The Palestinian Authority runs a virtual one-party administration over West Bank Arabs, unimpeded by an independent supreme court or a free news media, restricts civil liberties and gives only lip service to freedom of worship. For example, the International Christian Embassy Jerusalem reports:

The Palestinian Authority is refusing to renew the official registration papers of the First Baptist Church of Bethlehem, apparently due to its reluctance to join other Palestinian institutions in unfairly criticizing Israel. ... Such renewals are normally routine, and no official reasons were given for the denial. If [the decision is] left to stand, the result could mean the church cannot register births, marriages and deaths of its congregants. This could prove problematic as the PA requires that residents indicate affiliation with a certain religion on identification papers and other civil documents.

Pastor Naim Khoury, a relative rarity among Palestinian Arabs as a churchman who voices no hostility toward Jews and Israel, has witnessed violent attacks upon his Bethlehem church.

Israeli news media, for example, the Jerusalem Post Christian Edition, have reported on the persecution of the Bethlehem Baptist Church but the silence of Western mainstream media on the matter is pervasive.

Posted by MK at 02:54 PM |  Comments (1)

April 13, 2012

Israel Critic Rami Khouri is Upstaged by an NPR Listener

National Public Radio, as in the April 10, 2012 broadcast of the Talk of the Nation call-in show, persists in relying on Lebanon-based journalist Rami Khouri as a guest on discussion shows in which he frequently conveys misinformation about Israel and the Middle East. CAMERA has detailed Khouri’s tendency to snipe at Israel here, here and here.

According to Harvard University,“Rami George Khouri is a Palestinian-Jordanian and U.S. citizen whose family resides in Beirut, Amman, and Nazareth. He is director of the Issam Fares Institute for Public Policy and International Affairs at the American University of Beirut. His journalistic work includes writing books and an internationally syndicated column, and he also serves as editor at large of the Beirut-based Daily Star newspaper.�

But Khouri’s patrons including Harvard University (Belfer Center), American University of Beirut, PBS NewsHour with Jim Lehrer, as well as NPR, take no public notice of his false equivalence, lumping Israeli behavior – essentially that of self-defense – with that of anti-democratic Arab/Islamic regimes that threaten their neighbors and repress their own citizens.

Khouri’s slanted perspective on the Jewish state often echoes institutional Arab anti-Israel propaganda. Examples are his Daily Star commentaries in 2012 on March 21 and March 10.

Early in the April 10 thirty-minute discussion of the turmoil in Syria and elsewhere in the Middle East, Khouri, while downplaying the issues of enmity between Sunni and Shia Muslims and – Muslim antagonism toward the Christian Arab minority, declares that the Arab uprisings are about wanting “to have something closer to Belgium or Switzerland or even the United States, where people can more or less live a decent life knowing that there's a single standard of law that applies to everybody.� This despite popular support and voter turn out for Islamists and, as in Libya, where public opinion surveys show a majority more interested in Islamic rule than democracy.

At the discussion’s midpoint, Khouri aims his customary defamation dart at Israel in listing those he alleges are responsible for conditions causing the uprisings: “It’s not only the Arabs who need to be accountable but foreign armies that invade the region, occupation forces like the Israelis and others, the Iranians, the Turks...�

Khouri added, “An overwhelming majority of Syrians want this regime to change� and suggested that the promise of the new leaders emerging in Syria and elsewhere – to respect human rights of all citizens – can be relied upon.

But Khouri is upstaged by a woman calling from Pennsylvania offering a far different perspective:

I’m a Syrian-American. I grew up in the United States. My parents decided to leave Syria when Hafez al-Assad was in power. Of course the heir apparent was always his son Basil. It was not Bashar. Basil was killed. And then when Bashar came into power, my parents decided to move back to Syria. We are Christians. I have to say that we had a nice life. I had been going back and forth every holiday to celebrate. In Syria we have friends who are of all ethnic backgrounds – Alawites, Shia, Muslims, Sunni Muslims, Armenians in the north. I have to say that we’ve had freedom of religion. And things actually have been quite good under Bashar al-Assad.

I’m afraid of what’s going to happen afterwards. The people in the streets are Islamists and we don’t want an Islamic country. It’s now a secular government. Yes, it’s not perfect but the curse of the Middle East is its rulers, unfortunately. I’ll tell you whatever is going to come after him is going to be far much worse. Look at what’s happening in Egypt. The Muslim Brotherhood said they’d never float a candidate for president. Now, they’re doing it. They will always go back on their words. It’s a shame but it’s true. But the majority that I know – and I know a lot of people in Damascus – are just hunkered down in their houses right now, and they’re afraid to go in the streets, but they’re supporting Bashar al-Assad.

Host Neal Conan noted that “The record for Christians and other religious and ethnic minorities has not always been happy as these regimes have changed in many Arab states.�

Khouri countered, only slightly backing off his previous assurance of the reliability of Islamist public declarations of respect for human rights:

Well, we haven’t really had many experiences with regime changes and what the caller is saying is correct to a certain extent where you do have a lot of people who support the regime. Some of them feel that a different regime might actually not give everyone the same opportunities. But the problem is that, like in Iraq, it was the same thing. You had Christians who could do everything they want – Jews, Christians. And I’m a Christian myself and – but the fact is that an overwhelming majority of the entire population had no real civil rights or political rights or equal opportunity and there was massive deterioration in quality, in economic access to resources and job opportunities ... About the Islamists taking over, one of the things we have to really follow very closely to what they are saying – including the Muslim Brothers in Syria who have made some statements – they are all coming out now with very clear statements about their commitment to secular governments. These are Muslim people – the majority of Arabs are Muslims like the majority of Americans are Christians – but they recognize the rights of people who are different minorities and they are committed to a secular government. And this is something that has to be monitored very, very closely.

(Click here to listen to the entire discussion).

Khouri's projection that Islamists like those in Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood are committed to secular government and minority rights is untested and quite possibly, like his chronic sniping at Israel, unfounded. His claim that Iraqi Jews – forced out decades ago – and Iraqi Christians, who in large numbers have fled post-Saddam Hussein intimidation and murder by Muslim Iraqis "could do everything they want" is nonsensical. Nevertheless, he remains a popular resource for NPR and others.

Khouri can be contacted at [email protected] and NPR can be contacted here.

Posted by MK at 07:15 PM |  Comments (2)

Gunter Grass and "Criticism" of Israel

It's hard to tell whether Tablet's Liel Leibovitz is upset with what he sees as hyperbolic, knee jerk reactions, or if he's more interested in advocating such hyperbole. Commenting on Israel's decision to bar of Gunter Grass from the country, he writes:

the obvious conclusion is that the state of Israel will from now on categorically ban anyone who criticizes it in any way from entry. Which means that I, too, should be banned, immediately, and General Martin Dempsey, the Chairman of Joints Chief of Staff, and Coldplay, and anyone else who has ever publicly uttered any word that could be somehow construed as anything less than entirely and unquestioningly approving of Israel and every single one of its actions and policies.

Gunter Grass in 1944. To Israeli leaders, and under Israeli law, his past matters.

Never mind that he convincingly, though inadvertently, rebuts his own argument. Israel hasn't banned Leibovitz or Dempsey or Coldplay. There is no ban on Nicholas Kristof or Thomas Friedman. The country hasn't even banned Stephen Walt or John Mearsheimer. And these critics of Israel won't be barred from entry in the future. In other words, even in Liebovitz's own telling, his "obvious conclusion" is anything but obvious.

But never mind that. Whether or not a writer supports the decision to keep Grass out of the country, readers deserve to hear all of the germane facts. Liebovitz suggests the ban is either completely arbitrary or the result of a blanket punishment targeting all who won't walk in lockstep with Israel's government. But the decision, right or wrong, is neither of these. The Jerusalem Post, Ha'aretz and the Times of Israel have each reported that the decision was based on a Israeli law allowing the Interior Ministry to bar specifically people with past Nazi affiliations, and Grass, as he eventually admitted to the German people, was in a unit of the Waffen SS.

Leibovitz certainly isn't the only one who has omitted important points in order to cram this story into the "You can't get away with criticizing Israel" frame. In the New York Times, Nicholas Kulish writes that Grass was "making a point about the dangers of a first strike by Israel against Iran over its disputed nuclear program." He forgets to mention that, in Grass's telling, Israel's plans might involve "annihilating the Iranian people," or in other words, an Israeli-perpetrated holocaust.

Is this controversy about those who fail to "entirely and unquestioningly approv[e] of Israel and every single one of its actions and policies"? Is it about mere criticism of Israel? Or is it about an accusation, by a former Nazi, that crosses the line from criticism into demonization? Readers can decide. But they should be able to base their decision on all the relevant facts.

Posted by at 10:42 AM |  Comments (0)

April 11, 2012

Where's the Coverage? "Flytilla" Participants Need a New Travel Agent

Perhaps you have heard about the upcoming "flytilla" into Israel.

Israeli police expect 500-1,000 pro-Palestinian activists will try to land in Israel on 20 flights from Western Europe and Turkey throughout the day Sunday, April 15, 2012. Organizers say 2,000 people will attempt to arrive. The French delegation alone claims they will have 600 participants.

The leader of the French delegation is Olivia Zemor, 63, a well-known anti-Israel protester. She heads the group Euro Palestine and is a member of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement. Israel blacklisted her last July when she attempted to participate in the first (unsuccessful) "flytilla."

Zemor describes the motives of those engaging in the event:

The majority of the participants are not activists, they are people that are against the occupation. They want a free Palestine. They want Israelis and Palestinians to live in peace with equal rights. They have wanted to meet Palestinians and to go to Palestine to tell them they support their struggle for freedom.

Well, if the non-activists want Palestinians to have "equal rights," maybe they should fly into Jordan, where Palestinians face discrimination, are treated as foreigners and required to pay fees in foreign currency, making it difficult to enroll in Jordanian universities. Career options of Palestinians are limited to the private sector, access to decision making circles and state institutions is denied. Due to a law meant to limit Palestinian representation in the Jordanian parliament, as many as 1.6 million Jordanians of Palestinian descent of have been stripped of their citizenship, and with it numerous rights, including Palestinian Authority and PLO officials.

Or, perhaps the non-activists would like to "support the struggle for freedom" in Lebanon, where basic human rights are denied to Palestinians, where they are legally prohibited from high-status professions including law, medicine, pharmacy and engineering, excluded by law from owning real estate, denied civil identity registration and with it access to basic health services, education, civil, social and economic rights, registration of marriages and registration of newborns. The Lebanese army severely restricts Palestinian refugee camps where curfews are in place, where residents pass through military checkpoints, and where walls are being constructed, isolating them from their surroundings. Palestinian Arabs have been subject to arbitrary arrest, detention, and torture and denied legal representation.

And of course, if the non-activists want a "free Palestine," they should try to protest in Gaza, under the authority of Hamas, where political freedom, religious freedom and freedom of association are severely curtailed, women's rights are limited, terrorist activity is located in civilian centers transforming residents into human shields and often causing them injury and death, human rights activists are targeted, and homosexuality is a criminal offense.

It is very possible that "flytilla" participants didn’t know how to plan their trip properly because the media rarely if ever mentions the oppression Palestinians face at the hands of their Arab "brothers." Maybe Zemor and her compatriots should be asking, "Where’s the coverage?"

Posted by SC at 08:45 PM |  Comments (1)

April 09, 2012

JPS Uses New Falsification to Defend Pappé Falsification

CAMERA's response to Journal of Palestine Studies' defense of Ilan Pappé is now posted on our main website. Pappé had used a fabricated quote, which he attributed to a 1937 letter by David Ben-Gurion to his son Amos, in a 2006 article in JPS.

Unfortunately, instead of publishing a straightforward correction, JPS doubled down.

We explain in our article that

the journal's editors defended "the overall accuracy" of Pappé's piece, arguing that another purported statement by Ben-Gurion showed the author was essentially correct. Pappé claimed Ben-Gurion wrote that "The Arabs will have to go, but one needs an opportune moment for making it happen, such as a war." JPS maintained this quote, while incorrect, is close enough to what they say Ben-Gurion actually wrote, namely that "We must expel Arabs and take their place." The editors should have realized, though, that the new quote they cited is at best questionable, and almost certainly inaccurate. Making matters worse, JPS inserted invented words into its English translation of the document it used to defend Pappé's article. In other words, it introduced its own falsehoods to defend Pappé's falsehood.

Among other things, we note that JPS's English version of the 1937 Ben-Gurion letter, as translated by the journal's parent organization The Institute for Palestine Studies, includes the invented phrase "Up to now," which is inserted into the beginning of a key sentence and misleadingly suggests Ben-Gurion is describing a change of heart.

What we left out for the sake of brevity is that this wasn't the only peculiar change IPS made in its translation of the letter. For example, in another passage Ben-Gurion states that if Jews have to use force to secure their right to settle the barren land, "it is clear that we will then have an issue not only with the Arabs that are in the Land of Israel." It is very likely, he continues, that Arabs from neighboring countries "will come to help them against us."

In the JPS translation, "we will have an issue" turns into the nefarious sounding "we will have to deal ... with." The phrase "against us" is lopped of altogether, so that JPS's translation has Ben-Gurion writing, "it is very probable that Arabs from the neighboring countries will come to their aid."

Posted by at 04:32 PM |  Comments (1)

April's Fools: C-SPAN Begins the Month with More “Blame-the-Jews� Tirades

One of C-SPAN’s most popular programs, Washington Journal (a 3-hour daily public affairs and call-in show), ushered in April with a double dose of “blame-the-Jews" tirades from the same caller. Once again, when it came to bashing Israel, a network host failed to uphold C-SPAN's ostensible "one-call-per-30-days" rule.

It must be noted that C-SPAN, watched by more than 28 million viewers weekly (according to the network’s own estimate), allows no ethnic or religious group or nation except Israel and Jews to be repeatedly vilified on Journal broadcasts.

On April 5, "Pat" from Pittsburgh, an obvious conspiracy theorist, charged preposterously yet without challenge by either host Peter Slen or the guest that Israel manipulates U.S. elections through manufacture of voting machines (click here to listen):

When the American people are witnessing the massive manipulation of the election process when our election machines are being manufactured in the state of Israel which is manipulating our country on virtually every level, I think it is understandable that the skepticism of the American people is as high as it is.

On April 1, “Patrick� from Pittsburgh had launched into a propaganda tirade that began with an unsubstantiated and hearsay claim of a diplomat finding a key section of the U.S. State Department "occupied by Israelis," proceeded to the wild assertion that there are "a billion" Americans (there are a little more than 300 million) and ended with the canards –- popular with both neo-Nazis and the extreme left –- that "Israel is the puppet-master of America" and leading this country into "another war of lies." The guest's dispassionate refutation of the caller's smears could not relieve, ex post facto, Washington Journal host Paul Orgel of his professional responsibility to have recognized and quickly terminated the anti-Israel, anti-Jewish phone call in the first place. This is not a matter of censoring informed opinion, but of preserving air time from the lunatic fringe. Click here to listen.

C-SPAN can be contacted at (202) 737-3220, 877-662-7726, [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] or facebook.com/CSPAN about its dismal, indefensible record of permitting on a regular basis (usually without challenge), callers’ defamations of Jews and Israel.

Posted by MK at 02:16 PM |  Comments (0)

April 04, 2012

Where's the Coverage? Separation Barriers in…Cairo

Checkpoints! 10-foot concrete walls! Arabs who can’t get to their businesses! Must be Israel, right? Wrong.

It’s Egypt, as reported by NPR:

After five days of skirmishes in early February, Cairo's police chiefs ordered the construction of a series of 10-foot walls, seven of them in all, to block off access to the [interior] ministry.

Other walls have sprung up throughout the area, too, following other bouts of violence. Vibrant neighborhoods have been transformed into a maze of checkpoints and concrete blocks. Now residents are trying to get adjusted to the new, imposing barriers that have virtually paralyzed a large section of downtown Cairo.

And yet, with all the attention being paid to the vaunted freedoms of the "Arab Spring" and the outrage the world felt at Israel on "Land Day," have you heard anything about the "Apartheid Walls" of Cairo?

Naturally, NPR puts a positive spin on Cairo’s walls as preferable to the alternative:

Mohammed Kadry Said, a retired major general and a senior analyst at the Ahram Center for Political and Strategic Studies, says that the walls provide a limited solution.

"Either you go out and shoot the crowd who are attacking the building of the Ministry of Interior and can put a fire on it, or you can make a shield, so at least you are safe."

When Egypt erects a barrier to keep government officials safe from citizens, it’s fine. But when Israel erects a barrier to keep citizens safe from terrorists, it’s an atrocity. Talk about a double standard. Furthermore, there are separation barriers all over the world yet only Israel’s security barrier is criticized. Where’s the fairness? Where’s the context? Where’s the coverage?

Posted by SC at 02:56 PM |  Comments (3)

Ha'aretz's Lousy Headline

Yet again, Ha'aretz provides an example of how its distorted coverage provides fodder to anti-Israel writers abroad. Yesterday Ha'aretz's Web site published the following headline:

This dismal headline implies that the Israeli army is seeking to upgrade means in which to harm civilian populations. Indeed, one must read the article itself several times to understand the new brigade's actual purpose: to increase precision of attacks on combatants so as to minimize harm to civilians. But the dismal online headline, coupled with the lack of clarity in the article itself, points falsely instead to IDF intentions to massacre, a notion that anti-Israel blogger Richard Silverstein jumps on.

One need only look at the English print edition for a straight-forward headline: "IDF plans to set up first short-range rocket battalion." Ha'aretz editors take note: an accurate subheadline would read: "New rockets would reduce casualties among non-combatants during strikes against terrorist targets in populated areas."

Posted by TS at 07:45 AM |  Comments (2)

April 02, 2012

Video Exposes Northeastern Univ Holocaust Offenses

A new video exposes reckless disregard for scholarship and ethics at another university, continuing a trend. Northeastern University in Boston accepted funds for a Jewish Studies Chair from a donor concerned about preserving memory of the Holocaust, then allowed biased faculty and negligent administrators to "pervert" the clear aim of the donor, enlisting anti-Israel speakers who equated Israeli conduct with that of the Nazis.

Hijacking Holocaust Remembrance was produced by Americans for Peace and Tolerance. It lays out the disturbing story, citing the extreme anti-Israel speakers presented and an event that brought the matter to a head. Filmmaker Yoav Shamir and his anti-Israel work, Defamation, claiming Jews exploit the Holocaust to justify Israeli aggression were to be featured during Holocaust Remembrance Week in 2011. When Steven Stotsky, whose father had given Northeastern the Jewish Studies chair (and who is a Senior Research Analyst at CAMERA) discovered all this he wrote a column for the Boston Jewish Advocate. Shamir didn't, in the end, appear as a Holocaust comemoration speaker, but he and his film -- lauded on neo-Nazi Web sites -- were given a platform later in the year.

Posted by AL at 06:50 PM |  Comments (4)

Mrs. Bashar al-Assad: Fashion Media Spikes Heel

“This is the 21st century. Where in the world could this happen? As a mother and a human being, we need to make sure that these atrocities stop.�

So said Asma Assad, wife of Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad, and until recently a darling of fashion magazines and tabloid newspapers.

It was not, however, her husband’s suppression of the past year’s anti-regime protests and guerrilla attacks in Syria that the 36-year-old Mrs. Assad decried. It was Israel’s December, 2008 – January 2009 battle against Hamas in the Gaza Strip. “Operation Cast Lead,� she told Cable News Network (CNN) at the time, was “barbaric.�

The former Asma Akhras, daughter of a Syrian family who lived in a comfortable suburb of the British capital, graduated from King’s College London with a degree in computer science and diploma in French literature, Associated Press reported (“Syria’s first lady no longer idolized; British-born mother of three now denounced as part of brutal regime,� Washington Times, March 28).

According to the United Nations’, Bashar al-Assad’s forces have killed about 9,000 people, the large majority non-combatants. “They’ve gone for the children – for whatever purposes – in large numbers. Hundreds detained and tortured,� said Navi Pillay, U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights (“U.N. chief urges Assad to stem continuing violence; Fighting reported across Syria despite regime’s acceptance of peace plan,� Washington Post, March 29).

In “Operation Cast Lead,� Israel’s response to thousands of Palestinian mortar and rocket attacks, approximately
1,200 Gazans were killed and the majority appeared to be gunmen from Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad and other terrorist groups (“Hamas’ Revelation Undermines Key Conclusion of Goldstone Report,� CAMERA, Nov. 19, 2010).

Until the start of Syria’s “Arab spring� upheaval, Mrs. Assad captivated the French fashion magazine Elle, which in 2008 named her the world’s most stylish woman. In 2009, The Sun, Britain’s largest tabloid, called her the “sexy Brit … bringing Syria in from the cold.� And just before anti-regime protests erupted across the country last year, Vogue cited her charity work, “killer IQ� and penchant for going incognito to hear from the populace.

No matter that her husband, like his father Hafez al-Assad before him, ran Syria and Lebanon Mafia-style, car-bombing when not simply “disappearing� opponents from journalists to prime ministers, allying with Iran and collaborating with anti-American insurgents crossing the Syrian border into Iraq.

Apparently, countless reports – and surreptitously transmitted images – of slaughter by the regime now have rendered Mrs. Assad’s good looks, expensive tastes and fluent English irrelevant. Vogue reportedly deleted the Asma Assad puff-piece from its Web site. A lesson not only for readers of fashion magazines and tabloids, but also those of the “quality press� when fawning features from Arab and other dictatorship turn up.

Posted by ER at 05:46 PM |  Comments (0)

April 01, 2012

NBC World Blog Reports Disputed Land Claims as Fact

NBC's World Blog reports as fact a Palestinian farmer's disputed claims about expropriation of his land in Walaja:

But 70-year-old Abu Nidal doesn’t need a special calendar day to remind him of the Israeli occupation and their confiscation of his land. Nidal just needs to wake up every morning and look outside his window to see how the Israelis are confiscating his land.

He lives in the village Al Walaja, nestled in the hills between Jerusalem and Bethlehem. Half of the village of just over 2,000 is considered to be part of Jerusalem and the other half is part of the West Bank. So now the Israeli security wall snakes through the village. . . .

It was his grandmother’s wish that every family member be buried on their 11-acre farm land. But the Israelis have a different plan for the confiscated land. They are planning to build not only the wall, but a recreational park for Israelis on the other side of the wall.

But, as reported in Ha'aretz, authorities state that the plans for the park "do not call for the expropriation of privately-owned land":

Ir Amim says 1,250 dunams were added to the park plan about a year ago. The fence will cut villagers off from agricultural land and the park, which are on the Israeli side of the separation fence, Ir Amim says.

The groups says residents lost access to their land inside Jerusalem when sites were declared national parkland. But the development authority says the entire park is within Jerusalem's municipal boundaries and that the plans do not address land ownership.

They also do not call for the expropriation of privately-owned land, the authority says.

"In any event, there is no intention to expropriate privately-owned land," the authority said in a statement. "Most of the area already serves as a national park, and the expansion is being carried out to protect nature and the landscape." . . .

But Ze'ev Hacohen, a planner at the Israel Nature and Parks Authority, noted that Walaja residents would still be able to work their land.

He said the village's farmers would be able to cross the fence at a gate, although he acknowledged that the barrier would make access more difficult.

Abu Nidal goes on to suggest that Israel's courts never rule in the favor of Palestinians, a blatantly false claim, which NBC's Paul Goldman does not contradict:

This Friday when demonstrators take to the streets commemorating Land Day, Nidal won’t join them; his battle is being waged in the Israeli courts. But he pointed out that his case doesn’t have much of a shot. “The court is Israeli, the judge is Israeli and the lawyers are Israelis. It’s a losing battle.�

In fact, there is no shortage of examples in which Israeli courts ruled in favor of Palestinians.

Posted by TS at 04:33 AM |  Comments (2)

Ha'aretz Online Short on Space?

Usually, if there are differences in the lengths of online and print versions of the same article in a news outlet, it's the online edition that's longer. After all, while space is finite in print, editors do not have to deal with that restriction online.

So why is it that the online version of a Ha'aretz article about Jews moving into a building in Hebron is much shorter than its print counterpart? Notably, details about the Jews' alleged purchase of the property which appear in the print edition do not appear online. For instance, the print edition includes the following, which does not appear online:

The Palestinians who owned the two buildings died, leaving them to his two sons. One son took the renovated, three-story house and half of the second story of the adjacent house, whilehis brother received the rest.

The first brother is the one who allegedly sold his part in the compound to the settlers. His brother, who lives in the adjacent building, said the deal was carried out under false pretenses and is therefore invalid. He said a third party had purchased the property from them, without telling them he represented the settlers.

(Hat tip: IMRA and Yisrael Medad)

Posted by TS at 03:58 AM |  Comments (1)