Even though Arafat was a terrorist leader like Israel's leader Ariel Sharon (yes they were both terrorists) maybe they should have granted his wish to be buried in Jerusalem. This is the religious capital of the world for 3 major religions?

Jerusalem is the religious capital for over a billion Muslims? You might want to tell them they've been praying in the wrong direction, then.

Please read the Q'ran and report back on how many times it mentiuons Jerusalem, o.k.?


All this fuss over where to Bury Arafat. Why not simply bury him wher ehe was born?

Yes, anyone should be able to choose where they are buried.

Yet I still do not know why they fight over a litlle piece of land when

God created the heavens and the earth.

Jerusalem as the capital of Palestine?

Well, then I guess you won't mind when Osama bin Laden wants to be laid to rest at ground zero right?

I suppose Santiana should be buried at the Alamo too right?

Why fight over a little piece of land? Just give the terrorists what they want right? Israel, Kashmir, Andalusia, Spain, All of North Africa, all of Arabia, Sothern Thailand, Chechnya, and the Philipines ect...

BTW: Arafat did not have a will, so it logically follows that where he might be buried never occured to him, maybe the fact that he would die never occured to him, therefore all those speaking on his behalf may simply be speaking for themselves.

Actually, Sharon did Arafat a favor--many arabs will not go near the west bank.

Actually when Islam first started out Muslims did pray towards Jerusalem.

I don't think there is a right or wrong answer where Arafat should be buried. Where ever he ends up getting buried somebody isn't going to be happy.

I think what everyone should want (and pray for) is the Jews and the Palestinians come to an understanding and learn to live together in peace.

I'm fifty four years old and the conflict between the Jews and the Palestinians is older than me.

I pray both sides can find leadership who is willing to make peace.

Marine? Can you please support that Muslims praying toward Jerusalem with facts. I have not heard this? You mean in 600a.d. or so?

Perhaps you are refering to before Mohammed right? Yes, okay, well the Jews lived there in Medina and the caravan routes that Mohammed traveled took him to Jerusalem too. That's where Christians prayed and Jews prayed. Then in his old age, Mohammed got kind of upset when a Jew named Abu Afak, who was very old, "mocked" him and so he had him beheaded. This Quiblah in Mecca also preceeds Islam. Before Islam the tribes in the area were star worshipers, and this rock is actually something that fell from the sky and was considered holy. Mohammed adopted it and put some casing on it. That's really all there is to that!

In point of fact, no one knows where Mohammed died at all. No one even wrote any thing down for a long while after he died AND he did not read or write himself. It was not until the middle ages that Jerusalem took on any significance to Islam, when the mosque was built upon the ancient Jewish Temple. I really hate it when people go building their religious stuff on the grounds of OTHER people's holy sites...kind of an insult don't you think?

I read it in a book about 15 years ago, by the way Islam didn't exist before Mohammed. For about the first 20 years of Islam the Muslims prayed towards Jerusalem. I don't remember what turned them to praying towards Mecca.

I can try to dig up the book title, it was something like "A history of the Arab People". I am not an expert on Islam, just read a couple of books on the history of the Ottomans and Arabs so I wouldn't think of myself as totally dummy.

I found a link so now I know my memory still works.
http://islam.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite....em%2Fislam.html

At the end of the day, the thing to remember is that Arafat was buried. Putting him someplace else won't matter. If Mahmoud Abbas does really take over it could get interesting. He has said that the violence against Israel is counter-productive, and so Hamas would be left out in the cold, at least you have to hope. Abbas is supposedly the leader Israel favored but now that Arafat is dead, Arial Sharon might not want what he wished for.

Short answer is that until the Jews refused to follow Mohammed's new religion, they were more than willing to pray toward the burial place of Abraham and Sarah (a place in Hebron which the Jews refused to accept for free, and paid for so that the deed to this land would NEVER be in question and later everyone desecrated it anyway, just like the article says the Christians did to the Temple). Then when the Muslims started converting by the sword, they decided to pray toward Mecca, which is where they prayed before their was Islam, toward the "star cult shrine". The Quran absolutely says nothing about Jerusalem EXCEPT that God gave that land to the Jews and to occupy it was a sin because it would be theft of something that God gave the Jews DIRECTLY.

I'm sure that "W" will give Osama a decent patch at his Crawford ranch, since he helped in getting him elected

besides I am supportive of a Jerusalem for all

Heart,
I am probably the worst choice to be considered as a diplomat in the world but for a long time I have thought a solution between the Israelis and the Palestians could work with the following plan:
1. Give the Palestinians the west bank for a home land, work out some kind of land swap were the Israelis get the Gaza strip for land contingous with the west bank so the Palestinians have one piece of land and wouldn't have to be traveling back and forth across Israel.
2. Truly control the border between Israel and Palestine to keep the radicals from both sides away from the other side. If a fence or a wall is necessary, so be it.
3. Make Jerusalem an international city governed by a triumphirate of one Jew, one Christian, and one Muslim. All three religions have roots in the city, it would be kind of like the Vatican but with three Popes, one from each religion.

This war, hot and cold, between the Israelis and the Palestinians has been going on for longer than I have been alive.

Is this old Marine stupid, naive, or what? What do you think is a solution?

Yes I totally agree with Jerusalem being the religious 'capital' of the world. I was meaning that it be a capital of a country not actually a mecca that is a capital for all not just Jews. I was hoping that with fresh politics in Israel (the Likud Party flung out) and Palestine without Arafat we could make some progress. Bush has made things so difficult in the ME it is difficult to get back to the drawing board.

This makes sense. Which is why the current Israeli regime will never acccept it.

I've said it before, and I'll keep saying it: if the Israelis wany peace, why don't they bring their soldiers and illegal colonists back to their own country? Answer: The Israelis don't want peace. The religious extremists who rule Israel are racists who think God wants them to have the West Bank and more as part of a Greater Israel. They want the land, and are willing to sacrifice the lives of their own people to hold on to it.

Today, in the 21st century, it's all about the occupation. End the occupation and the terrorism will end. Young men will not reject the PA and seek out Hamas if they have better things to do.

It's time for new thinking on Israel and Palestine. And Americans need to get over this idea that Israel is something like our 51st state. Israel has nuclear weapons and can defend itself. We give billions of dollars a year to that country and at the same time people here in Cleveland can't get a 13 week extension in unemployment benefits? Old people are spending $200 for prescriptions at drug stores in my neighborhood...why?

And, yes, Arafat should have been buried in Jerusalem. Like him or not, corrupt or not, he was widely respected in the occupied lands and will someday be regarded as the father of his country.

Going back to the Jerusalem issue, it absolutely should be the dual capital of Israel and Palestine. As a Catholic I resent the idea of the city being claimed as the exclusive property of either Jews or (pre-1967) Muslims.

When I visited Israel and the West Bank I did not like visiting Christian holy sites in Jerusalem (or Bethlehem) with the damned Israeli army looking over my shoulder.

Going back to the Jerusalem issue, it absolutely should be the dual capital of Israel and Palestine. As a Catholic I resent the idea of the city being claimed as the exclusive property of either Jews or (pre-1967) Muslims.

Antonin,
You make some excellent points--pecifically, your argument for a Jerusalem that is controlled by one of the three major religions of the world who have a stake in it. Jerusalem is a holy site for Jews, Islam, and Christians. Accordingly, each should be able to freely call it their religious 'home'.

And, yes.... Arafat should have been allowed to be burried in Jerusalem. And further, Bush should have sent Powell instead of an assistant to an assistant that no one knows. Bush's arrogance once again!

So, it's settled then -- Ariel Sharon is to be buried in Mecca when he dies, and the Vatican City is to be administered as an international city shared between Christians, Jews and Muslims.

yes quite and the fact that the USA uses Israel as a military strategic position in the middle east. No wonder it is pumping millions of dollars in.

Check out this 1-minute film.

http://www.honestreporting.com/m/legacy.asp

BTW, since "savemefrombush" opines that P.M. Sharon is a terrorist, he needs to rally support for the following:
1. Put pressure on Sharon to cease sending teenage suicide bombers into Palestinian buses, market places and other public areas.
2. Tell Sharon to stop seizing and killing Palestinian Olympic athletes.
3. Stop Sharon from hijacking airplanes.

Perhaps, "savemefrombush," who seems to favor moral equivalence, can tell us who is the one - Arafat or P.M. Sharon - who enriched himself by embezzling millions of dollars of foreign aid meant to help Palestinians.

Yes. He should have been buried where he wished. I understand the Palestinian people carried dirt from the site where Arafat wanted to be buried and used this dirt to cover his grave.

I dislike your cynisme and the lack of objectivity in the film....a similar film could be made, showing Palestinians being harassed by the Israeli army, their houses being bulldozed, olives trees being uprooted and last day, a zoo being sacked. then going back....Sabra and Chatilah....without forgetting the money scandals of Sharon and "Bibi"
Nobody is totally innocent, but if Arafat was elected by his people, he must have given them something they were hoping for?????
Hate is the big factor in this conflict and no propaganda will be helpfull <_<

BTW, since "savemefrombush" opines that P.M. Sharon is a terrorist, he needs to rally support for the following:
1. Put pressure on Sharon to cease sending teenage suicide bombers into Palestinian buses, market places and other public areas.
2. Tell Sharon to stop seizing and killing Palestinian Olympic athletes.
3. Stop Sharon from hijacking airplanes.

Perhaps, "savemefrombush," who seems to favor moral equivalence, can tell us who is the one - Arafat or P.M. Sharon - who enriched himself by embezzling millions of dollars of foreign aid meant to help Palestinians.

Regarding the video clip, please point to one thing in it that is untrue, inaccurate, exaggerated or out-of-context. This clip is not merely "propaganda."

The cynicism that I see is your attempt to equate Arafat's terrorism with the defense measures taken by Israel to protect her civilians. None of these measures and their unfortunate consequences would have been necessary had Arafat not consistently violated the Oslo Accords, personally authorized terrorist acts (including the assassination of America's ambassador to Sudan), refused to reign in Hamas and Islamic Jihad, retained Palestinian schoolbooks showing no mention of Israel on maps, spoke of peace in English while referring to the Battle of Badr in Arabic, etc.

As for Arafat's having been elected, he had no opponents. He had them arrested, tortured and/or killed.

How do you explain Suha Arafat's wealth and Arafat's bank accounts? No alleged "scandals" that you think that you can point to (and which were investigated by people not allied with either Mr. Netanyahu or P.M. Sharon) can even remotely compare to the plundering of the Palestinian people by Arafat and his gangsters.

I think you may have a short memory of Israel. You have to go back through time with the Palmach, unit 101 (Ariel Sharon), Haganah etc - these were terrorists.

You just gave yourself away.

What does that mean? That no one can point out that Sharon was the leader of unit 101 that attacked Qibya?

Or that another former PM, Begin, blew up the King David Hotel?

You entirely miss Mistral's point. Which is that both sides can identify specific true events and use them to try to paint with a broad brush an entire population. Like other posters here who spend a great deal of time talking only people who agree with them you seem to respond to what you think people are saying instead of what they actually say.

I don't pretend to be an expert on this but my guess is that eventually Arafat's remains will be moved to Jerusalem as a gesture towards peace. Hopefully, this will happen in our lifetime.

Inasmuch as my reply was to someone else, if he chooses to respond, I'll elaborate.

As for you, we already know from your other postings that you oppose the existence of a Jewish state in the Middle East, and that you have not supported a single one of Israel's defensive measures, which no thanks to you, have cause a 90+% drop in the rate of suicide mass murders.

We also know that your stance is not that of a truly "real Democrat":
You opposed John Kerry's position on Israel and Palestine.
You opposed the platform of the Democratic Party.
You oppose the positions of most if not all Democratic senators, and most Democratic House members.
You opposed the the policies of the last Democratic president and the conclusion that he had reached after Arafat's rejection of the peace agreement.

Prior to his assuming the prime ministership of the State of Israel, I was no fan of Ariel Sharon. However, nobody including P.M. Sharon, ever encouraged or dispatched teenage or other suicide murders or plane hijackers.

Regarding the King David Hotel, you neglected to tell us that it was the military HQ of the British Mandatory authorities.

From "Myths & Facts"
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/myths/mf2.html#h

MYTH

"The Irgun bombed the King David Hotel as part of a terror campaign against civilians."

FACT

The King David Hotel was the site of the British military command and the British Criminal Investigation Division. The Irgun chose it as a target after British troops invaded the Jewish Agency June 29, 1946, and confiscated large quantities of documents. At about the same time, more than 2,500 Jews from all over Palestine were placed under arrest. The information about Jewish Agency operations, including intelligence activities in Arab countries, was taken to the King David Hotel.

A week later, news of a massacre of 40 Jews in a pogrom in Poland reminded the Jews of Palestine how Britain's restrictive immigration policy had condemned thousands to death.

Irgun leader Menachem Begin stressed his desire to avoid civilian casualties. In fact, the plan was to warn the British so they would evacuate the building before it was blown up. Three telephone calls were placed, one to the hotel, another to the French Consulate, and a third to the Palestine Post, warning that explosives in the King David Hotel would soon be detonated.

On July 22, 1946, the calls were made. The call into the hotel was apparently received and ignored. Begin quotes one British official who supposedly refused to evacuate the building, saying: "We don't take orders from the Jews."42 As a result, when the bombs exploded, the casualty toll was high: a total of 91 killed and 45 injured. Among the casualties were 15 Jews. Few people in the hotel proper were injured by the blast.43

In contrast to Arab attacks against Jews, which were widely hailed by Arab leaders as heroic actions, the Jewish National Council denounced the bombing of the King David.44

For decades the British denied they had been warned. In 1979, however, a member of the British Parliament introduced evidence that the Irgun had indeed issued the warning. He offered the testimony of a British officer who heard other officers in the King David Hotel bar joking about a Zionist threat to the headquarters. The officer who overheard the conversation immediately left the hotel and survived.45

The 1948 Declaration of Independence of Israel believed that all people could have an equal share in Jerusalem and in the new state. An excerpt of that document from my news site (Issue 11.1.04):

http://www.maravot.com/Maravot_News.html

"..both sides have to bury their grievances and begin anew, living peacefully side by side as the Declaration of Independence of the State of Israel vowed before the United Nations. We all know that exterminating people is not the way to peace. Let's revisit this short excerpt from Israel's Declaration of Independence:

1.13 The State of Israel will be open for Jewish immigration and for the ingathering of the Exiles; it will foster the development of the country for the benefit of all inhabitants; it will be based on freedom, justice and peace as envisaged by the prophets of Israel; it will ensure complete equality of social and political rights to all its inhabitants irrespective of religion, race or sex; it will guarantee freedom of religion, conscience, language, education and culture; it will safeguard the Holy Places of all religions; and it will be faithful to the principles of the Charter of the United Nations.
1.14 The State of Israel is prepared to cooperate with the agencies and representative of the United Nations in implementing the resolution of the General Assembly of the 29th November, 1947, and will take steps to bring about the economic union of the whole of Eretz-Israel.
1.15 We appeal to the United Nations to assist the Jewish people in the building up of its State and to receive the State of Israel into the community of nations.
We appeal--in the very midst of the onslaught launched against us now for months – to Arab inhabitants of the State of Israel to preserve peace and participate in the upbuilding of the State on the basis of full and equal citizenship and due representation in all its provisional and permanent institutions.
1.16 We extend our hand to all neighboring states and their peoples in an offer of peace and good neighborliness, and appeal to them to establish the bonds of cooperation and mutual help with the sovereign Jewish people settled in its own land. The state of Israel is prepared to do its share in a common effort for the advancement of the entire Middle East.
1.17 We appeal to the Jewish People throughout the Diaspora to rally round the Jews of Eretz-Israel in the tasks of immigration and upbuilding and to stand by them in the great struggle for the realization of the age-old dream – the redemption of Israel.
1.18 Placing our trust in the Almighty [be-Zur Yisra'el], we affix our signatures to this Proclamation at this session of the Provisional Council of State, on the soil of the homeland, in the city of Tel-Aviv, on this Sabbath eve, the 5th day of Iyar, 5708 (14th May, 1948). [end of document]

There is much to be said in the above clauses, should the two sides – and the United Nations – choose to revisit them. But this would go against the trend since May 14, 1948, which has been to settle disputes with the sword. Keep in mind that there are people in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania who are of Jewish and Palestinian origin, who have been living in peace for much longer under a similar document called the Constitution of the United States of America. Thus, living according to the dream and will of a document is possible, even for Jews and Palestinians.

I understood Mistral's point very well. And I know your points better than you think.

If you viewed the video, then you should already know that it deals with Arafat, not an "entire population." I have seen plenty of anti-Israel propaganda, with their half-truths and outright lies, and I can single them out. Once again, I challenge anyone who has viewed the video to find one untruth, exaggeration, inaccuracy, or something out-of-context.

Among your many distortions is this gem that I "spend a great deal of time talking only people who agree with them." Unfortunately, I wish that were true. I seem to waste too much time talking to people outside the Democratic Party mainstream and those who oppose Israel's right to exist within secure and recognized boundaries.

rd is more interested in remembering the Liberty and some conspiracy associate with it then REMEMBERING LIBERTY as a concept. I have a much more positive view of the prospects for peace without Arafat, but the Gaza nutjobs just shot two of PM Abbas's bodyguards. I don't want the people who think nothing of shooting at a "potential" PM running anything...so the only way that elections can actually be held now is for troops from Egypt maybe, to occupy Gaza. I can understand why Sharon wants out of there. I think it ought to be given to Egypt like the tale of the White Elephant maybe it could be done in such a way that they would HAVE to accept the gift.

I see this as indicative of a personality that thrives on conflict, since it only seems natural to me to prefer to deal with reasonable people. She has attacked others for their opnions on Arafat, and so I'm sure her actions will tend to act as self-fulfilling prophesies since she does find agreement to be objectionable. Nothing quite like an ideologuery based upon the admiration for a man like Arafat to ensure one receives plenty of disagreement.

No, that is flat out wrong. What I have said is that we should not be the ones responsable for it. The vast majority of Americans think we should support "neither" in this conflict, so this is certainly not out of the mainstream.

So what?
I am real Democrat, and my views are widely held, and rank and file members are far less supportive of Israel than Republicans. Is your definition of a "Real Democrat" someone who agrees with everything the leadership of the party believes?

Admire Arafat? I have always described him as a failure, and a sponser of terror.

That's true, RD has never been an admirer of Arafat I agree. However, when you want to give a people a country of their own you do have to consider who is going to rule this country? What kind of government do they want? Are they fighting because they really want "freedom" or are they fighting "the Jews". Are they fighting for a regime that will provide the citizens with more rights, liberties and freedoms or are they trying to set up another satropy, another destpotic oppressive regime. If you can't replace it with something better then I have to say that your case in the affirmative is lacking. It is always the burden of those arguing for change to prove that what they are proposing is a better choice.

And yet people who thought nothing of killing Rabin, and who reportedly threatened to assassinate Sharon have quite a lot to do with running things, including the day-to-day existence of Palestinians.

How do you reconcile this?

The "person" who assasinated Rabin, and his particular "group" have been outlawed by Israel and the USA. They have arrested people too lately. This was such a big deal for Israel that the whole country went into a frenzy looking for the people that did such a thing.

This has NOT happened in the palestinian territories. Israel has had one attempted (and successful) assasination in 50 years, well...we've had more assasination attempts than that here. That doesn't mean everytime a presidential candidate goes to console mourners he gets shot at and someone kills two secret service officers does it?

That's just totally abnormal wouldn't you agree?

Can you imagine the wall-to-wall coverage, the virtual lynch mob that would surround the person with the gun, the condemnations from the WHOLE government and citizenry? That's what happened with Rabin....but you won't see that in the PA, the people that did it will be hidden, cheered in large part and it's just another day in their world.

Should Arafat have been buried in Jerusalem?

None of our (USA) business, imho.

That says quite a lot pertainent to Iraq.

But regarding Palestine, the mindset that someone wants to "give" them a country is perhaps less than ideal. The Palestinians are fighting for their own country because, based on 37 years history, they have no realistic hopes that anyone will even obey international laws of occupation, let alone give them anything worth having.

And yes, there was considerable and admirable reaction against the Rabin assassin - but the society hasn't really changed - or there wouldn't be talk of assassinating Sharon, especially over what has been acknowledged by his aide as a plan that removes 7,500 settlers in order to stiffle potential acceptance of the Geneva Initiative.

I don't know what's normal for three generations raised under occupation, in abject poverty. I do note that the Israeli government treats Israelis for shock whenever a Qassam missile is launched, even when it lands in open fields; but it does nothing to treat the families of Palestinian kids killed - sleeping in their own bedrooms or attending class - or for the bystanders that are killed and wounded by IDF bullets, missiles and shells. That is the normallity that Palestinian children grow up in.

They are fighting for all those reasons, that is the wrong ones and the right ones. Right now the ball is very much in the Palestinian's court. Will they sieze the moment? Or will they once again prove that they never miss an opporunitity to miss an opportunity? Will their "brothers" finally act like supporters instead of users and really help them? Earth to Arabs states: Shut the f*ck up and do something for these people. The attempt on Abbas' life does not bode well, but perhaps it will serve to rally the support of his people, and he can convince them that Hamas and their ilk is the path to the suicide of their movement. And you are right, they must follow this with something better. And the Arab states need to commit to long term support. to make it happen..

As for you, we already know from your other postings that you oppose
the existence of a Jewish state in the Middle East

FACTS:
The nationwide poll of 1,200 American adults was conducted December 1- 4, 2003, by The Marttila Communications Group.

Among the main survey findings were:

Americans sympathize more with Israel -- 40% --than with the Palestinians – 15%.

39% believe the Palestinians are more responsible for the current violence; 16% blame Israel.

70% of Americans believe Israel is more serious about reaching a peace agreement with the Palestinians; 46% think the Palestinians are serious.

75% believe that the U.S.-Israel special relationship is based on shared values of freedom and democracy.

57% of the respondents said the U.S. has a moral obligation to combat anti-Semitism throughout the world through its foreign policy.
END OF QUOTE

Regarding your other point: Your denial that you oppose the existence of the State of Israel is rendered meaningless by your statement that the US should not be responsible for it. IOW, you feel that the US should not aid a reliable democracy in that part of the world, and that the US should not be partners with Israel in the war against radical Islamic fundamentalist terrorists.


QED

Which "rank and file members" are you talking about...the Michael Moore minority wing? Your views are indeed widely held...by the leftwing fringe, but not by the majority of Democrats. No anti-Israel candidate will ever become the Democratic Party nominee. And no Democrat will get elected if the majority of voters perceive the fringe of the party actually represents the party.

My mistake. I was thinking it had been Mistral who had made that particular statement. My apologies.

Still, I certainly do not see how wishing to converse with like-minded people would be anything to be ashamed of. I do know I certainly take no enjoyment out of butting heads with people, and don't know that many people in my personal life who do.

Dear nr,ns,

One who personally ordered the assassination of the US ambassador to Sudan, embezzled his people's money, ordered the attack on Israeli athletes in Munich, and authorized suicide bombings and other terrorist acts against civilians, will never be allowed to have his body pollute Jerusalem. Death does not transform a murderer and a terrorist into a saint.

BTW, you and other readers may find Thomas Friedman's column in today's NYT enlightening:
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/14/opinion/14friedman.html

Regards,

"The Arafat I Knew"
He hasn't changed since his days as a KGB-backed terrorist.
by ION MIHAI PACEPA
Wall Street Journal, Saturday, January 12, 2002
Mr. Pacepa was the highest ranking intelligence officer ever to have defected from the former Soviet bloc. He is author of "Red Horizons" (1987), a memoir.

The entire article is avaialble free w/o registration at
http://tinyurl.com/3vxt7

I want to make certain that nobody think I admired Arafat.... I should have known better than discuss the problem again and again! living in Florida, where a lot of right wing Jews live, confortably in their condo and dictating what to do with Palestinians........I stopped to try to argue, long time ago!
Arafat was a bad guy, but so is Sharon and his clique of extremists!
In my own family, in one of this kind of discussion, I was even asked if Palestinians should not be better pushed into Jordanian, "where they belong"......that from a right wing Jew from my own family!
it is just HATE and from both sides.....basta!

I guess the man who killed Rabin can be called 'Nut" too?????? or do you have another explanation for extremisme, both sides?

You are absolutely correct in your last statement- the question is how does 3-5% of the US population dicate the policies of both parites? THere are many more who feel like this person than you imagine.

elaborate pls

we know Arafat was a terrorist but he can't be singled out as the only one. Terrorists on both sides!

Are those rich Jews still doing all that rich Jew stuff like *dictating* to the rest of us? Always doing their dictating and controlling, aren't they? Heck, you'd think those nice German chaps of 70 years ago would have taught them the lesson of what happens to these comfortable Jews, but they're still at it, you say?

My goodness.