Page 7 of 8 FirstFirst ... 5678 LastLast
Results 121 to 140 of 157

Thread: Brexit - The End of the United Kingdom?

  1. #121
    Capped Player SkStu's Avatar
    Joined
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Saskatchewan, Canada
    Posts
    11,232
    Thanks
    2,052
    Thanked 3,299 Times in 1,753 Posts
    What part of what he said in the videos did you not find convincing or truthful? He's pretty straightforward in everything he says. It's kind of his thing. He's already hated by many, it's not like he stands to win friends now by being deceitful.

  2. #122
    Capped Player DannyInvincible's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Derry
    Posts
    10,371
    Thanks
    3,009
    Thanked 3,356 Times in 2,049 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by SkStu View Post
    You quote a lot of sources but very rarely claim a position on a lot of these things. These publications can make all the claims and speculation they want but it doesn't change what occurred in Rotherham etc and Muslim gangs, rape and human trafficking.
    Hey, there's nothing wrong with being an agnostic in a nuanced world. The truth is often more complex than we can or will comprehend, appreciate or envisage.

    More often than not, I probably broadly concur with the various bits and pieces I'm quoting though, or at least, I feel the information is worthy of inclusion in whatever discussion is in progress and can add some value or insight.

    And evidence-based academic research is surely a world away from speculation.

  3. #123
    Banned. Children Banned. Grandchildren Banned. 3 Months. Charlie Darwin's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    16,750
    Thanks
    3,384
    Thanked 4,663 Times in 2,935 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by SkStu View Post
    What part of what he said in the videos did you not find convincing or truthful? He's pretty straightforward in everything he says. It's kind of his thing. He's already hated by many, it's not like he stands to win friends now by being deceitful.
    I'm sure the stuff about his background, how he got to where he is truthful. Distancing himself from the racists he's run with from his entire adult life I find hilarious. I'll watch it again over the weekend as it's been a while but the whole 'mea culpa, I was a bad un' schtick is a classic. Can't remember if he mentioned it there but the idea he left the EDL after failing to run out the neo-nazis is very funny.

  4. #124
    First Team peadar1987's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Glasgow
    Posts
    2,491
    Thanks
    674
    Thanked 755 Times in 448 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by SkStu View Post
    You quote a lot of sources but very rarely claim a position on a lot of these things. These publications can make all the claims and speculation they want but it doesn't change what occurred in Rotherham etc and Muslim gangs, rape and human trafficking.
    Interesting you should mention Rotherham, as I found this the other day, revealing that 68% of the offenders were actually white: https://exposingbf.wordpress.com/201...rooming-gangs/

    This quote from the Crown Prosecution service's lead on child sex abuse stood out:

    “So I know that the vast majority of offenders are British white male,” he says, setting the number at somewhere between 80 and 90%. “We have come across cases all over the country and the ethnicity of the perpetrators varies depending on where you are … It is not the abusers’ race that defines them. It is their attitude to women that defines them.”
    The normal resident population of the UK is 86% white. For every sex crime by a black or middle-eastern person that gets the gutter press whipped up into a frenzy, there are a raft of similar crimes committed by white people which are swept under the carpet. Nationwide, Muslims do not appear to be significantly more likely to commit sex crimes than any other ethnic group.

  5. Thanks From:


  6. #125
    Capped Player SkStu's Avatar
    Joined
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Saskatchewan, Canada
    Posts
    11,232
    Thanks
    2,052
    Thanked 3,299 Times in 1,753 Posts
    from the same blog post (which by the way didn't link to the Rotherham report itself, instead a strategic plan to move Rotherham forward):

    To be fair, we genuinely don’t know how accurate or representative even these figures are. It seems that as more information comes to light the picture of what happened in Rotherham keeps on changing. Perhaps we’ll never know for sure.
    The report itself and almost every article and analysis provided (and even Jack Straw) at the time was unanimous in claiming that this was a problem predominantly perpetrated by Muslim gangs. Even this problem itself is acknowledged by Muslim thought leaders.

    Mohammed Shafiq, chief executive of the Ramadhan Foundation, said British Pakistanis needed to acknowledge the problem of grooming gangs operating in their communities.

    He said: 'Until British Pakistanis accept that this is a problem for our community we will not be able to eradicate this evil. Burying our head in the sand as the usual response is not good enough.'
    Bear in mind that this scandal was initiated as a result a conviction of 5 members of a Muslim gang in the area in 2010, then Rochdale (all Muslim) and then the Inquiry was called and completed with the first groups of people imprisoned as a result of the report back in 2016 were a Muslim group (and two white women). I don't deny that it likely is not exclusively a Muslim problem but they do seem to be hugely represented in the events that predated the report, the report itself and the follow on convictions. Of the 20 convictions arising from Operation Clover, 18 are Muslim men aged between 30 and 42. The other 2 are white women. Another 3 Muslim men are awaiting trial.

    BBC News (27 August 2014): "At least 1,400 children in the South Yorkshire town were sexually exploited by criminal gangs of men who were predominantly of Pakistani origin between 1997 and 2013."

    from Wikipedia related to the Casey report:

    Published in January 2015, the Casey report concluded that Rotherham Council was "not fit for purpose".[173] Casey identified a culture of "bullying, sexism ... and misplaced 'political correctness'", along with a history of covering up information and silencing whistleblowers. The child-sexual-exploitation team was poorly directed, suffered from excessive case loads, and did not share information.[174] The council had a history of failing to deal with issues around race: "Staff perceived that there was only a small step between mentioning the ethnicity of perpetrators and being labelled a racist."[175] The Pakistani-heritage councillors were left to deal with all issues pertaining to that community, which left them able to exert disproportionate influence, while white councillors ignored their responsibilities

  7. #126
    Youth Team
    Joined
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    244
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 44 Times in 30 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by peadar1987 View Post
    Nationwide, Muslims do not appear to be significantly more likely to commit sex crimes than any other ethnic group.
    Looks like the number is ticking up.

    http://metro.co.uk/2017/04/13/29-peo...ldren-6571793/

  8. #127
    Coach BonnieShels's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Elm Valley, Blackpool
    Posts
    11,401
    Thanks
    2,096
    Thanked 2,441 Times in 1,680 Posts
    I have an idea to solve the border issue if it's seemingly so insurmountable...

    Quote Originally Posted by David Davis
    Davis said: “How on earth do you resolve the issue of the border with Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland unless you know what our general borders policy is, what the customs agreement is, what the free trade agreement is, whether you need to charge tariffs at the border or not? You can’t decide one without the other.”
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics...b0a8ea08b6e015
    DID YOU NOTICE A SIGN OUTSIDE MY HOUSE...?

  9. #128
    Capped Player
    Joined
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    13,679
    Thanks
    1,485
    Thanked 2,282 Times in 1,555 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by peadar1987 View Post
    Interesting you should mention Rotherham, as I found this the other day, revealing that 68% of the offenders were actually white: https://exposingbf.wordpress.com/201...rooming-gangs/

    This quote from the Crown Prosecution service's lead on child sex abuse stood out:
    So I know that the vast majority of offenders are British white male,” he says, setting the number at somewhere between 80 and 90%. “We have come across cases all over the country and the ethnicity of the perpetrators varies depending on where you are … It is not the abusers’ race that defines them. It is their attitude to women that defines them.”


    The normal resident population of the UK is 86% white. For every sex crime by a black or middle-eastern person that gets the gutter press whipped up into a frenzy, there are a raft of similar crimes committed by white people which are swept under the carpet. Nationwide, Muslims do not appear to be significantly more likely to commit sex crimes than any other ethnic group.
    That's a very good post on the issue. Both you and the Crown prosecutor have it spot on and from what I can gather most rational sex exploitation researchers/ activists/'legalists' would agree with that quote from the prosecutor.
    However, here a discussion about brexit has come down to discussing the merits of the socially divisive propaganda of racist groups, Britain First or British Pride or whatever they're called in these days of re-branding racism into something trendy and credible.

    Wendy Shepherd, child sexual exploitation project manager for Barnardo's wrote,
    "The danger with saying that the problem is with one ethnicity is that then people will only be on the lookout for that group – and will risk missing other threats."
    I think Wendy's statement doesn't go far enough, because focusing the problem on one ethnicity to the exclusion of others is (to state the obvious) a poison and patently a part of an agenda driven racist propaganda.
    Fortunately in order to understand what that's about, we can get assistance from those who have studied propaganda and in particular Nazis. One of the most respected in this field is Sebastian Haffner
    In "Jekyll and Hyde" Seb wrote “Outside of Germany people often wonder at the palpable fraudulence of Nazi propaganda, the stupid incredible exaggerations, the ludicrous reticences concerning what is generally known. Who can be convinced by it? They ask. The answer is that it is not meant to convince but to impress. It addresses emotion and fantasy. Nazi propaganda seeks to create in our minds tenacious ideas and fantasies."
    In Germany there were plenty of intelligentsia who rejected the facts of the propaganda, eg. that "snub nosed, dwarfish, half ape" Czechs/Poles were threats to Germany, but the impression of the propaganda lingered.
    In the aftermath of such propaganda today (Moslems rape our white girls) we get discussions based on those lingering impressions, which in turn deepen the effect of the propaganda, as explanations are offered that such belligerent people are victims of bad information, instead of what they are, basically people having questionable levels of rationality, bigots who focus on selective incidents to support their prejudices.
    We offer in response, information that "Muslims" have low crime rates, good in business, academia, solid family support network etc etc , but in a nutshell this information is having the effect of separation, of accentuating differences in other ethnic groups. They are, they have, they is ok.
    I'm not saying that racist/ethnic/social propaganda issues should not be challenged, but to keep in mind a perspective on the idea that "racist propaganda is not meant to convince but to impress".
    It's not just about the facts.
    Last edited by geysir; 14/05/2017 at 8:22 PM.

  10. #129
    First Team peadar1987's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Glasgow
    Posts
    2,491
    Thanks
    674
    Thanked 755 Times in 448 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by SkStu View Post
    from the same blog post (which by the way didn't link to the Rotherham report itself, instead a strategic plan to move Rotherham forward):

    The report itself and almost every article and analysis provided (and even Jack Straw) at the time was unanimous in claiming that this was a problem predominantly perpetrated by Muslim gangs. Even this problem itself is acknowledged by Muslim thought leaders.

    Bear in mind that this scandal was initiated as a result a conviction of 5 members of a Muslim gang in the area in 2010, then Rochdale (all Muslim) and then the Inquiry was called and completed with the first groups of people imprisoned as a result of the report back in 2016 were a Muslim group (and two white women). I don't deny that it likely is not exclusively a Muslim problem but they do seem to be hugely represented in the events that predated the report, the report itself and the follow on convictions. Of the 20 convictions arising from Operation Clover, 18 are Muslim men aged between 30 and 42. The other 2 are white women. Another 3 Muslim men are awaiting trial.

    BBC News (27 August 2014): "At least 1,400 children in the South Yorkshire town were sexually exploited by criminal gangs of men who were predominantly of Pakistani origin between 1997 and 2013."

    from Wikipedia related to the Casey report:
    The plural of anecdote isn't data. If you narrow your focus on anything you can pretend that it's the problem. Take these guys for example: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...le-gang-jailed . Not a Muslim involved. It doesn't matter how things seem, because that's a product of the media and our own internal biases. So let's take a look at what the statistics say:

    Here's a British government report on crime and ethnicity, which is probably as close as we're going to get to a breakdown based on religion. Page 36 has a breakdown by race and type of offence. Asians commit about 7% of sexual crimes in the UK, while comprising 6.9% of the population. Also interesting to note is that Asians are significantly less likely than the general population to commit violent offences, robbery, burglary or drug offences. Statistically speaking, perhaps we should be whipping up a moral panic about these Muslim immigrants coming over here committing fraud and forgery (for which the defendant is Asian ~10-11% of the time), although that's less of an emotive topic for the press to latch onto than strange-looking foreigners abusing innocent British girls.

    Quote Originally Posted by KrisLetang
    Looks like the number is ticking up.

    http://metro.co.uk/2017/04/13/29-peo...ldren-6571793/
    See above. The plural of anecdote isn't data. In the same time period I guarantee there was a proportional number of sex crimes committed by folk of other ethnicities and religions. If there wasn't the statistics would look different.

  11. Thanks From:


  12. #130
    Youth Team
    Joined
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    244
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 44 Times in 30 Posts
    We never had female genital mutilation in Michigan or Minnesota until these Muslim Communities were gathered there. Muslim doctors were shocked they got arrested for it. They didn't see the harm. To me that's bad immigration. We don't need that. And I'm not just choosing just that when talking about immigration problems. MS-13 is murdering people on Long Island like crazy. They come from El Salvador--illegally. Wait until MS-13 get to Chicago. You think that city is going up in flames now...I mean they are there already, just not like they are on L.I. yet.

  13. #131
    First Team peadar1987's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Glasgow
    Posts
    2,491
    Thanks
    674
    Thanked 755 Times in 448 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by KrisLetang View Post
    We never had female genital mutilation in Michigan or Minnesota until these Muslim Communities were gathered there. Muslim doctors were shocked they got arrested for it. They didn't see the harm. To me that's bad immigration. We don't need that.
    I'm not quite sure what that's got to do with the EU, but banning Muslims from entering the country isn't going to stop FGM. In fact, it's less likely to happen in the US or the UK where there are actually laws against it. Not to mention the fact that FGM is also extremely widespread among the christian communities in west, central and east african countries, whereas it is almost completely non-existent in countries such as Indonesia, Malaysia, Iran, Saudia Arabia...

    And I'm not just choosing just that when talking about immigration problems. MS-13 is murdering people on Long Island like crazy. They come from El Salvador--illegally. Wait until MS-13 get to Chicago. You think that city is going up in flames now...I mean they are there already, just not like they are on L.I. yet.
    Well this doesn't exactly have much to do with freedom of movement for EU nationals within the EU. But anyway, there are almost no immigrants in the Aryan Nation and Combat 18. And the Crips are almost exclusively African-Americans whose ancestors were slaves. And none of this changes the fact that immigration does not have any statistical correlation with an increase in crime rate. You can point to MS-13, but I could point to the proportional number of crimes committed by non-immigrants:

    https://www.americanimmigrationcounc...-united-states
    http://econofact.org/are-immigrants-...-commit-crimes
    http://thehill.com/latino/324607-rep...-born-citizens

  14. #132
    Youth Team
    Joined
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    244
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 44 Times in 30 Posts
    Right but we don't need to add any illegal immigrants who are in gangs.

  15. #133
    First Team peadar1987's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Glasgow
    Posts
    2,491
    Thanks
    674
    Thanked 755 Times in 448 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by KrisLetang View Post
    Right but we don't need to add any illegal immigrants who are in gangs.
    The keyword there is illegal. The UK can already stop illegal migration, because it's, y'know, illegal. Leaving the EU isn't going to change that one iota. And if the immigration is legal, then you can filter out gang members and terrorists at the visa application stage. EU immigrants have contributed far more to the UK economy in taxes and economic activity than they have taken out, which makes more money available for things that benefit everyone in the UK. And that's without mentioning the fact that things like the NHS would simply collapse without migrant workers to prop it up.

  16. #134
    Youth Team
    Joined
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    244
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 44 Times in 30 Posts
    Do people who are rich or upper class use NHS generally?

  17. #135
    First Team peadar1987's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Glasgow
    Posts
    2,491
    Thanks
    674
    Thanked 755 Times in 448 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by KrisLetang View Post
    Do people who are rich or upper class use NHS generally?
    About 8% of the population use private health care. I would assume they would be from the richer parts of society, yes.

  18. #136
    Capped Player DannyInvincible's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Derry
    Posts
    10,371
    Thanks
    3,009
    Thanked 3,356 Times in 2,049 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by KrisLetang View Post
    Do people who are rich or upper class use NHS generally?
    Although they are perfectly entitled to do so, persons from the upper classes probably wouldn't tend to avail of it. They may consult for minor matters but I suspect they would generally go private for more serious issues or where there may be long waiting lists on the NHS as they can afford it.

    Working class persons would generally be limited to NHS treatment due to financial restraint. This Telegraph article (which references a report by a think-tank) claims that middle class people "dominate" the NHS, however:

    Quote Originally Posted by Rebecca Smith
    [A Civitas] report, titled Quite Like Heaven?, warns that the health service cannot be allowed to continue as it is because far from receiving equal treatment under the NHS, much depends on where you live, how much you earn, how old you are and who you know.

    Nick Seddon, the study's author, said: "Higher socio-economic groups are more likely to have family or friends who work in the health services, and even if these contacts are not directly used to gain access to services they act as an important source of advice on how to work the system.

    "The Government is faced with the dispiriting fact that not only have health inequalities not improved, but they have got worse.
    This piece discusses the impact the introduction of universal healthcare free at the point of service had upon the middle class:

    Quote Originally Posted by Barry Doyle
    ...

    Thus, it would seem that the arrival of the NHS did much to improve the health options of the middle class, especially the less wealthy crippled by large doctors fees for poor service and denied access to the most up to date and efficient hospital treatment. As with education, the new system made a substantial difference to the family budgets of clerks, lower professionals and even middle managers freeing up income for improved housing, more discretionary spending and even the ultimate status symbol of the 1950s, a motor car – and in the process possibly sowing the seeds of an increasingly sedentary, over-indulgent and unhealthy lifestyle!

  19. #137
    Youth Team
    Joined
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    244
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 44 Times in 30 Posts
    So what % of a working persons taxes that they pay in the U.K. go toward NHS? Do sales taxes and property taxes also go towards NHS or is it only payroll taxes?

  20. #138
    First Team peadar1987's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Glasgow
    Posts
    2,491
    Thanks
    674
    Thanked 755 Times in 448 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by KrisLetang View Post
    So what % of a working persons taxes that they pay in the U.K. go toward NHS? Do sales taxes and property taxes also go towards NHS or is it only payroll taxes?
    Sales tax, income tax and National Insurance all go in the one pot. Property tax is paid locally and goes towards fixing potholes, social housing, state schools etc.

    The NHS comes out of the big pot, and accounts for 18.8% of that. Currently Income Tax is 0% on all earnings £11,000 and below, 20% on all earnings £11,000 to £43,000, and 40% on all earnings above that. National Insurance varies from 0% to 11% of income depending on a number of factors. On average a UK worker will pay 31% tax on their earnings, which means just under 6% of their income will go on the NHS. This is significantly less than in the US, which is generally attributed to a number of factors. One of the most important of these being that people in the UK will go to the doctor on a cautionary or preventative basis, so many problems are nipped in the bud before they can develop into something more dangerous (and expensive). There is also the fact that the NHS does not try to turn a profit, and the fact that it has a much greater negotiating power than individual US customers, and so can get a better deal from suppliers of drugs and medical equipment.

  21. #139
    Capped Player DannyInvincible's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Derry
    Posts
    10,371
    Thanks
    3,009
    Thanked 3,356 Times in 2,049 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by KrisLetang View Post
    So what % of a working persons taxes that they pay in the U.K. go toward NHS? Do sales taxes and property taxes also go towards NHS or is it only payroll taxes?
    Whilst there has been talk in recent years of sending itemised letters to taxpayers detailing exactly how their tax contribution is spent by the British government, exact figures aren't presently published or made known to taxpayers. However, according to this BBC piece from 2012, a worker earning the then-average UK full-time salary of £25,500 per annum would have paid a total tax amount of £5,979 and, from that total, would have contributed £1,094 to the NHS.

    This article (also from 2012) claims that "a taxpayer earning £50,000 a year [was] paying £14,183 (or 28.37 per cent) of their income to the Government" and that "by far the largest proportion of this money [went] to fund the welfare state (£4,727.67), followed by health (£2,469.73) and education (£1,848.73)". It more or less confirms what the BBC article was asserting and suggests that someone earning £25,000 would contribute £993 to health-care.

    This article from the Telegraph states that someone earning £60,000 per year will contribute £3,442 to the NHS.

    For what it's worth, the average UK wage in 2015 was £27,600 and it tends to rise by a percentage or two every year, so the average tax contribution will also have increased proportionately.

    The NHS is funded almost exclusively through income (payroll) tax and national insurance contributions. Some further info on NHS funding here:

    Quote Originally Posted by Wikipedia
    The systems are 98.8% funded from general taxation and National Insurance contributions, plus small amounts from patient charges for some services.[24] About 10% of GDP is spent on health and most is spent in the public sector.[25] The money to pay for the NHS comes directly from taxation. The 2008/9 budget roughly equates to a contribution of £1,980 for every man, woman and child in the UK.[26]

    When the NHS was launched in 1948 it had a budget of £437million (roughly £9 billion at today’s prices).[27] In 2008/9 it received over 10 times that amount (more than £100billion). In 1955/6 health spending was 11.2% of the public services budget. In 2015/6 it was 29.7%.[28] This equates to an average rise in spending over the full 60-year period of about 4% a year once inflation has been taken into account. Under the Blair government investment levels increased to around 6% a year on average. Since 2010 spending growth has been constrained to just over 1% a year.[28]

    Some 60% of the NHS budget is used to pay staff. A further 20% pays for drugs and other supplies, with the remaining 20% split between buildings, equipment, training costs, medical equipment, catering and cleaning. Nearly 80% of the total budget is distributed by local trusts in line with the particular health priorities in their areas.[29]
    Some further info here too:

    Quote Originally Posted by The King's Fund


    ...

    Some funding is generated by user charges. Charges for prescriptions, dental treatment and spectacles were first introduced in the early 1950s. These charges account for only a small proportion of NHS income – for example, income from patient fees and charges for prescriptions and dental care was £1.3 billion in 2015/16, which was 1.1 per cent of the Department of Health budget. The NHS also generates some income, for example, through parking charges and land sales.

    The level of NHS funding in a given year is set by central government through the Spending Review process. This process estimates how much income the NHS will receive from sources such as user charges, National Insurance and general taxation. If National Insurance or patient charges raise less funding for the NHS than originally estimated, funds from general taxation are used to ensure the NHS receives the level of funding it was originally allocated.

  22. #140
    Capped Player DannyInvincible's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Derry
    Posts
    10,371
    Thanks
    3,009
    Thanked 3,356 Times in 2,049 Posts
    Just following on from the talk on immigration above... This is a powerful and thought-provoking long-read by a former asylum seeker (who left Iran aged eight and who is now a teacher of American literature in London, as well as holding both US and EU citizenship) on the nativist disdain for the "ungrateful refugee" and the suspicious notion that refugees should shed their old identities and owe eternal and unconditional thanks to their native hosts: https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...ateful-refugee

Page 7 of 8 FirstFirst ... 5678 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Brexit Impact on LOI
    By Mr A in forum Premier & First Divisions
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 28/08/2016, 8:54 PM
  2. RTE: Wenger worried by Brexit impact on Premier League
    By Foot.ie in forum Football Feeds
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05/07/2016, 3:50 PM
  3. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 01/07/2016, 9:50 AM
  4. Brexit and our league !
    By Kiki Balboa in forum Premier & First Divisions
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 29/06/2016, 6:15 PM
  5. United Kingdom Team
    By liam88 in forum World League Football
    Replies: 61
    Last Post: 08/03/2004, 10:44 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •