

Taxes are common in all cultures and religions. Taxes are necessary, a nation can't do without them.

QUOTEAnything good do they have, other than locking woman under black clothes or blasting people or simple word violence.
Hindus also want their woman to be fully clothed, they want their women to walk behind them. They don't want women to work, lots of violence against women is going on in India. And so much more, yet you close your eyes to all this.

QUOTEIf indeed people are having misconceptions then why was it that through out Muslim rule these very same injuctions of killing kaffirs
Do you agree that most Hindus fail to follow Hinduism? Then you should have no trouble subscribing to similar notions about Islamic followers.

In conclusion, Hindus are as violent as Muslims, perhaps more. The reason why they don't commit such acts is because hindus are afraid. Not because they're good people. If they were, India wouldn't be #1 in corruption, violence and the rest. <!--emo& Tongue

--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tongue.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tongue.gif' />

Please don't misunderstand my bold assessment as an attack on hindus.

11-03-2006, 02:48 PM

QUOTEI am a western woman, so I can offer an objective view on this matter. 

being a western women is no qualification so as to provide an objective view. Infact the persons who claim they can provide an objective shouldn't take part in discussion at all.

Everybody's views are influenced by the way he has lived till now.

QUOTEDidn't Hindu kings fight each other even BEFORE islamic invasion? 

Personally I dont care if ancient muslim king did some wrong. this can't be an excuse for present generation of hindus to take revenge, and if they say so, they are wrong, but since this point has been raised I would say fighting wars and forcing somebody to change religion are two different things.

QUOTEWhy Muslims slam planes on building or blast bombs in trains or blow themselves or burn live children and women?
You can ask the same questions vis-a-vis Vietnam war, nuclear holocaust etc.


so what's your point? are you defending any of this activity by saying these acts were done as part of rectifying past mistakes.

QUOTETaxes are common in all cultures and religions. Taxes are necessary, a nation can't do without them.


taxes are necessary but can't be based on caste sex or religion.
will you agree if nation intoduces tax for being born as women(in this case tax for being born as minority)

rightly said what a religion which promotes discrimination.

QUOTEHindus also want their woman to be fully clothed, they want their women to walk behind them. They don't want women to work, lots of violence against women is going on in India. And so much more, yet you close your eyes to all this.


Since you are a western woman(good qualification) I am assuming you have never visted india and your view on this is based on what your media has told you.(there goes your view of being objective)

QUOTEIn conclusion, Hindus are as violent as Muslims, perhaps more. The reason why they don't commit such acts is because hindus are afraid. Not because they're good people. If they were, India wouldn't be #1 in corruption, violence and the rest. <!--emo& Tongue

--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tongue.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tongue.gif' />


don't make baseless claims --prove this.
QUOTEPlease don't misunderstand my bold assessment as an attack on hindus.


Oh no, in no way did I misunderstood you. I know exactly what kind of "western woman" you are.
[right][snapback]60276[/snapback][/right]

11-03-2006, 02:52 PM

PS-- my views are not objective and are influenced by the fact that I was born and brought up in INDIA.

11-03-2006, 03:26 PM

QUOTE(Jill @ Nov 3 2006, 02:26 PM)I am a western woman, so I can offer an objective view on this matter.


Mmm...would your 'objective' source of information by any chance be the CNN, Fox News, ABC, NBC, CBC, and other alphabetic combinations?

I saw a program recently about 'how hindu women are all being burnt and killed by the men' on one of these channels. (Sigh) I have always have loved the western notion of 'objectivity.'

And to think that western women complain that they are all regarded and treated in many parts of the world as prostitutes and willing to bed anyone at the drop of a hat; all whites kill and maim blacks, and smoke dope; all white children go on killing spree for no reason; all white children have behavioral problems and can't function in school; all white men beat on their wives and sleep with other women for recreational pleasure; white teenage females get themselves knocked up and then go in for abortion; white men can't hold a job and binge drink all day, etc.

Can one blame the people around the world for holding on to such views on the western world; you see, their sources of information are very 'objective' - hollywood movies, BBC, CNN, NBC, Oprah Winfrey, Dr. Phil, and all the local news channels and talk shows in their country.

QUOTEBut if my posts are altered or if I am abused, I'll leave.

Many western countries, especially the US, stand rank very high on domestic violence against women and rape. So, one would think you'd be used to abuse by now. Or has my 'objective' source let me down this time?

Husky · (This post was last modified: 11-04-2006, 03:14 AM by Husky.)

QUOTEI am a western woman, so I can offer an objective view on this matter.Based on the contents of your uninformed post, there's 99% chance you're a christian (or islamic) and 90% chance you will deny it. And 0% chance I will believe you if you do. Christianity, communism, pretended secularism - none of them count as proof of objectivity. I don't care where you come from - the west, east, south, north. If you have an ideology, you are not objective. Obviously you've come here towing a predictable line - and all this from the kindness of your objective little heart. How quaint.

On the page http://www.faithfreedom.org/Articles.htm there's a section called "women in islam" - check out the video at the top of that section. Wait for it to download, it's something that occurs frequently in Afghanistan and Iran. Don't worry, you'll have no trouble watching it, seen as how you personally know of infinitely 'worse crimes' that Hindus commit everyday.

Of course, christians have burnt women in their millions - between 7 and 9 million according to historian Will Durant. But that's ok. And it's okay what islam does to women too:
Women in Islam 1 and Women in Islam 2, Atheist Foundation of Australia.
The religion of peace (tied for first place with christianity)
Homa Darabi's page on women in islam
It's all ok. Nothing compares to what 'Hindus have done' to women, which you confidently talk about as having at least as much proof of (however, I should warn you, contents of christoislamic propaganda sites don't constitute proof, nor do those funded by christoislamism).

Glad you are willing to accept the islamic pardees that you no doubt are praying will descend on whatever land you are living in. However, I for one, am hoping that your country and countrymen may never experience it, but that you (for being such a fervent defender of Allah's One True Religion) may decide to move to Afghanistan or Pakistan where you will doubtless find your belief of Islam's love for women and peace vindicated.

QUOTEIn conclusion, Hindus are as violent as Muslims, perhaps more. The reason why they don't commit such acts is because hindus are afraid.That's supposed to explain why we didn't blow up the WTC? 'Not because we didn't care to, but because we were afraid to'? That sort of 'logic' would only make sense to a christoislamic. It's wasted on us, I'm afraid. Did you ever think that maybe it's because we lack christoislamic logic that we aren't terrorists? Because then you'd be nearer the mark: we don't follow the terrorist religion(s) of christoislamism, hence we don't do terrorism. It's that simple.

QUOTEThe reason why they don't commit such acts is because hindus are afraid. Not because they're good people. If they were, India wouldn't be #1 in corruption, violence and the rest.You're right. Of course, we are not 'good' people in the Christian sense, that would be hard for anyone but the super-duper christians to achieve.

Jill's exhibiting the superior christoislamic 'morality'. One has to be amazed at their gall for accusing others. Must be their guilt talking.

Husky · (This post was last modified: 11-04-2006, 03:13 AM by Husky.)

Post 253 (nix)
QUOTEoh you mean all those Muslim conquests,Aurangzeb slaughtering Hindus.
personal ambition of leaders,I call it.But no one cares what you call it. Unbiased historians have identified the islamic jihad on India as nothing less than holy islam. Ask your ancestors what that islamic love felt like. Oh wait, your kafir Hindu ancestors are supposedly being tormented in swell Allah's jekinnah. Nice to know, isn't it?

QUOTEI am not good at debates.Good. Didn't think this was a debating thread anyway.
QUOTEif you want to meet other Muslims you can go here- http://www.islamicboard.com/Now I know you must be joking. Why would people here want to meet other muslims? Didn't Hindus meet islam's all-embracing brotherhood of love in the last few terrorist attacks already? Maybe next november, if there are no terrorist attacks from now to then. Can you arrange that, nix?

QUOTEthey know more than me.I just know the basic stuff.I am a non-practicing muslim,but still a conservative.Why don't you read the koran (translated into whatever language you understand best) and the hadiths - try to read it from a humane perspective if you can.

Bharatvarsh · 11-03-2006, 08:56 PM

QUOTEI am a western woman, so I can offer an objective view on this matter. But if my posts are altered or if I am abused, I'll leave.
Being Western or being African or whatever is no certificate of being objective.

Your very first statement shows how objective you are.
QUOTEDidn't Hindu kings fight each other even BEFORE islamic invasion? So what's the difference between hindus slaughtering people, and muslims doing the same? None.
Yes Hindu kings fought each other but did they:

1) Slaughter civilians
2) Destroy places of worship of others
3) Impose discriminatory taxes on non Hindus

No they didn't which makes a world of difference, if you are too blind to see the difference then I can't help it.
QUOTETaxes are common in all cultures and religions. Taxes are necessary, a nation can't do without them.
Read before you spew nonsense, the taxes which Hindus paid were extra taxes, in other words they were discriminatory taxes intended to promote conversion to Islam. Here are some passages from primary sources:
QUOTEMuHammad bin QÃ¢sim made it clear to the Hindus and Buddhists: 'Those among you who become Mussalmans and come within the fold of Islam shall have their tribute remitted, but those who are still inclined to be of their own faith, must put up with injuries (gazand) and tribute (jizia) to retain the religion of their fathers and grandfathers.'1

Upon this, some took to flight 'in order to maintain the faith of their ancestors' and 'their horses, domestics, and other property were taken away from them.'2

http://voiceofdharma.org/books/jtsi/ch03.htm
QUOTEQÃ¢DÃ® MughÃ®th ad-DÃ®n told SulTÃ¢n 'AlÃ¢'u 'd-DÃ®n KhaljÃ®: 'If the Jizyah-collector ask a Hindu for silver, the latter should offer gold in all humility. If the collector wishes to spit into his mouth, the latter should open his mouth without demur, so as to enable the former to spit into it.'5 AlÃ¢'u 'd-Din is notorious for having pauperized the Hindus to the utmost limit, but it is not known if he acted upon the QÃ¢DÃ®s advice.

http://voiceofdharma.org/books/jtsi/ch03.htm
Do you allow your tax collectors to spit into your mouth when they collect taxes?

In the West does everyone pay taxes or are Muslims not expected to pay certain taxes?
QUOTEHindus also want their woman to be fully clothed, they want their women to walk behind them. They don't want women to work, lots of violence against women is going on in India. And so much more, yet you close your eyes to all this.
And you know this how?

Last I heard Indira Gandhi was the PM of India, Hindu women vote and can get an education today, so tell me how many women were allowed to get an education under the Taliban and became the highest leaders of the country?

Also in Islam wearing the veil is compulsory according to the Orthodox, in India women do not have to be covered up from head to toe but they are expected to dress decently, does western society allow women to run around fully naked?

Why doesn't it do so?, because each society has a set of standards independent of scriptures (these are called social rules), even without the Bible many Westerners would frown on running around naked.

In reality even Sikh women in Punjab dress decently according to societal norms, they do not run around wearing bikinis (most of them anyway) although their scriptures may say nothing about bikinis because that is the way society functions.

In contrast the Muslim countries bring in scriptural rules to force women to cover up.
QUOTEIn conclusion, Hindus are as violent as Muslims, perhaps more. The reason why they don't commit such acts is because hindus are afraid. Not because they're good people. If they were, India wouldn't be #1 in corruption, violence and the rest. <!--emo& Tongue

--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tongue.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tongue.gif' />

Please don't misunderstand my bold assessment as an attack on hindus. 
You haven't even proved anything you said and there is no bold assessment here, all you said can be considered as uninformed trash.

A person who can't even distinguish between normal taxes and jaziyah claims to be objective, that has to be the biggest joke ever.

Bharatvarsh · 11-03-2006, 09:05 PM

QUOTEoh you mean all those Muslim conquests,Aurangzeb slaughtering Hindus.
personal ambition of leaders,I call it.
Even the Caliphs conquered lands for their own power and ambitions.
Really then why was it that all the Muslim chronicles mention those conquests as having been undertaken in order to spread Islam and root out kaffirs?

Why was Shah Waliullah (considered as one of the foremost theologians of Islam) inviting Abdali to invade and destroy the Marathas, Jats and Sikhs and restablish Muslim rule to save Islam?

If personal ambition was the reason then why did Mahmud of Ghazni refuse to take the money that Hindus were willing to pay to get back the idol of their Somnath and said that he would rather be known as an idol breaker rather than an idol seller.

How come none of the Ulema opposed this misinterpretation, infact many of them like Waliullah and Ahmad Sirhindi were urging Muslim rulers to persecute Hindus, Sirhindi went into raptures when Jahangir put Guru Arjun Dev to death.
QUOTENon-Muslims are supposed to pay a small tax in Muslim countries in exchange of security and protection of rights,and they can have their own judiciary.that IIRC is called jizya.
that is in "Islamic theory".
Well how about you Muslims pay an extra tax to us Hindus for protection and security rights for allowing you guys to stay here after partition?

11-03-2006, 09:13 PM

QUOTEI am a western woman, so I can offer an objective view on this matter.
I can bet this person is sitting in India and Muslim or married to Muslim. <!--emo& Big Grin

--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' />
Lies can be traced very easily by your writing. Very good trick to generate attention.
Anyway, I am Indian woman living in west and can give better perspective. So you should check your society first.

QUOTEHindus also want their woman to be fully clothed, they want their women to walk behind them. They don't want women to work, lots of violence against women is going on in India. And so much more, yet you close your eyes to all this.
This happened after Islamic invasion when barbaric Muslim attacked Hindus and raped women and created harem.
As Mudy said, ask any Indian sub continent Muslim about their past who was their great-great-great grand father.

Lot of violence in India, but it is not restricted to Hindus women only. First check misery of Muslim or Christian women. Muslim laws give no protection to women and same is with Christian women.
Indian Hindu women had good Hindu laws to support them and had voice. So problem is not Hindu religion.

Bodhi · (This post was last modified: 11-03-2006, 11:45 PM by Bodhi.)

Western lady, Just look at this post and subsequent. A muslim has repeatedly raped his daughter-in-law, and muslim sharia experts have directed the husband of the raped woman to divorce her, so that the raping father-in-law can marry her. Photo of the guy is in that thread. Example of muslim 'culture' in our age and time?

11-03-2006, 11:47 PM

Oh I forget. treatment of women.

Shambhu · 11-04-2006, 02:39 AM

Nix:

I would love for you to edit the Koran. Wipe out all the references to killing, rape etc in the name of Allah (the Most Merciful, the Mosty Beneficient). I mean, since your opinion counts for so much. What was that? Yeah "Aurangzeb killed Hindus for personal ambition". Heh! And I am Santa Claus. Would you like a copy of the most excellent Qu'ran for Christmas, Nix?

Jill:

Read the Koran. On the web. Google for it. Will increase your objectivity, promise. And "Indian kings killed each other": Yeah. But they kept it to that. No "kill all subjects of your opponent; rape a woman, kill 2 babies for free" sales like the Muslims had.

11-04-2006, 04:48 AM

Here's a difference between king/wars in one culture versus another... documented by Serge Trifkovic
QUOTEMoslem invaders began entering India in the early 8th century, on the orders of Hajjaj, the governor of what is now Iraq. (Sound familiar?) Starting in 712 the raiders, commanded by Muhammad Qasim, demolished temples, shattered sculptures, plundered palaces, killed vast numbers of men â it took three whole days to slaughter the inhabitants of the city of Debal â and carried off their women and children to slavery, some of it sexual. After the initial wave of violence, however, Qasim tried to establish law and order in the newly-conquered lands, and to that end he even allowed a degree of religious tolerance. but upon hearing of such humane practices, his superior Hajjaj, objected:

"It appears from your letter that all the rules made by you for the comfort and convenience of your men are strictly in accordance with religious law. But the way of granting pardon prescribed by the law is different from the one adopted by you, for you go on giving pardon to everybody, high or low, without any discretion between a friend and a foe. The great God says in the Koran [47.4]: "0 True believers, when you encounter the unbelievers, strike off their heads." The above command of the Great God is a great command and must be respected and followed. You should not be so fond of showing mercy, as to nullify the virtue of the act. Henceforth grant pardon to no one of the enemy and spare none of them, or else all will consider you a weak-minded man."

In a subsequent communication, Hajjaj reiterated that all able-bodied men were to be killed, and that their underage sons and daughters were to be imprisoned and retained as hostages. Qasim obeyed, and on his arrival at the town of Brahminabad massacred between 6,000 and 16,000 men.

The significance of these events lies not just in the horrible numbers involved, but in the fact that the perpetrators of these massacres were not military thugs disobeying the ethical teachings of their religion, as the European crusaders in the Holy Land were, but were actually doing precisely what their religion taught. (And one may note that Christianity has grown up and no longer preaches crusades. Islam has not. As has been well-documented, jihad has been preached from the official centers of Islam, not just the lunatic fringe.)

Husky · (This post was last modified: 11-04-2006, 06:25 AM by Husky.)

Post 263 (Gargi)
QUOTEI can bet this person is sitting in India and Muslim or married to Muslim.Â
Lies can be traced very easily by your writing. Very good trick to generate attention.That is so very true. Very perceptive. Totally forgot rule #1: question everything written by people who've lied once.
(1) No actual person from the west would ever say they were a 'western woman'. And only a person of the Indian subcontinent would make that mistake. That ranks along 'britisher' and a host of other thoughtless errors.
(2) Choice of thread on islam and interest in (blindly) defending islam, shows they're not christian but islamic
(3) Typical islamic female's unfounded fear of 'abuse' by (male) kafirs - even if this were only (potential) verbal abuse on-line, by kafirs from remote quarters. In reality, islamic women ought to be afraid of abuse by their own family members.

That gives us an image of 'Jill': an islamic woman originating in the subcontinent, pretending to be a 'western woman', blindly rattling out the usual pathetic defense of islamic peace and islam's reverential treatment of women, interspersed with unsupported allegations (lies) against Hinduism.

Login




Remember me Lost Password?