Sudan Accuses Israel Of Attack; Khartoum 'Reserves The Right To React'

Israeli Air Force/ Wiki Commons image

Reuters

KHARTOUM - Sudan's Foreign Minister Ali Karti on Wednesday accused Israel of carrying out an attack on Tuesday near Port Sudan that killed two people and said Khartoum reserved the right to react to the aggression.

"This is absolutely an Israeli attack," he told reporters.

He said Israel undertook the attack in order scupper Sudan's chances of being removed from a U.S. list of state sponsors of terrorism.

One of the two people killed in the strike was a Sudanese citizen who had no ties to Islamists or the government, he said.

Israeli Foreign Ministry spokesman Yigal Palmor declined to comment on the accusation.

Read Full Article

Enter your email address to subscribe to our newsletter:


Delivered by FeedBurner

Arab Spring: The Israeli Factor

There are bad Israelis exploited and 
used by the globalists and there are good Israelis.
But lumping them together as "bad" you carry
water for the globalists' "divide & conquer " campaign
and undermine entirely the efforts of the good.

Tony Cartalucci, Contributing Writer
Activist Post

Any analysis of the Middle East would be remiss without factoring in Israel. Israel has been playing a rather muted role in the unfolding globalist gambit -- mainly because any Israeli involvement in supporting these staged revolutions would instantly taint them and ultimately derail them. Interestingly enough, the limited role Israel has been playing includes using this phenomenon, a political "touch of death," to target the various national oligarchies being swept from power.

The first prominent example of this occurred during Hosni Mubarak's besieging led by International Crisis Group stooge Mohamed ElBaradei and the US State Department trained and equipped April 6 Youth Movement. Israel made very overt, in fact, quite oafish statements of support on Hosni Mubarak's behalf including unverified claims of airlifts bringing the embattled dictator "riot equipment." The United States, to a lesser extent, at first capitalized on anti-American sentiment by making similarly oafish statements of support to poison the Mubarak regime, before openly admitting to funding and supporting not only the Egyptian protesters, but the Tunisians, Libyans, and beyond.


Adding further credence, the Council on Foreign Relations' magazine Foreign Affairs reported in March 2010, nearly a year before the "Arab Spring" began:

"Further, Egypt’s close relationship with the United States has become a critical and negative factor in Egyptian politics. The opposition has used these ties to delegitimize the regime, while the government has engaged in its own displays of anti-Americanism to insulate itself from such charges. If ElBaradei actually has a reasonable chance of fostering political reform in Egypt, then U.S. policymakers would best serve his cause by not acting strongly. Somewhat paradoxically, ElBaradei’s chilly relationship with the United States as IAEA chief only advances U.S. interests now. " 

Fully realizing US or Israeli support for ElBaradei in Egypt would destroy any chance for the "revolution's" success, it appears that the cartoonish act of overtly supporting Mubarak in the early stages of the unrest was a deliberate attempt to shift the ire of the Egyptian people toward him, and their suspicions away from globalist stooge ElBaradei.


This has played out in Libya as well. Again, unverified reports of mercenaries hired by Qaddafi through Israel, armed with Israeli weapons swept through the Israeli press. Upon reading the reports, the "evidence" is hearsay from the Libyan rebels themselves. These reports of mercenaries helped not only demonize Qaddafi and render him "illegitimate" in the opening stages of the conflict, but also helped members of the Arab League garner support domestically for UNSC r.1973. With the war now in full swing, these "mercenaries" are no where to be found, and the story effectively swept under the rug.

In fact, during a particularly frank, pre-UNSC r.1973, International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) military briefing, Qaddafi's military was identified as two professional forces divided into eastern and western brigades of approximately 10,000 men in total. IISS analysts would go on to refute claims that Qaddafi was intentionally targeting civilians noting that by doing so, he would only be fueling efforts by the West to use military force against him (16:26 & 1:00:00). When asked about mercenaries (53:00), the IISS conceded to having no credible evidence.

A frank IISS military briefing on Libya, before UNSC r.1973.

Now, perhaps the most ridiculous of all, is an effort to taint the Assad regime of Syria. Hareetz of Israel recently published an op-ed titled "Israel's Favorite Arab Dictator of All is Assad." In what is certainly over-the-top cartoonish propaganda, we are told that Assad's advocacy toward resisting Israel was merely a "slogan" and "hollow, serving the regime merely as an insurance policy against any demand for freedom and democracy."

Of course the arms, fighters, and training that transited Syria into Hezbollah's hands in Lebanon, who handed the aggressors within the State of Israel their first bitter defeat on the battlefield, seem a tangible rebuttal. While the Hareetz piece claims Syria is fighting Israel " to the last Lebanese," the people of Lebanon are most likely satisfied with the results of the 2006 campaign to defend their nation and the wide berth it afforded them and their allies.

Conclusion

Understanding that Israel is comprised of two types of people is key to understanding Israel's role in the Middle East and subsequently their role in the recent "Arab Spring." The first are people who truly live in Israel, recognize it as their home and realize that perpetual militancy and aggression toward their neighbors is neither beneficial nor sustainable.

The second type consists of the same godless, self-serving lost humanity that have hijacked nations across the globe as part of the corporate-financier oligarchy's bid to institute world government. They are using Israel as a beachhead of sorts to project their agenda throughout the Middle East. Their actions, including the ongoing apartheid against the Palestinians and unilateral military aggression towards neighboring nations are not indicative of a nation interested in its own self-preservation.

Like the United States which is being bled to death both literally and financially, those doing the bleeding in Israel are "globalist" in nature, who do not see borders and do not consider themselves to be of any particular religion, race, creed, or nationality. Such contrivances on their part, is merely political camouflage devised to lend them credibility when they otherwise have none. The whole world is their oyster, and the nation-state their plaything. Separating these two groups in Israel is essential in both understanding its role in the Middle East and helping to ensure those who truly consider it their home prevail against those maliciously using it for their own ends with the full intention of discarding it once they are done.

By perceiving Israel as a sort of "black capital" of a "Zionist empire," we carry water for the globalists in their bid to divide and conquer through preying on our petty prejudices. We also lump together and undermine those in Israel that are fighting against the globalists' exploitation of their nation and their people, who are just as lied to, misled, brainwashed, and manipulated as the people of America, the UK or Europe.

By understanding the Israeli factor and that those behind it are neither Israeli or Jewish, or even Zionist, we can understand it is but a gambit within a gambit towards building world empire, thus allowing us to move on to targeting the real culprits.

Tony Cartalucci's articles have appeared on many alternative media websites, including his own at 
Land Destroyer Report.

Enter your email address to subscribe to our newsletter:


Delivered by FeedBurner

US embassy outing in Lebanon attacked by stones

A general view shows the Palestinian refugee
camp of Ain el-Helweh on the outskirts of Sidon
© AFP/File Joseph Eid

AFP

SIDON, Lebanon (AFP) - A group of angry Lebanese youths on Saturday threw stones and bottles at a group from the US embassy in Beirut visiting the southern port town of Sidon, a security official said.

A spokesman for the US mission confirmed there had been "an incident."

"The embassy can confirm that a group of employees went to Sidon today on a tourism trip. An incident occurred, and the group returned back to the embassy. No injuries," he said, without elaborating.

Local media had spoken of the presence in the group of the embassy's political charge d'affaires.
"A group of youths intercepted a US embassy delegation as they left a restaurant and insulted them before throwing stones and empty glass bottles at them," the security source said.


He said the youths accused the members of the group of being "criminals, Israelis... you have soiled the land of resistance and martyrs."

South Lebanon is the heartland of the country's Shiite Hezbollah militia, and saw heavy fighting in the short but sharp summer war of 2006 between the group and Israeli forces.

The 34-day conflict killed more than 1,200 people in Lebanon, mainly civilians, and 160 Israelis, mostly soldiers.

Lebanese security forces accompanying the US group intervened on Saturday, but stones continued to be thrown, breaking car windows. The army then arrived and arrested three of the attackers, the security official said.

Protesters later staged a sit-in in Sidon to demand the release of the three arrested in connection with the attack.

Osama Saad, head of the Nasserite Popular Movement, a Hezbollah ally, gave a speech describing the detained men as "heroes."

Saad called for their "immediate release because they were trying to protest against the positions of the United States, with Israel, against Lebanon and US interference in Lebanon's internal affairs."

A group of men blocked roads into the Sunni majority city with burning tyres for an hour before the army dispersed them.

© AFP -- Published at Activist Post with license

Enter your email address to subscribe to our newsletter:


Delivered by FeedBurner

US senators press Clinton on anti-Israel 'incitement'

© AFP/File Menahem Kahana

AFP

WASHINGTON (AFP) - Twenty-seven US senators pressed Secretary of State Hillary Clinton Tuesday to make clear to Palestinian leaders that any incitement to violence against Israel or Jews is "not tolerable."

"We would like to know what specific steps you are taking to press for an end to this dangerous incitement," the lawmakers wrote in a letter to Clinton urging action after the grisly stabbing slayings of a family of five Israelis, including three children.

"The Itamar massacre was a sobering reminder that words matter, and that Palestinian incitement against Jews and Israel can lead to violence and terror," the group, which included Democrats and Republicans, said in their message.
"We urge you to redouble your efforts to impress upon the Palestinian leadership that continuing to condone incitement is not tolerable. We also urge you to consider focusing adequate training and educational programs in the West Bank and Gaza that promote peaceful coexistence with Israel," they said.

Palestinian president Mahmud Abbas has denounced the early March attack at the Itamar settlement in the West Bank near the northern city of Nablus as "abominable, inhuman and immoral."

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has blamed Palestinian incitement for creating an atmosphere that led to the killings -- widely believed to have been carried out by Palestinians -- and Abbas has flatly rejected the charge.

In the wake of the Itamar attack as well as a bomb attack on a crowded Jerusalem bus stop last week, US lawmakers have stepped up appeals for President Barack Obama's administration to do more against Palestinian "incitement."

The 27 US senators told Clinton they had "serious concern over continuing incitement directed against Jews and Israel within the Palestinian media, mosques and schools, and even by individuals or institutions affiliated with the Palestinian Authority."

© AFP -- Published at Activist Post with license

Enter your email address to subscribe to our newsletter:


Delivered by FeedBurner

The Surprising PNAC Connection to Libya

Zen Gardner
Before It's News

Looks like the PNAC, or Project for A New American Century, agenda of 1997 is rolling along as planned.  Just as has been outlined by other think tanks, Illuminati writers and social programmers.

But a blind world reels on the defensive when they could have known what was coming all along.  Notice, mind you, that the portrayal of an unstable Middle East includes every "rogue" nation BUT Israel. Israel oddly enough is never "on the table" for discussion, when in fact they are the fomentors and co-creators of the entire "terrorist" threat fabrication. 

Recent Developments
If you want to know exactly what's happening or about to transpire, keep an eye on Neocons like Bill Kristol at rabid Zionist Murdock's Fox News, the former head of PNAC when they made their famous study, proposal and "Statement of Principles" preceding the staged 9/11 events and ensuing bogus "war on terror".

It looks like despite Obama's "promises" to not send troops, we're about do it anyway. Surprise. So expect a real good reason to be fabricated soon, like tales of horrific atrocities by Gaddafi, to make sure the public is behind it. A false flag or two within Libya is probably on the table right now, like the staged theatre fire massacre in Abadan, Iran during the Iran revolution.

Read Full Article 

Related Articles:

WikiLeaks: U.S. Punished Costa Rica For Not Signing Covert ...

Obama Starts Another Illegal War, Rangel Calls For Draft

Fighting shifting in Kadhafi's favor: US intel

US vetoes UN resolution on Israel settlements

The Deliberate Lies That Shift Attention Away From The ...

LinkWithin

Enter your email address to subscribe to our newsletter:


Delivered by FeedBurner

Veteran US reporter Thomas lashes Israel, again

© AFP/File Paul J. Richards

AFP

LOS ANGELES (AFP) - Veteran US reporter Helen Thomas lashed out at Israel in an interview published Friday, standing by fiery comments which forced her to quit as doyenne of the White House press corps last year.

Speaking to Playboy, she denied she was anti-Semitic but railed against Jewish lobbies she said controlled power in America, from the White House and Congress to Hollywood and financial markets.

The combative 90-year-old also reiterated her view that Jews should stay in Europe and the United States rather than moving to Israel, which she said was stolen from the Palestinians.

"I’m not anti-Jewish; I’m anti-Zionist. I am anti-Israel taking what doesn’t belong to it. If you have a home and you’re kicked out of that home, you don’t come and kick someone else out."
Thomas was forced to quit last June after being recorded saying, when asked about Israel: "Tell them to get the hell out of Palestine," adding: "They can go home, Poland, Germany, and America and everywhere else."

Asked about those comments by Playboy, she said: "Well, that immediately evoked the concentration camps. What I meant was they should stay where they are because they’re not being persecuted -- not since World War II."

"If they were, we sure would hear about it. .. I want people to understand why the Palestinians are upset. They are incarcerated and living in an open prison," she added.

Jewish lobbies had power across the board in the US, she added. "Everybody is in the pocket of the Israeli lobbies, which are funded by wealthy supporters, including those from Hollywood.

"Same thing with the financial markets. There’s total control ... It’s real power when you own the White House, when you own these other places in terms of your political persuasion. Of course they have power," she added.

Thomas also wanted to set the record straight on her departure from the White House, announced as a retirement by Hearst Corp., where she worked as a newspaper columnist after decades at United Press International (UPI).

"I’m not retired! I was fired. In fact, I’ll die with my boots on," she said in the interview, which was conducted in Washington where she took Playboy contributing editor David Hochman to her favorite Palestinian restaurant, the magazine said.

© AFP -- Published at Activist Post with license

Related Articles:

Ireland's Prelude To Revolution: IMF Bankster Party Tossed ...

US lawmakers seek to force action on trade pacts

US deploys two nuclear experts to Japan

Broken Nation (Charlie McGrath Video)

US Libyan Intervention

LinkWithin

Enter your email address to subscribe to our newsletter:


Delivered by FeedBurner

The Globalists' Egyptian Gambit: ElBaradei

From the Council on Foreign Relations to the Brookings Institute, Globalists agree. Mohamed ElBaradei for (Egyptian) President 

source

Tony Cartalucci, Contributing Writer

Activist Post 

 It was previously reported that Mohamed ElBaradei, the self-proclaimed leader of the unfolding Egyptian protests, is actually sitting on the Board of Trustees of the Zbigniew Brzezinski/George Soros globalist think-tank, the International Crisis Group.

The mainstream media has been backing ElBaradei's ownership of the protests, hailing this Nobel Laurette and former UN IAEA director as the potential next president of Egypt and the "hero" of the protests. The New York Times refers to him as the "Nobelist" portraying him as standing "toe-to-toe" with hundreds of riot police and promising to run for president if and only if elections were "free and fair."

While ElBaradei poses as a critic of the United States, it is not because of their meddling with Middle Eastern affairs, it is because they are not meddling enough. ElBaradei berates the United States for not intervening in what he calls "social disintegration, economic stagnation, and political repression" in Egypt. Apparently ElBaradei isn't the only one who thinks so either.

Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) senior fellow, Project for a New American Century signatory, and Bush wrangler Elliott Abrams elaborated on the sort of "intervention" the United States should be committed to in his piece "Less 'Engagement,' More Democracy" in the New York Times. In his piece he criticizes the current policy of engaging with nations he deems repressive regimes as equals and calls for a revisit to George Bush's "freedom agenda." In other words - the export of "democracy" that has brought America the trillion dollar military adventures in Iraq and Afghanistan at the cost of thousands of US soldiers' lives and the lives of millions of foreigners killed, maimed, or displaced.

Ultimately the "freedom agenda" has created puppet governments and sweeping economic reforms giving globalist corporate cartels free reign in these "importers of democracy." Those that remember Paul Bremer's Colalition Provisional Authority, may also recall the various "liberalizations" imposed upon Iraq including 100% foreign ownership of Iraqi companies and immunity granted to foreign contractors from Iraqi law.

In the end, the "freedom agenda" is nothing more than 21st century gunboat diplomacy coupled with the one-sided "treaties" the European imperialists imposed across Africa, Asia, and the Middle East.

Fellow CFR policy wonk, Robert Danin echos Abrams' sentiments regarding the freedom agenda by regretting how President Obama had backed away from it during his 2009 speech in Cairo, and how interesting it is now that the administration seems to be interested in perhaps adopting it. He then goes on to explain how the protests are unprecedented, in that they are concerning not anit-American or anti-Israeli causes, but directed at inward problems at home.

With Tunisia and now Egypt internally infighting, a collective regional division seems to be developing. It is no secret the globalists via the United States and Israeli governments, want regime change in Iran and to desperately halt their nuclear program. Elliot Abrams in his New York Times piece states explicitly "our ultimate goal for Iran is not a nuclear deal with the ayatollahs but freedom for its people under a government they choose in honest elections." Newsweek goes one step further and reports on a covert war against Iran's nuclear program already well underway.Seymour Hersh reported as early as 2008 that the US was conducting military operations in Iran.

The floundering efforts to achieve the globalists' goals with Iran, now spanning several years, may have spurred the real policy makers, the globalist think tanks, to consider a wider regional campaign of destabilization and the installation of more reliable and more zealous allies to build the needed coalition to confront an unmovable Iran. At any rate, any opposition for the globalists' next phase in the Middle East will be muted with regimes across the region battling for their very survival.

Mohamed ElBaradei, then literally sitting on the International Crisis Group's Board of Trustees with the likes of George Soros, would not only be a trusted candidate to sow instability throughout Egypt, but would make an equally trustworthy leader of a pliable proxy regime to turn against Iran, Russia, and China. An ElBaradei controlled Egypt could equally be turned against disruptive members of the other globalist pet project Egypt is conveniently positioned to deal with, the African Union. And last but not least, Egypt controls the Suez Canal. Greater control over Egypt means greater control over the passage of freight through the canal.

Finally, globalist think-tank, the Brookings Institute, chimes in claiming Egypt's new opposition leader is indeed Mohamed ElBaradei and claims he is already reaching out for ties and a loose alliance with the Muslim Brotherhood, an extremely large and influential opposition organization in Egypt. The Brookings Institute feigns the same ignorance as the rest of the mainstream media regarding ElBaradei's position in the International Crisis Group by claiming it will be Egypt that will decide the outcome "not Washington." Brookings also laments that Israel's government holds a huge stake in the outcome of Egypt's unrest but has "absolutely no ability to influence the course of events."

It should then comfort Israel and the Brookings Institute to know that ElBaradei is working so closely with US policy makers via the International Crisis Group and that his sentiments are echoed by America's "Neo-Conservative" establishment. In other words, Israel and America have their foot in the door and seem not to even realize it. The wiser suspects they most certainly do realize it.

Tony Cartalucci's articles have appeared on many alternative media websites, including his own at Land Destroyer.   

Related article by Tony Cartalucci
All is Not What it Seems in Egyptian Clashes 

RELATED ARTICLE:
The Tipping Point Has Passed: Sweeping Change is at Hand
Enter your email address to subscribe to our newsletter:


Delivered by FeedBurner

Ian Bremmer's Top Ten Political Risks for 2009

Eurasia Group's Ian Bremmer just released the firm's top ten political risks for 2009. We will feature a panel discussing the ethical implications of these risks with Ian Bremmer, Michele Wucker, and Art Kleiner next week, on Jan. 13, at the Carnegie Council. Sign up for the event at gpievents@cceia.org.

Here is how Ian summarizes the top risks for the year:

First, we’ll see more state intervention in the global economy. Second, that intervention will be both reactive and uncoordinated by a series of local, regional, and national political actors who have decidedly non-global (and in many cases non-market) views of the cost/benefit equations that attend their policy decisions. In short, politics will drive the global economy more directly, and more inefficiently, in the coming year than at any point since World War II.

Below, we present a truncated excerpt of the ten risks:

1. Congress - Political risks have historically been most important for economic outcomes in emerging markets, but that’s not so this year. The current financial crisis has created an unprecedented space for government interference in economic affairs within developed states, as well. Nowhere is that more true than in Washington.

2. South Asia Security - The security environment in India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan will deteriorate significantly over the coming year, and the United States and Europe will find themselves more directly involved in conflicts in all three states, with little benefit to show for it, by the end of 2009.

3. Iran/Israel - The likelihood of the United States launching strikes against Iran has diminished considerably over the past two years, due both to internal policy wrangling between Vice President Dick Cheney and others within the Bush administration and the election of Barack Obama as president. But 2009 is the critical year for conflict (both direct and through proxies) between Iran and Israel.

4. Russia - We enter 2009 with Russia in play in a way we haven’t seen in decades. The relevant comparison isn’t 1998, when the Russians engaged in default and devaluation but remained within the bounds of their existing political and economic system (as Lenin said, two steps forward, one step back). The history to consider is 1989—as key aspects of the Russian system could change for the worse.

5. Iraq - Frankly, Iraq at number five is a good news story. With about 140,000 American troops remaining on the ground and no serious evolution of the Iraqi political model, it’s a testament to the relative improvements of security that Iraq has managed to claw its way away from a risk that keeps the world on edge.

6. Venezuela - President Hugo Chavez has made a habit of miscalculation over the years, but this may be the big one. His plans for a referendum in the coming month to reform the Venezuelan constitution and abolish term limits (which would allow Chavez to run again for the presidency in 2012) show little likelihood of success. Then the Venezuelan president will have a real political fight on his hands.

7. Mexico - While Colombia’s President Alvaro Uribe has effectively won his country’s war against the drug cartels, the same can’t be said of Mexico’s President Felipe Calderon. The security situation there has worsened and is almost certain to deteriorate further over the course of 2009. Well armed and well financed narco-criminals have effectively declared war on the state of Mexico—increasingly singling out elected government officials, bureaucrats, and the armed forces and police for their attacks. As the government continues to rely on the military to go after the drug lords, the bloodshed will continue.

8. Ukraine - As I mentioned, Ukraine isn’t likely to spur the kind of direct military conflict we saw last August in Georgia. But it merits a slot in our top risks because of the government’s inability to deal effectively with the severe challenges posed by the current financial crisis and economic downturn—and one certainly not helped by its volatile relationship with Moscow.

9. Turkey - Speaking of internal distractions, Turkey is essentially defining the problem. The country has all sorts of factors in its favor—a diversified economy, strong demographics, an extremely favorable trade route geography, and solid ties with both western countries and its Middle Eastern neighbors. Yet the fight pitting secularists in the judiciary, military, and industry against Islamists in government is becoming a serious obstacle to economic advancement. And the AK party leadership, feeling that it increasingly carries the weight of popular support on its side, is unwilling to compromise—instead, casting out potential dissent from within the party (and losing critical bureaucratic competence as a result). To make matters worse, the AK party has long lost its reformist spirit and has embraced a more nationalist attitude, making it more difficult to find a solution to the thorny Kurdish question.

10. South Africa - Rounding out the top risks for 2009 is South Africa. Upcoming elections will dominate the news, but it’s more political context than electoral results that will cause concern. It’s pretty clear that the African National Congress (ANC) will keep its majority in parliament, though the emergence of a new splinter party will reduce its numbers. In principal, that’s not a bad development; popular concerns over the ANC’s abuse of power should be reduced accordingly. But the transition is going to be hard on the ANC leadership—with South Africa’s legislators having to accept the need to cooperate with political opponents, rather than using political influence to force would-be dissidents into line. The initial reaction is likely to be a lack of patience and tolerance, undermining public confidence in South Africa’s political institutions...and providing little comfort to investors.

Notice China instability, the Persian Gulf, and climate change are not on the list. Ian sees these as either red herrings or, in climate change's case, longer term developments.

More Arab Diplomatic Initiatives

As I have pointed out in a previous (post) its seems there are more initiavtes in the same direction, now there are talks between the Syrian and Lebanese president after a few years of diplomatic tensions. Also more recently the Jordanian Government holds talks with Hamas officials! After a cut off and heavy tensions for 9 years!

Keep in mind that this is for regional strategic reasons not coz King Husain suddenly had a “change of heart” in the Israeli coming elections and what it yeilds may mess up the situation in West Bank which would bring turmoil in Jordan. However this will also ease tentions with the Muslim Brotherhood of Jordan and the Islamist Social movment at large with th Jordanian government.

Anyway it seems interesting.. Jordan is trying to step up.. Now Egypt looks like a dork since they havent been able to bring all Palestinian factions and Israel to concrete deals.. Whatever Happens in Egypt in the next decade or is going to be a major propellant of what the Middle East will look like vis-à-vis Israel.

The U.S is too busy with Iraq that its “Allies” are more free to do what they want,, and more recently the Fiasco of Georgia is worrying them and dragging them into Cold War Politics.. Georgia ia a U.S Ally and currently Russian troops are only 40km away from Tbilisi the Georgia Capital..

International Affairs is getting Interesting !!