Sorry, I haven't read the previous posts, but permit me to throw a few thoughts into the mix. I live in France, 300km from Paris, but what happened here was pretty devestating - my sympathy for those in Belgium.
Having said that, and as horrifying as it is, this is what people endure every day 'over there', and most of it isn't reported. There are hundreds of bombs/suicide attacks every day. I think there's always a massive rush to condemn a whole race/religeon when it happens here - although we make the bombs, and we train the troops - how many times has the west sided with Iran against Iraq, then visa-versa?
However, I think the populations of these countries should finally confront the enemy themselves - there's no more room in Europe, and it isn't the solution anyway. That's not racist - I'm far from it. There's a difference between immigration and integration. I genuinely feel/hope that the immigrants of the 50s and 60s and their children are well integrated here - and it might sound crass but I love the cosmpolitain mix of London, where I hope to back very soon.
Here, I vote Mélenchon (Squirrel Face will know - he's a kind of Tony Benn/Corbyn, but 100 times better) - I say that just to give you my political slant - but Europe can't take ny more in, because we already have we don't know how many sleepers ready to detonate their bombs.
There are bad Charlton supporters, there are bad Frenchmen, bad English, and bad Islamists; and the vast majority are good, law respecting individuals. But enough is enough. I don't have a job - my work's done in China or Poland. The last time I was in England I had an English boss and 10 Polish collegues - I didn't speak all day. OK, I'm an immigrant in France, but I make an effort to assimilate, I immerse myself in French culture (to a lesser and lesser extent tbh).
If you go to live in a country, IMHO, you have to abide by their rules, and it seems to me that the Islamists don't respect that.
If we let Turkey into Europe that'll be it - the floodgates will be open.
This act was perpertrated (spelling - sorry!) by cowards, but I think we're all cowrds in a way by supporting (tacitally or otherwise) our governements and allowing wht happens.
I chuck that in to the mix to see if anyone bites, but above all my sympathy for the victims - everywhere.
Wouldn't say it's evil but my opinion is that it's an oppressive (especially if you're female or homosexual) religion that doesn't appear to have moved on much since the Middle Ages. Despite it's many faults, Christianity has evolved with time and can take its place in a modern, civilised society, which in my opinion Islam can't.
Wouldn't say it's evil but my opinion is that it's an oppressive (especially if you're female or homosexual) religion that doesn't appear to have moved on much since the Middle Ages. Despite it's many faults, Christianity has evolved with time and can take its place in a modern, civilised society, which in my opinion Islam can't.
Fairly sure Christianity has been oppressive to both of those groups within recent history and in some denominations of it continue to be.
All religions have to evolve in order to survive with the modern world and perhaps is some of the reasoning behind these extremist attacks. There are some just unwilling to change get and will go to any length to keep it as such.
Despite it's many faults, Christianity has evolved with time and can take its place in a modern, civilised society, which in my opinion Islam can't.
Understandably, you're writing from the perspective of living in Western Europe, where the people are mostly atheist and Christianity has to work around that. However, your description of Christianity doesn't correspond to what happens in other parts of the world, places where women and homosexuals are oppressed (to take your examples).
There are several million Muslims living in Western Europe, who live peacefully and coexist with non-Muslims, including homosexuals. My hope is that that identity will be seen as/become the default for Islam, in the same way as you see it for Christianity.
It's been reported that Salah Abdeslam was being shielded by the 'community' in the area he was living in Molenbeek, after he was arrested, locals gathered shouting their support for "Hero Abdeslam", when the police tried to disperse the crowd they threw missiles.
Despite it's many faults, Christianity has evolved with time and can take its place in a modern, civilised society, which in my opinion Islam can't.
Understandably, you're writing from the perspective of living in Western Europe, where the people are mostly atheist and Christianity has to work around that. However, your description of Christianity doesn't correspond to what happens in other parts of the world, places where women and homosexuals are oppressed (to take your examples).
There are several million Muslims living in Western Europe, who live peacefully and coexist with non-Muslims, including homosexuals. My hope is that that identity will be seen as/become the default for Islam, in the same way as you see it for Christianity.
Fair point. I actually believe that all religion is horseshit.
It's been reported that Salah Abdeslam was being shielded by the 'community' in the area he was living in Molenbeek, after he was arrested, locals gathered shouting their support for "Hero Abdeslam", when the police tried to disperse the crowd they threw missiles.
That is obviously a street full of actors that have been employed to show the community in a bad light and to hide the nastiness of foreign policy employed by the evil west.
It's been reported that Salah Abdeslam was being shielded by the 'community' in the area he was living in Molenbeek, after he was arrested, locals gathered shouting their support for "Hero Abdeslam", when the police tried to disperse the crowd they threw missiles.
That is obviously a street full of actors that have been employed to show the community in a bad light and to hide the nastiness of foreign policy employed by the evil west.
There's a chap on BBC news at the moment from the UK's National Counter Terrorism Security Office (NaCTSO) who seems to be unable to comprehend the situation in Belgium; specifically how one of the world's most wanted men was able to stay safely a few streets away from his home address whilst seemingly slipping under the radar.
Another chap, a Security Analyst, mentioned that their Intelligence Services do not liaise with their police force correctly. Apparently there have been times where the Belgian Security Services have liaised with UK Security Services, who in turn pass intelligence down to the UK Police... who in turn have liaised with the Belgian police and sometimes been the first people to let them know of intelligence, even if it originated from Belgium to begin with.
I must say, the officials don't seem to be coming out of this very well.
It's been reported that Salah Abdeslam was being shielded by the 'community' in the area he was living in Molenbeek, after he was arrested, locals gathered shouting their support for "Hero Abdeslam", when the police tried to disperse the crowd they threw missiles.
It's been reported that Salah Abdeslam was being shielded by the 'community' in the area he was living in Molenbeek, after he was arrested, locals gathered shouting their support for "Hero Abdeslam", when the police tried to disperse the crowd they threw missiles.
Right. Will you be posting a video which shows the events you describe?
So we all need video evidence for every news story we share now then do we?
I heard a BBC reporter mentioning something along the same lines immediately after his arrest, but she never went any further. She's probably down the road with her P45
It's been reported that Salah Abdeslam was being shielded by the 'community' in the area he was living in Molenbeek, after he was arrested, locals gathered shouting their support for "Hero Abdeslam", when the police tried to disperse the crowd they threw missiles.
The fact that these abhorrent attitudes are not only present in Western Europe, but are openly voiced, is no longer surprising - just completely depressing.
Molenbeek can now claim to be the birthplace of two sets of horrific terrorist attacks - both within 5 months of each other.
I genuine fear for areas in the UK - like Whitechapel - where petty crime seems to be common and, if you don't fit in, it can seem very intimidating. I've had young lads in cars pull up beside me when I've been walking down Whitechapel High Street; they'll roll down a window and offer you a business card for their services dealing drugs. Business cards. Given to strangers.
I don't see anything positive coming from the combination of petty crime, a community who doesn't want to integrate, political corruption (Lufter Rahman?) and seeming inaction. Of course, you can't simply break these areas up, but I think a zero tolerance approach to crime in general in those at risk areas would be a positive step forwards.
It's been reported that Salah Abdeslam was being shielded by the 'community' in the area he was living in Molenbeek, after he was arrested, locals gathered shouting their support for "Hero Abdeslam", when the police tried to disperse the crowd they threw missiles.
Right. Will you be posting a video which shows the events you describe?
It's really hard for some to stomach that there are communities in Europe that are extremist hotbeds, very weird from the liberals, sooner we accept this problem (tower hamlets, Luton, parts of birmingham) we might actually prevent this shit happening to us!
There's a chap on BBC news at the moment from the UK's National Counter Terrorism Security Office (NaCTSO) who seems to be unable to comprehend the situation in Belgium; specifically how one of the world's most wanted men was able to stay safely a few streets away from his home address whilst seemingly slipping under the radar.
Another chap, a Security Analyst, mentioned that their Intelligence Services do not liaise with their police force correctly. Apparently there have been times where the Belgian Security Services have liaised with UK Security Services, who in turn pass intelligence down to the UK Police... who in turn have liaised with the Belgian police and sometimes been the first people to let them know of intelligence, even if it originated from Belgium to begin with.
I must say, the officials don't seem to be coming out of this very well.
Firstly, so sad and my sympathies go to the victims and their families. I don't want to get drawn into the 'whys' and recriminations but to say that there was a very interesting article on the BBC site after the Paris attacks which explained how the Belgium police and secret services don't share intelligence. The sub-divisions of all police services within places even like Brussels are so sub-divided that they don't communicate efficiently. It can't help with acquiring information if accurate. Unfortunately, I can't find the article now.
If people are looking for a way to end all Islamist terrorism, the solution requires peace in the Middle East.
Anything else is a stop-gap measure.
'Peace' is not the same thing as 'the absence of organised armed conflict'.
Hate to say it but I think the only thing that would bring peace for them is another Dictator.
Its a region that almost needs to be ruled with an iron fist because there are so many factions that bicker with each other and since we've disposed of Hussuin / Gadaffi the two areas have gone down hill quicker than me in a shopping trolley on Shooters Hill.
If people are looking for a way to end all Islamist terrorism, the solution requires peace in the Middle East.
Anything else is a stop-gap measure.
'Peace' is not the same thing as 'the absence of organised armed conflict'.
Hate to say it but I think the only thing that would bring peace for them is another Dictator.
Its a region that almost needs to be ruled with an iron fist because there are so many factions that bicker with each other and since we've disposed of Hussuin / Gadaffi the two areas have gone down hill quicker than me in a shopping trolley on Shooters Hill.
Have to say that I disagree entirely with this sort of statement.
If we accept this argument, you effectively infantilise that the people of the Middle East (in which case, they cannot be responsible for their actions any more than a 7 year old child can). It assumes that we are somehow more mature and, thus, ready for democracy.
A significant percentage of our problems among many Middle Eastern countries is precisely because of the sorts of people that we have supported. The kings and dictators that are our "friends" don't want to rule countries where the masses are educated, forward thinking and Westernised; so they collude with (among others) those religious groupings that wish to declare that Islam and democracy (for example), or even the modern world are incompatible. The problem for our "friends" is that they have been doing it for so long that they can no longer control their unofficial allies - the House of Saud made a Faustian pact which allowed them rule relatively untroubled while there were big oil revenues...
There are millions of un/underemployed young people across the Middle East and Africa who live a life without hope, who are easy pickings for those seeking to manipulate them
Take a look at the attacks carried out in the name of al Qaida and ISIS across Muslim countries in recent years. How many of these, apart from the immediate threat to life, are designed specifically to destroy the economy and thus the chances for the younger generations.
And, in relation to both Iraq and Libya, the Western powers (especially the US and UK) chose to ignore the lessons of history. The thing that brought Europe back from its knees following the Second World War, and helped avoid a re-run of the 1920s and 1930s, was the Marshall Plan and the reconstruction of Europe. Look at the number of years when Germany, after 1945, was effectively administered by the Allied Powers, and the resources pumped into the country to bring it back to productivity. Just like Iraq and Libya, Germany had had relatively few potential anchors for transition to a democratic state - but unlike Dubya and Blair, the Allies recognised that rebuilding benefitted them in the long run.
So, anyway, my view is the polar opposite. What we should be looking to do is support those that are willing to help create a civil society (so I would seek to provide increased aid to Tunisia, for example, which is currently in the sights of ISIS, but is clinging to the Arab Spring). If we don't, in 50 years time, we'll look back at this period like Hungary in 1956 or the Prague Spring.
Naturally, as I have a sister working for an NGO in Lebanon (a country where 25% of those officially living in the borders are refugees), I might suggest that they need help too....
If people are looking for a way to end all Islamist terrorism, the solution requires peace in the Middle East.
Anything else is a stop-gap measure.
'Peace' is not the same thing as 'the absence of organised armed conflict'.
Hate to say it but I think the only thing that would bring peace for them is another Dictator.
Its a region that almost needs to be ruled with an iron fist because there are so many factions that bicker with each other and since we've disposed of Hussuin / Gadaffi the two areas have gone down hill quicker than me in a shopping trolley on Shooters Hill.
I understand why you say that, but it is misguided.
That may provide the absence of armed conflict in the region, but it would not bring peace.
It is just a stop-gap measure at best.
Strong-man dictators in the Middle East propped up by Western governments would not end Islamist terrorism, certainly not terrorism targeted at Western populations.
Wouldn't say it's evil but my opinion is that it's an oppressive (especially if you're female or homosexual) religion that doesn't appear to have moved on much since the Middle Ages. Despite it's many faults, Christianity has evolved with time and can take its place in a modern, civilised society, which in my opinion Islam can't.
Fairly sure Christianity has been oppressive to both of those groups within recent history and in some denominations of it continue to be.
All religions have to evolve in order to survive with the modern world and perhaps is some of the reasoning behind these extremist attacks. There are some just unwilling to change get and will go to any length to keep it as such.
Religions do not have to evolve, but some have. Christianity did about 200 years ago through the Age of Reason but that took 1700-1800 years from the birth of Christianity. Islam is 500 years behind that so if the same linear progression is applied they have another 300 years to go!
There are about 2 billion people on this planet who claim to be Muslims - most, the overwhelming majority, do practice a modified version (interpretation of the Koran rather than a change) of Islam which is peace loving and compassionate. A tiny minority are fundamentalists who will be defeated at some point - and the army to defeat them will be the rest of the Muslim community. Depressingly, there is a long way to go to reach that point and the west's challenge in my opinion is to 'arm' the peace-loving Muslims with support and peaceful deeds whilst at the same time going after the likes of IS.
My thoughts are with the families of yesterday's victims.
Why does every sad event like this, where we should be merely sympathising with victims families and friends, turn into a debate about religion, culture and immigration?
There's no need there is nothing religious or holy about the scum that commit these heinous crimes against humanity just evil people. No religion wants to be tarnished by them and they shouldn't.
There would be a lot less animosity and racism and bigotry out there if people started blaming and punishing individuals responsible for crimes rather than a wider community that had nothing to do with them.
Whilst I am a firm believer that all religion is complete fantasy, ghost stories and illogical bullshit. I do respect people that have religious belief that runs hand in hand with the laws of the country in which they live. It's good manners not to kill your neighbours - but maybe that's just me.
What staggers me is these apologists and 'my poo don't smell sort' that immediately appear on websites such as these and after any horrific murderous bloodbath such a Brussels and label anyone that dare suggest that the Muslim religion is still a bit 'suspect' as racist. Then come up with the Christians do the same argument - two wrongs and all that.
There does seem there's a pattern here with recent carnage in European Cities, Young men, terrible complexions, radicalised, pretty criminal, and non conformist.- oh and Muslim. When the National Trust start planting bombs then you can blame politics.
This has nothing to do with anyone invading Iraq, or Afgahnistan or low level housing in Bradford or Erith. The Muslim religion is fundamentally flawed - it's incoherent nonsense.
Muslims have been killing non Muslims in Europe for the last 100 years - it's not a new concept, they have bombing and hijacking, shooting coppers on our streets, since 1950 and this only has increased with mass immigration- not foreign policy. I wonder what will happen on our streets in 20 years time unless the Muslim followers take a long hard look at themselves.
Why does every sad event like this, where we should be merely sympathising with victims families and friends, turn into a debate about religion, culture and immigration?
There's no need there is nothing religious or holy about the scum that commit these heinous crimes against humanity just evil people. No religion wants to be tarnished by them and they shouldn't.
There would be a lot less animosity and racism and bigotry out there if people started blaming and punishing individuals responsible for crimes rather than a wider community that had nothing to do with them.
You've asked why it turns into debate and then gave your opinion, which will probably lead to someone else giving their opinion and then onto debate no doubt. What is wrong with it leading to respectful debate?
I and lots of people I know weren't surprised that Abdeslam was shielded by the community. However ... I'm still outraged that foreign media reported that lots of youngsters were insulting, menacing police and even throwing objects at them in support of Abdeslam, while ... our own national television chose not to mention this. We knew national television is known for exagerated political correctness, but sometimes they remind me of how media are run in North Korea ! This is IMO an enormous problem for the Flemish part of the media, it's even worse for the French speaking part. Sigh ...
I and lots of people I know weren't surprised that Abdeslam was shielded by the community. However ... I'm still outraged that foreign media reported that lots of youngsters were insulting, menacing police and even throwing objects at them in support of Abdeslam, while ... our own national television chose not to mention this. We knew national television is known for exagerated political correctness, but sometimes they remind me of how media are run in North Korea ! This is IMO an enormous problem for the Flemish part of the media, it's even worse for the French speaking part. Sigh ...
The BBC and ITV never reported it either, except a 'slip up' from a reporter reporting live from a roof top opposite the property. I've not seen any reports in France either, but it is there if you look hard enough....
Why does every sad event like this, where we should be merely sympathising with victims families and friends, turn into a debate about religion, culture and immigration?
There's no need there is nothing religious or holy about the scum that commit these heinous crimes against humanity just evil people. No religion wants to be tarnished by them and they shouldn't.
There would be a lot less animosity and racism and bigotry out there if people started blaming and punishing individuals responsible for crimes rather than a wider community that had nothing to do with them.
You've asked why it turns into debate and then gave your opinion, which will probably lead to someone else giving their opinion and then onto debate no doubt. What is wrong with it leading to respectful debate?
Correction, it was/is already a debate, therefore I want starting one. Was merely asking a question and justifying said question, it can't cause what has already started.
Comments
Having said that, and as horrifying as it is, this is what people endure every day 'over there', and most of it isn't reported. There are hundreds of bombs/suicide attacks every day. I think there's always a massive rush to condemn a whole race/religeon when it happens here - although we make the bombs, and we train the troops - how many times has the west sided with Iran against Iraq, then visa-versa?
However, I think the populations of these countries should finally confront the enemy themselves - there's no more room in Europe, and it isn't the solution anyway. That's not racist - I'm far from it. There's a difference between immigration and integration. I genuinely feel/hope that the immigrants of the 50s and 60s and their children are well integrated here - and it might sound crass but I love the cosmpolitain mix of London, where I hope to back very soon.
Here, I vote Mélenchon (Squirrel Face will know - he's a kind of Tony Benn/Corbyn, but 100 times better) - I say that just to give you my political slant - but Europe can't take ny more in, because we already have we don't know how many sleepers ready to detonate their bombs.
There are bad Charlton supporters, there are bad Frenchmen, bad English, and bad Islamists; and the vast majority are good, law respecting individuals. But enough is enough. I don't have a job - my work's done in China or Poland. The last time I was in England I had an English boss and 10 Polish collegues - I didn't speak all day. OK, I'm an immigrant in France, but I make an effort to assimilate, I immerse myself in French culture (to a lesser and lesser extent tbh).
If you go to live in a country, IMHO, you have to abide by their rules, and it seems to me that the Islamists don't respect that.
If we let Turkey into Europe that'll be it - the floodgates will be open.
This act was perpertrated (spelling - sorry!) by cowards, but I think we're all cowrds in a way by supporting (tacitally or otherwise) our governements and allowing wht happens.
I chuck that in to the mix to see if anyone bites, but above all my sympathy for the victims - everywhere.
All religions have to evolve in order to survive with the modern world and perhaps is some of the reasoning behind these extremist attacks. There are some just unwilling to change get and will go to any length to keep it as such.
For example:
Serbia/Russia (Orthodox)
Lebanon (Maronite)
Philippines (Catholic)
Uganda (Anglican & Catholic)
There are several million Muslims living in Western Europe, who live peacefully and coexist with non-Muslims, including homosexuals. My hope is that that identity will be seen as/become the default for Islam, in the same way as you see it for Christianity.
Another chap, a Security Analyst, mentioned that their Intelligence Services do not liaise with their police force correctly. Apparently there have been times where the Belgian Security Services have liaised with UK Security Services, who in turn pass intelligence down to the UK Police... who in turn have liaised with the Belgian police and sometimes been the first people to let them know of intelligence, even if it originated from Belgium to begin with.
I must say, the officials don't seem to be coming out of this very well.
I heard a BBC reporter mentioning something along the same lines immediately after his arrest, but she never went any further. She's probably down the road with her P45
Molenbeek can now claim to be the birthplace of two sets of horrific terrorist attacks - both within 5 months of each other.
I genuine fear for areas in the UK - like Whitechapel - where petty crime seems to be common and, if you don't fit in, it can seem very intimidating. I've had young lads in cars pull up beside me when I've been walking down Whitechapel High Street; they'll roll down a window and offer you a business card for their services dealing drugs. Business cards. Given to strangers.
I don't see anything positive coming from the combination of petty crime, a community who doesn't want to integrate, political corruption (Lufter Rahman?) and seeming inaction. Of course, you can't simply break these areas up, but I think a zero tolerance approach to crime in general in those at risk areas would be a positive step forwards.
Unfortunately, I can't find the article now.
Its a region that almost needs to be ruled with an iron fist because there are so many factions that bicker with each other and since we've disposed of Hussuin / Gadaffi the two areas have gone down hill quicker than me in a shopping trolley on Shooters Hill.
If we accept this argument, you effectively infantilise that the people of the Middle East (in which case, they cannot be responsible for their actions any more than a 7 year old child can). It assumes that we are somehow more mature and, thus, ready for democracy.
A significant percentage of our problems among many Middle Eastern countries is precisely because of the sorts of people that we have supported. The kings and dictators that are our "friends" don't want to rule countries where the masses are educated, forward thinking and Westernised; so they collude with (among others) those religious groupings that wish to declare that Islam and democracy (for example), or even the modern world are incompatible. The problem for our "friends" is that they have been doing it for so long that they can no longer control their unofficial allies - the House of Saud made a Faustian pact which allowed them rule relatively untroubled while there were big oil revenues...
There are millions of un/underemployed young people across the Middle East and Africa who live a life without hope, who are easy pickings for those seeking to manipulate them
Take a look at the attacks carried out in the name of al Qaida and ISIS across Muslim countries in recent years. How many of these, apart from the immediate threat to life, are designed specifically to destroy the economy and thus the chances for the younger generations.
And, in relation to both Iraq and Libya, the Western powers (especially the US and UK) chose to ignore the lessons of history. The thing that brought Europe back from its knees following the Second World War, and helped avoid a re-run of the 1920s and 1930s, was the Marshall Plan and the reconstruction of Europe. Look at the number of years when Germany, after 1945, was effectively administered by the Allied Powers, and the resources pumped into the country to bring it back to productivity. Just like Iraq and Libya, Germany had had relatively few potential anchors for transition to a democratic state - but unlike Dubya and Blair, the Allies recognised that rebuilding benefitted them in the long run.
So, anyway, my view is the polar opposite. What we should be looking to do is support those that are willing to help create a civil society (so I would seek to provide increased aid to Tunisia, for example, which is currently in the sights of ISIS, but is clinging to the Arab Spring). If we don't, in 50 years time, we'll look back at this period like Hungary in 1956 or the Prague Spring.
Naturally, as I have a sister working for an NGO in Lebanon (a country where 25% of those officially living in the borders are refugees), I might suggest that they need help too....
That may provide the absence of armed conflict in the region, but it would not bring peace.
It is just a stop-gap measure at best.
Strong-man dictators in the Middle East propped up by Western governments would not end Islamist terrorism, certainly not terrorism targeted at Western populations.
There are about 2 billion people on this planet who claim to be Muslims - most, the overwhelming majority, do practice a modified version (interpretation of the Koran rather than a change) of Islam which is peace loving and compassionate. A tiny minority are fundamentalists who will be defeated at some point - and the army to defeat them will be the rest of the Muslim community. Depressingly, there is a long way to go to reach that point and the west's challenge in my opinion is to 'arm' the peace-loving Muslims with support and peaceful deeds whilst at the same time going after the likes of IS.
My thoughts are with the families of yesterday's victims.
There's no need there is nothing religious or holy about the scum that commit these heinous crimes against humanity just evil people. No religion wants to be tarnished by them and they shouldn't.
There would be a lot less animosity and racism and bigotry out there if people started blaming and punishing individuals responsible for crimes rather than a wider community that had nothing to do with them.
What staggers me is these apologists and 'my poo don't smell sort' that immediately appear on websites such as these and after any horrific murderous bloodbath such a Brussels and label anyone that dare suggest that the Muslim religion is still a bit 'suspect' as racist. Then come up with the Christians do the same argument - two wrongs and all that.
There does seem there's a pattern here with recent carnage in European Cities, Young men, terrible complexions, radicalised, pretty criminal, and non conformist.- oh and Muslim. When the National Trust start planting bombs then you can blame politics.
This has nothing to do with anyone invading Iraq, or Afgahnistan or low level housing in Bradford or Erith. The Muslim religion is fundamentally flawed - it's incoherent nonsense.
Muslims have been killing non Muslims in Europe for the last 100 years - it's not a new concept, they have bombing and hijacking, shooting coppers on our streets, since 1950 and this only has increased with mass immigration- not foreign policy. I wonder what will happen on our streets in 20 years time unless the Muslim followers take a long hard look at themselves.
This won't be popular, but has to be read