Political Crossfire Forums

[Patriot911]

Robodoon wrote: Patriot911 wrote: Robodoon wrote: Patriot911 wrote: Yeah, this guy has lots of credibility and inside information. :roll: He hasn't been with the CIA since 79. Hell, he has been out of the CIA almost as long as he was in it! As for his motives, he has been an anti-Bush activist for many years now. Activists have a long history of escalating their accusations when they find out nobody gives a s**t about their cause. He makes it sound like he was a good little government soldier until about half a year ago. bulls**t! Him and his wife have been actively campaigning against the Bush administration/Israel and for Palestine.

So what proof does he bring? None. Just another opinion. He is entitled to his opinion, but he is also working under flawed logic that I would bet is intentionally misleading.

Take the 2.3 trillion he is talking about. He makes it sound like the whole 2.3 trillion was taken by the Bush administration to pay for 9/11 and that 9/11 was actually a cover up for the missing money. :roll:

If you take a closer look at this you would realize that the 2.3 trillion would have had to have been accumulated over decades. In 2005 the military budget was 518 billion dollars. That was for the whole year. How is Bush suppose to get four times the entire military budget in under 9 months? :lol:

Former Bush Admin Economist Says Official Story of WTC Collapse 'Bogus'
http://www.hannity.com/forum/showthread.php?p=305978#post305978

Yet he has no proof either. If you're going to spam the boards with every person who doesn't believe the official story does this mean I can spam you with everyone who DOES believe the official story? ;-)

Well there a lot of "TV Watchers" out there, I guess you better get started typing ;)

And what do you mean proof, what every is out side of the Government line you attack it.

There is lots of proof, but....

But none of it really qualifies as proof. See, thats where we differ. I prefer my kind of proof to be the kind that would hold up in a court of law. You prefer your proof to be just because you say so.

[psholtz]

Patriot911 wrote: Robodoon wrote: Patriot911 wrote: Robodoon wrote: Patriot911 wrote: Yeah, this guy has lots of credibility and inside information. :roll: He hasn't been with the CIA since 79. Hell, he has been out of the CIA almost as long as he was in it! As for his motives, he has been an anti-Bush activist for many years now. Activists have a long history of escalating their accusations when they find out nobody gives a s**t about their cause. He makes it sound like he was a good little government soldier until about half a year ago. bulls**t! Him and his wife have been actively campaigning against the Bush administration/Israel and for Palestine.

So what proof does he bring? None. Just another opinion. He is entitled to his opinion, but he is also working under flawed logic that I would bet is intentionally misleading.

Take the 2.3 trillion he is talking about. He makes it sound like the whole 2.3 trillion was taken by the Bush administration to pay for 9/11 and that 9/11 was actually a cover up for the missing money. :roll:

If you take a closer look at this you would realize that the 2.3 trillion would have had to have been accumulated over decades. In 2005 the military budget was 518 billion dollars. That was for the whole year. How is Bush suppose to get four times the entire military budget in under 9 months? :lol:

Former Bush Admin Economist Says Official Story of WTC Collapse 'Bogus'
http://www.hannity.com/forum/showthread.php?p=305978#post305978

Yet he has no proof either. If you're going to spam the boards with every person who doesn't believe the official story does this mean I can spam you with everyone who DOES believe the official story? ;-)

Well there a lot of "TV Watchers" out there, I guess you better get started typing ;)

And what do you mean proof, what every is out side of the Government line you attack it.

There is lots of proof, but....

But none of it really qualifies as proof. See, thats where we differ. I prefer my kind of proof to be the kind that would hold up in a court of law. You prefer your proof to be just because you say so.
You believe that the "OBL" evidence would stand up in a court of law?

[Patriot911]

Given that Moussaoui was convicted, I would say the chances are REALLY good. ;-)

Lets see.....

We have prior history
Video taped confessions
money trails
Association with the hijackers

I am sure I am forgetting a bunch of evidence we have against OBL. That right there would be enough for me.

[psholtz]

Patriot911 wrote: Given that Moussaoui was convicted, I would say the chances are REALLY good. ;-)

Lets see.....

We have prior history
Video taped confessions
money trails
Association with the hijackers

I am sure I am forgetting a bunch of evidence we have against OBL. That right there would be enough for me.
How much do you know about the Mossaoui trial?

(I should write a book about that alone.. :think:)

You know that bin Laden was never indicted, right?

[Patriot911]

A grand jury has never been convened over 9/11 in regards to OBL. Kind of pointless as he is not in custody. We already have indictments against him for other crimes against the United States. That is enough until we have him in custody.

Seriously.... if you were on a Grand Jury and the prosecution showed you a video tape of Osama admitting to 9/11, wouldn't that be enough evidence for you to hand down an indictment?

[Robodoon]

psholtz wrote: Robodoon wrote: psholtz wrote: I concur w/ Chrisiton..

9/11 was an (obvious) inside job by the U.S. government..

The next step is to have the criminals in question arrested and prosecuted for high treason.

Cheney is the lead suspect, I understand..

well thats the trouble, how do we hold these fellows and more so their bosses to account?

The courts are for the most part in the pockets of the elites....well most things are.
We need to form our own courts, brother.. :-)

It's called the Common Law Court Movement.

We need to get out of the admirality kangaroo courts, and start working w/ the Constitution again. If the "elected officials" refuse to do this for us, then under the 7th Amendment of Constitution, we the people have the right (and the responsibility) to do it for ourselves.

I wish we could, you know if anything like that happened the powers that be would start yelling "terrorists" and pointing at the good americans, without the media there is little hope of gathering the people to do much of anything... ;)

[psholtz]

Patriot911 wrote: A grand jury has never been convened over 9/11 in regards to OBL. Kind of pointless as he is not in custody. We already have indictments against him for other crimes against the United States. That is enough until we have him in custody.

Seriously.... if you were on a Grand Jury and the prosecution showed you a video tape of Osama admitting to 9/11, wouldn't that be enough evidence for you to hand down an indictment?
A grand jury indicted OBL over the embassy bombings in Africa in 1998..

Didn't have him in custody..

Crime didn't even happen in America..

[Robodoon]

Patriot911 wrote: A grand jury has never been convened over 9/11 in regards to OBL. Kind of pointless as he is not in custody. We already have indictments against him for other crimes against the United States. That is enough until we have him in custody.

Seriously.... if you were on a Grand Jury and the prosecution showed you a video tape of Osama admitting to 9/11, wouldn't that be enough evidence for you to hand down an indictment?

FBI: Bin Laden Not Wanted for 9/11?

The 'FBI has no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11'

by Enver Masud
The FBI's "Most Wanted Terrorists" web page does not state that Bin Laden is wanted for the September 11, 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.
The FBI page states: "Usama Bin Laden is wanted in connection with the August 7, 1998, bombings of the United States Embassies in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, and Nairobi, Kenya. These attacks killed over 200 people. In addition, Bin Laden is a suspect in other terrorist attacks throughout the world."
When asked why there is no mention of 9/11 on the FBI's web page, Rex Tomb, the FBI's Chief of Investigative Publicity, is reported to have said, "The reason why 9/11 is not mentioned on Usama Bin Laden's Most Wanted page is because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11."
In the months leading up to the Septmber 11, 2001 attack, it is reported, the Taliban "outlined various ways bin Laden could be dealt with. He could be turned over to the EU, killed by the Taliban, or made available as a target for Cruise missiles." The Bush administration did not accept the Taliban's offer.
"On September 20, 2001," according to the Guardian, "the Taliban offered to hand Osama bin Laden to a neutral Islamic country for trial if the US presented them with evidence that he was responsible for the attacks on New York and Washington. The US rejected the offer."
On September 23, 2001 the BBC reported that four of the hijack "suspects" - Waleed Al Shehri, Abdulaziz Al Omari, Saeed Alghamdi, and possibly Khalid Al Midhar - were alive, and that FBI Director Robert Mueller acknowledged "the identity of several of the suicide hijackers is in doubt."
Bin Laden, in a September 28, 2001 interview with the Pakistani newspaper Ummat, is reported to have said: "I am not involved in the 11 September attacks in the United States."
Skeptics dismiss the video tape "found in a house in Jalalabad", Afghanistan, which allegedly shows Bin Laden confessing to the September 11 attacks. In a December 20, 2001, broadcast by German TV channel Das Erste "two independent translators and an expert on oriental studies found the White House's translation not only to be inaccurate, but manipulative."
FBI Director Robert Mueller, in a speech at the Commonwealth Club on April 19, 2002, said: "In our investigation, we have not uncovered a single piece of paper - either here in the United States, or in the treasure trove of information that has turned up in Afghanistan and elsewhere - that mentioned any aspect of the September 11 plot."
The evidence against Bin Laden, promised by Secretary of State Colin Powell on September 23, 2001, has yet to be made available to the public.
Bin Laden is the "prime suspect" in the September 11 attacks, said President Bush on September 17, 2001, and he pledged to capture him "dead or alive."
---
Enver Masud, "Deadly Deception, Pretexts for War," The Wisdom Fund, July 30, 2001
[Bin Laden has been under surveillance for years: every telephone call was monitored and al-Qaeda has been penetrated by US intelligence, Pakistani intelligence, Saudi intelligence, Egyptian intelligence. They could not have kept secret an operation that required such a degree of organisation and sophistication.--Gore Vidal, "The Enemy Within," Observer, October 22, 2002]
George Friedman, "America's Secret War," The Wisdom Fund, October 11, 2005
Enver Masud, "What Really Happened to 7 World Trade Center?," The Wisdom Fund, April 17, 2006
Robert Parry, "CIA: Osama Helped Bush in '04," consortiumnews.com, July 4, 2006
http://www.twf.org/News/Y2006/0608-BinLaden.html

[homerjay_s]

Robodoon wrote: psholtz wrote: Robodoon wrote: psholtz wrote: I concur w/ Chrisiton..

9/11 was an (obvious) inside job by the U.S. government..

The next step is to have the criminals in question arrested and prosecuted for high treason.

Cheney is the lead suspect, I understand..

well thats the trouble, how do we hold these fellows and more so their bosses to account?

The courts are for the most part in the pockets of the elites....well most things are.
We need to form our own courts, brother.. :-)

It's called the Common Law Court Movement.

We need to get out of the admirality kangaroo courts, and start working w/ the Constitution again. If the "elected officials" refuse to do this for us, then under the 7th Amendment of Constitution, we the people have the right (and the responsibility) to do it for ourselves.

I wish we could, you know if anything like that happened the powers that be would start yelling "terrorists" and pointing at the good americans, without the media there is little hope of gathering the people to do much of anything... ;)

I'd sacrifice everything for that cause...and I believe both you and sholtz would, too.

I must say, I'm glad to know both of you.

[Patriot911]

psholtz wrote: Patriot911 wrote: A grand jury has never been convened over 9/11 in regards to OBL. Kind of pointless as he is not in custody. We already have indictments against him for other crimes against the United States. That is enough until we have him in custody.

Seriously.... if you were on a Grand Jury and the prosecution showed you a video tape of Osama admitting to 9/11, wouldn't that be enough evidence for you to hand down an indictment?
A grand jury indicted OBL over the embassy bombings in Africa in 1998..

Didn't have him in custody..

Crime didn't even happen in America..

And all you need to arrest someone is one indictment, not an indictment for every crime. The one indictment they have is all they need. You really should learn about our judicial system and how it works. ;-)

[Patriot911]

homerjay_s wrote: Robodoon wrote: psholtz wrote: Robodoon wrote: psholtz wrote: I concur w/ Chrisiton..

9/11 was an (obvious) inside job by the U.S. government..

The next step is to have the criminals in question arrested and prosecuted for high treason.

Cheney is the lead suspect, I understand..

well thats the trouble, how do we hold these fellows and more so their bosses to account?

The courts are for the most part in the pockets of the elites....well most things are.
We need to form our own courts, brother.. :-)

It's called the Common Law Court Movement.

We need to get out of the admirality kangaroo courts, and start working w/ the Constitution again. If the "elected officials" refuse to do this for us, then under the 7th Amendment of Constitution, we the people have the right (and the responsibility) to do it for ourselves.

I wish we could, you know if anything like that happened the powers that be would start yelling "terrorists" and pointing at the good americans, without the media there is little hope of gathering the people to do much of anything... ;)

I'd sacrifice everything for that cause...and I believe both you and sholtz would, too.

I must say, I'm glad to know both of you.

Given what I've seen you guys write, you would make the Salem witch trials look sane by comparison. All you need is some voice in your head telling you who is guilty and who isn't and off you go. You don't need no steenkin evidence. Nothing beats the conviction of a zealot when it comes to knowing right from wrong regardless of the facts. :lol:

[homerjay_s]

Patriot911 wrote: homerjay_s wrote: Robodoon wrote: psholtz wrote: Robodoon wrote: psholtz wrote: I concur w/ Chrisiton..

9/11 was an (obvious) inside job by the U.S. government..

The next step is to have the criminals in question arrested and prosecuted for high treason.

Cheney is the lead suspect, I understand..

well thats the trouble, how do we hold these fellows and more so their bosses to account?

The courts are for the most part in the pockets of the elites....well most things are.
We need to form our own courts, brother.. :-)

It's called the Common Law Court Movement.

We need to get out of the admirality kangaroo courts, and start working w/ the Constitution again. If the "elected officials" refuse to do this for us, then under the 7th Amendment of Constitution, we the people have the right (and the responsibility) to do it for ourselves.

I wish we could, you know if anything like that happened the powers that be would start yelling "terrorists" and pointing at the good americans, without the media there is little hope of gathering the people to do much of anything... ;)

I'd sacrifice everything for that cause...and I believe both you and sholtz would, too.

I must say, I'm glad to know both of you.

Given what I've seen you guys write, you would make the Salem witch trials look sane by comparison. All you need is some voice in your head telling you who is guilty and who isn't and off you go. You don't need no steenkin evidence. Nothing beats the conviction of a zealot when it comes to knowing right from wrong regardless of the facts. :lol:

I'd like you to give at least one example of something any one of us said that would even remotely make you think of comparing us to the Salem witch trials. I'm convinced you're only purpose is to blindly defend anyone against the neocon agenda. Are you on the payroll or are you just that blindly a follower of their agenda?

[Wizard From Oz]

Quote: A grand jury indicted OBL over the embassy bombings in Africa in 1998..

Didn't have him in custody..

Crime didn't even happen in America..

Actually it did - International convention suggests that embassys are in fact extentions of the particulat nation they represent. Generally the offended nation will allow local authorties to deal with the person, but I suspect that in this case the US might make an exception

[Robodoon]

homerjay_s wrote: Robodoon wrote: psholtz wrote: Robodoon wrote: psholtz wrote: I concur w/ Chrisiton..

9/11 was an (obvious) inside job by the U.S. government..

The next step is to have the criminals in question arrested and prosecuted for high treason.

Cheney is the lead suspect, I understand..

well thats the trouble, how do we hold these fellows and more so their bosses to account?

The courts are for the most part in the pockets of the elites....well most things are.
We need to form our own courts, brother.. :-)

It's called the Common Law Court Movement.

We need to get out of the admirality kangaroo courts, and start working w/ the Constitution again. If the "elected officials" refuse to do this for us, then under the 7th Amendment of Constitution, we the people have the right (and the responsibility) to do it for ourselves.

I wish we could, you know if anything like that happened the powers that be would start yelling "terrorists" and pointing at the good americans, without the media there is little hope of gathering the people to do much of anything... ;)

I'd sacrifice everything for that cause...and I believe both you and sholtz would, too.

I must say, I'm glad to know both of you.

I'm glad to know you guys as well. I just wish there were more of you out there. Our poor people are still asleep in sheeple land

[Patriot911]

homerjay_s wrote: Patriot911 wrote: homerjay_s wrote: Robodoon wrote: psholtz wrote: Robodoon wrote: psholtz wrote: I concur w/ Chrisiton..

9/11 was an (obvious) inside job by the U.S. government..

The next step is to have the criminals in question arrested and prosecuted for high treason.

Cheney is the lead suspect, I understand..

well thats the trouble, how do we hold these fellows and more so their bosses to account?

The courts are for the most part in the pockets of the elites....well most things are.
We need to form our own courts, brother.. :-)

It's called the Common Law Court Movement.

We need to get out of the admirality kangaroo courts, and start working w/ the Constitution again. If the "elected officials" refuse to do this for us, then under the 7th Amendment of Constitution, we the people have the right (and the responsibility) to do it for ourselves.

I wish we could, you know if anything like that happened the powers that be would start yelling "terrorists" and pointing at the good americans, without the media there is little hope of gathering the people to do much of anything... ;)

I'd sacrifice everything for that cause...and I believe both you and sholtz would, too.

I must say, I'm glad to know both of you.

Given what I've seen you guys write, you would make the Salem witch trials look sane by comparison. All you need is some voice in your head telling you who is guilty and who isn't and off you go. You don't need no steenkin evidence. Nothing beats the conviction of a zealot when it comes to knowing right from wrong regardless of the facts. :lol:

I'd like you to give at least one example of something any one of us said that would even remotely make you think of comparing us to the Salem witch trials. I'm convinced you're only purpose is to blindly defend anyone against the neocon agenda. Are you on the payroll or are you just that blindly a follower of their agenda?

You're kidding, right? You want to set up your own trials to convict people for crimes you have no real proof they committed and you don't think your kangaroo courts would be worse than the Salem witch trials? You guys want to be prosecutor, judge, jury and executioner! Give me a break!

[Robodoon]

Patriot911 wrote: homerjay_s wrote: Robodoon wrote: psholtz wrote: Robodoon wrote: psholtz wrote: I concur w/ Chrisiton..

9/11 was an (obvious) inside job by the U.S. government..

The next step is to have the criminals in question arrested and prosecuted for high treason.

Cheney is the lead suspect, I understand..

well thats the trouble, how do we hold these fellows and more so their bosses to account?

The courts are for the most part in the pockets of the elites....well most things are.
We need to form our own courts, brother.. :-)

It's called the Common Law Court Movement.

We need to get out of the admirality kangaroo courts, and start working w/ the Constitution again. If the "elected officials" refuse to do this for us, then under the 7th Amendment of Constitution, we the people have the right (and the responsibility) to do it for ourselves.

I wish we could, you know if anything like that happened the powers that be would start yelling "terrorists" and pointing at the good americans, without the media there is little hope of gathering the people to do much of anything... ;)

I'd sacrifice everything for that cause...and I believe both you and sholtz would, too.

I must say, I'm glad to know both of you.

Given what I've seen you guys write, you would make the Salem witch trials look sane by comparison. All you need is some voice in your head telling you who is guilty and who isn't and off you go. You don't need no steenkin evidence. Nothing beats the conviction of a zealot when it comes to knowing right from wrong regardless of the facts. :lol:

yeah what is Science, phyisics and facts anyway. :shock: ... we all know that truth only comes from government officials. :shock: ...and we know government never lies :roll: ....hey at least we aren't good germans ;)

to each his own reward ;)


Patriot, is there anything the government says that you don't believe?

[homerjay_s]

Patriot911 wrote: psholtz wrote: Patriot911 wrote: A grand jury has never been convened over 9/11 in regards to OBL. Kind of pointless as he is not in custody. We already have indictments against him for other crimes against the United States. That is enough until we have him in custody.

Seriously.... if you were on a Grand Jury and the prosecution showed you a video tape of Osama admitting to 9/11, wouldn't that be enough evidence for you to hand down an indictment?
A grand jury indicted OBL over the embassy bombings in Africa in 1998..

Didn't have him in custody..

Crime didn't even happen in America..

And all you need to arrest someone is one indictment, not an indictment for every crime. The one indictment they have is all they need. You really should learn about our judicial system and how it works. ;-)

So for all your patriotic grandstanding, you aren't interested in charging Osama Bin Laden with the 9/11 attacks? I suppose you don't care that the administration chose to go into Iraq which had nothing to do with the attack, aside from being the motive for the PNAC cabal to pull off the inside job.

[Patriot911]

Robodoon wrote:
yeah what is Science, phyisics and facts anyway. :shock: ... we all know that truth only comes from government officials. :shock: ...and we know government never lies :roll: ....hey at least we aren't good germans ;)

to each his own reward ;)


Patriot, is there anything the government says that you don't believe?

How would you know about science, physics and facts? You rarely touch them other than to dismiss them or twist them. Nice troll post though.

[Patriot911]

homerjay_s wrote: Patriot911 wrote: psholtz wrote: Patriot911 wrote: A grand jury has never been convened over 9/11 in regards to OBL. Kind of pointless as he is not in custody. We already have indictments against him for other crimes against the United States. That is enough until we have him in custody.

Seriously.... if you were on a Grand Jury and the prosecution showed you a video tape of Osama admitting to 9/11, wouldn't that be enough evidence for you to hand down an indictment?
A grand jury indicted OBL over the embassy bombings in Africa in 1998..

Didn't have him in custody..

Crime didn't even happen in America..

And all you need to arrest someone is one indictment, not an indictment for every crime. The one indictment they have is all they need. You really should learn about our judicial system and how it works. ;-)

So for all your patriotic grandstanding, you aren't interested in charging Osama Bin Laden with the 9/11 attacks? I suppose you don't care that the administration chose to go into Iraq which had nothing to do with the attack, aside from being the motive for the PNAC cabal to pull off the inside job.

Ahhhh the typical dishonest bulls**t conspiracy theorists are known for. Care to show me where I said I wasn't interested in charging OBL? You can't because I didn't. Just another outright lie by you. Not your first and won't be your last.

FWIW I want to see OBL frying on the chair. My whole point which you've so conveniently ignored so you could make a huge fool of yourself is that they don't NEED to go through the whole effort of indicting OBL because they already have cause to bring him to trial from a prior indictment. But if you want to continue your childish ways of putting words in other people's mouths, go right ahead. Just shows everyone just how totally dishonest and deceitful you are. ;-)

[citizen_X]

What a troll, Patriot911, you sit there and debunk everyones elses opinions and call anyone who doesnt agree with you a troll, wheres your proof, no where to be found, all you got is a handful of gov't papers for your brain to resort too, no thought, no substence, if I want to debate gov't BS, I'll resort to the papers, not with you, a walking gov't pamphlet.

Just like your buddy Octacon, or whatever his/her name is, who cares, blah blah blah about how you want to be proven wrong. Are you so hard up for us to show you the truth and provide you how to think? Didnt high school teach you how to think for yourself? Or was mommy and daddy forcing thier political ideologies on you?

But none of it really qualifies as proof. See, thats where we differ. I prefer my kind of proof to be the kind that would hold up in a court of law. You prefer your proof to be just because you say so.

Yeah, ok, how conveinent, you cant even take your own opinions and thoughts and tear them to shreds and Im and others on here supposed to debate with you?

Given that Moussaoui was convicted, I would say the chances are REALLY good.

Lets see.....

We have prior history
Video taped confessions
money trails
Association with the hijackers

I am sure I am forgetting a bunch of evidence we have against OBL. That right there would be enough for me.

Yeah, anything is good enough for you, still want to buy that rock from the other thread?

And all you need to arrest someone is one indictment, not an indictment for every crime. The one indictment they have is all they need. You really should learn about our judicial system and how it works.

Online Law degrees dont count buddy, get a real grip on the judicial system or spend some time in a DAs office.


Given what I've seen you guys write, you would make the Salem witch trials look sane by comparison. All you need is some voice in your head telling you who is guilty and who isn't and off you go. You don't need no steenkin evidence. Nothing beats the conviction of a zealot when it comes to knowing right from wrong regardless of the facts.

Facts? you something of facts? you cry to alternate theories ppl for proven facts, are you that hard up for convincing, do you need to be shown a trail before you walk it? bah bah bah bah bah, hahahahahahaha

How would you know about science, physics and facts? You rarely touch them other than to dismiss them or twist them. Nice troll post though.

You havent even displayed one formula, let alone said one thing in physics vocabulary, go back to biology.

Ahhhh the typical dishonest bulls**t conspiracy theorists are known for. Care to show me where I said I wasn't interested in charging OBL? You can't because I didn't. Just another outright lie by you. Not your first and won't be your last.

FWIW I want to see OBL frying on the chair. My whole point which you've so conveniently ignored so you could make a huge fool of yourself is that they don't NEED to go through the whole effort of indicting OBL because they already have cause to bring him to trial from a prior indictment. But if you want to continue your childish ways of putting words in other people's mouths, go right ahead. Just shows everyone just how totally dishonest and deceitful you are.

Thank you for showing your true self, how does it feel to admit to something, but you twisted it, next time show your precious proof with out you BS, Ive seen many times where ppl call you to debate, but you go after the weakest link that doesnt have anything to do with the topic.

Thank you come again!!!!!!!

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

:x :x :x :x :x :x :x