Burma: some news from a largely ignored conflict.
http://www.irrawaddy.org/article.php?art_id=20650
There's an ongoing violent conflict in Burma. While the west tends to want to focus on the peaceful efforts of Suu Kai & the NLD, not everyone is willing to ignore the junta's crimes against humanity.
Look away, stay away
There has always been a reluctance to report consistently on the Burmese insurgencies, which date back to independence in 1947. Burmese nationalism was and is a factor with impact - for the nation, not just the military junta.
Nor have her neighbours encouraged long-term reporting, most notably by Thailand.
I know there have been refugees since 1947 encamped close to the border and few have left for the wider world. Somehow I doubt there is a Burmese diaspora that has any effect, unlike the Tamils for example.
davidbfpo
Thailand has had a lot of nasty going on. This is one of the things I found out they've been doing recently:Originally Posted by davidbfpo
http://democracyforburma.wordpress.c...wed-to-travel/
Thailand has also engaged in the forced repatriation of refugees during active conflict, meaning they do force people back into places where shooting is still going on.
In the URL I originally posted, you might notice that the Brigade 5 is a splinter group. One of the things that illustrates is that this is quite an active conflict.
The Burmese armed forced under control of `the generals' have been engaging in quite an impressive array of war crimes, including organized forced rapes of women in entire villages, a variety of pressed labor activities including using civilians with sticks impressed to clear minefields & mined roads, use of pressed gangs to haul war material, and array of other more tediously evil murders & forced labor that can be expected by a thoroughly corrupt military regime. All that rather recently too, so these are current events I'm referring to, not historical abuses.
Burma is one of what I think of as the `Chinese toilet ring', one of a set of border countries where they encourage despotic regimes in order to make themselves look better by comparison. It's in line with their other imperialistic ambitions, and a quite troubling pattern that has me concerned with their subversive sponsorship of Nepalese Maoists by way of related activity. This is why when you hear propaganda about China's "peaceful rise" you shouldn't believe it for a second. It's a well papered lie, but a lie no matter how they try to cover up for what they're really doing.
interview with a former slave
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oc7qMyIu4G4
This guy was used in a press gang as a porter and human shield for 4 years before his escape to the Karen state.
Here's some background on the tragedy playing out in Burma:
Secret War In Burma: The KMTWhile the work of French clandestine services in Indochina enabled the opium trade to survive a government repression campaign, some CIA activities in Burma helped transform the Shan States from a relatively minor poppy cultivating area into the largest opium-growing region in the world. The precipitous collapse of the Nationalist Chinese (Kuomintang, or KMT) government in 1949 convinced the Truman administration that it had to stem "the southward flow of communism" into Southeast Asia. In 1950 the Defense Department extended military aid to the French in Indochina. In that same year, the CIA began regrouping those remnants of the defeated Kuomintang army in the Burmese Shan States for a projected invasion of southern China. Although the KMT army was to fail in its military operations, it succeeded in monopolizing and expanding the Shan States' opium trade. (excerpt from The Politics of Heroin: CIA Complicity In The Global Drug Trade by Alfred W. McCoy)
The Politics of Heroin in Southeast Asia - Wikipedia
The Politics of Heroin - Amazon
Alfred W. McCoy - Wikipedia
Some other players:
Burma: US Oil Major Complicit in Abuses - Rights Lobby - IPS News‘’Chevron and its consortium partners continue to rely on the Burmese army for pipeline security and those forces continue to conscript thousands of villagers for forced labour, and to commit torture, rape, murder and other serious abuses in the course of their operations,’’ revealed the 76-page report, ‘The Human Cost of Energy’.
Chevron should act on ‘’its moral and legal obligations to human rights rather than profit from human rights abuses,’’ the report added of this project that earned the Burma’s junta about 1.1 billion US dollars in 2006, over half of its total earnings from the sale of gas to neighbouring Thailand, which was 2.16 billion dollars that year.
‘’Chevron can be sued by villagers from Burma if it does not stop the human rights violations,’’ Naing Htoo, EI’s Burma Project coordinator, said during a press conference at the launch of the report. ‘’The violations are happening every day.’’
Pressure Mounts On Energy Giant Chevron To Disclose Revenue - IPS NewsBANGKOK, Apr 29, 2010 (IPS) - When shareholders of the multinational company Chevron gather for their annual meeting in the U.S. city of Houston in late May, they will come face to face with Naing Htoo, whose community has suffered due to the exploits of the energy giant in military-ruled Burma.
"I want to expose what has gone on as a result of Chevron’s investments in Burma," says the 30-year-old from the Karen ethnic minority. "The shareholders need to know where their money is going and the suffering it is causing."
The Hypocrites Who Say They Back Democracy In Burma - John Pilger - antiwar.comI had planned tonight to read from my last interview with Aung San Suu Kyi, but I decided not to – because of something Suu Kyi said to me when I last spoke to her. "Be careful of media fashion," she said. "The media like this sentimental version of life that reduces everything down to personality. Too often this can be a distraction."
A sad state of affairs.
A couple more things that may be of interest from Alfred McCoy, author of The Politics of Heroin: CIA Complicity In The Global Drug Trade:
McCoy Interview, 11/9/91PD: How does the CIA's policies affect drug interdiction? I've spoken for example to former Drug Enforcement Administration officer Michael Levine, who has expressed anger that he was pulled off cases because he got too close to someone who, while being a big trafficker, was also an asset of the CIA.
AM: Mike Levine speaks from personal experience. In 1971 Mike Levine was in Southeast Asia operating in Thailand as an agent of the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration [DEA]. At the same time I was conducting the investigation for the first edition of my book.
Mike Levine said that he wanted to go up country to Chiangmai, the heroin capital of Southeast Asia at that point, the finance and processing center and hub of an enterprise. He wanted to make some major seizures. Through a veiled series of cut outs in the U.S. embassy in Bangkok, instructions were passed to his superiors in the DEA, who told him he couldn't go up and make the bust. He was pulled off the case.
$$$
That meant that when the CIA was running one of its covert action wars in the drug zones of Asia, the DEA would stay away. For example, during the 1950's the CIA had this ongoing alliance with the nationalist Chinese in northern Burma. Initially mounting invasions of China in 1950-51, later mounting surveillance along the border for a projected Chinese invasion of Southeast Asia. The DEA stayed out of Southeast Asia completely during that period and collected no intelligence about narcotics in deference to the CIA's operation.
Let's take two more examples that bring it right up to the present. [First] the Afghan operation: from 1979 to the present, the CIA's largest operation anywhere in the world, was to support the Afghan resistance forces fighting the Soviet occupation in their country. The CIA worked through Pakistan military intelligence and worked with the Afghan guerilla groups who were close to Pakistan military intelligence.
In 1979 Pakistan had a small localized opium trade and produced no heroin whatsoever. Yet by 1981, according to U.S. Attorney General William French Smith, Pakistan had emerged as the world's leading supplier of heroin. It became the supplier of 60% of U.S. heroin supply and it captured a comparable section of the European market. In Pakistan itself the results were even more disastrous.
In 1979 Pakistan had no heroin addicts, in 1980 Pakistan had 5,000 heroin addicts, and by 1985, according to official Pakistan government statistics, Pakistan had 1.2 million heroin addicts, the largest heroin addict population in the world.
McCoy Article, 1/8/11Military Misadventure: Present Situation
Counterintuitively, as their power wanes, empires often plunge into ill-advised military misadventures. This phenomenon is known among historians of empire as “micro-militarism” and seems to involve psychologically compensatory efforts to salve the sting of retreat or defeat by occupying new territories, however briefly and catastrophically. These operations, irrational even from an imperial point of view, often yield hemorrhaging expenditures or humiliating defeats that only accelerate the loss of power.
Embattled empires through the ages suffer an arrogance that drives them to plunge ever deeper into military misadventures until defeat becomes debacle. In 413 BCE, a weakened Athens sent 200 ships to be slaughtered in Sicily. In 1921, a dying imperial Spain dispatched 20,000 soldiers to be massacred by Berber guerrillas in Morocco.
A link to an article by some human rights outfit concerned about possible excessive use of force by Royal Thai Police during drug crackdowns:
The Royal Thai Massacres by Roger WhiteA deafening silence
Its not as if the Bush Administration didn't know what was going down in Thailand. The United Nations Commission on Human Rights special repporteur Asma Jahangir expressed "deep concern" about the "extra-judicial executions" in the spring of 2003. Before Prime Minister Thaksin came to the U.S. for the first time as a head of state in June 2003 Human Rights Watch sent the White House a letter detailing the drug war atrocities taking place. The June 911 letter mentioned the over "2000 killings" and quoted Thai government officials including Thaksin himself on the drug crackdown. "In this war drug dealers must die." (Letter to U.S. President George Bush: Press Thaksin on Extrajudicial Executions, Burma. Human Rights Watch June 9, 2003). It also quoted Interior Minister Wan Muhamad Nor Matha referring to the drug crackdown. "They will be put behind bars or even vanish without a trace ... who cares?" (ibid) The Human Rights Watch report politely mentioned that the U.S. reputation may be "sullied by association with a bloody and murderous campaign in the name of the war on drugs" due to our on going anti narcotics training and money to the Thai police. (ibid)
An interesting link to the elite Thai Border Patrol Police Aerial Reinforcement Unit who as far back as the late Fifties were receiving Ranger training at Benning:
PARU - nationreligionking.comAs part of this support, the newly opened CIA station in Bangkok worked with the Thai government to form contingency plans in case of a Chinese invasion. Part of these plans involved the creation of a local guerrilla force. A choice was made to use the Thai Police as the source for these guerrilla fighters since the Thai Police were viewed as more flexable than the Royal Thai Army. In addition, Thai Police were already distributed around the country and could provide a faster reaction to events than the Thai Military. Strong support for the plans was given by the Director-General of the Thai National Police Department, General Phao Siyanon.
The CIA assigned James William 'Bill' Lair to work with the Thai Police on the project. An American front company, Southeast Asia Supply Company, or Sea Supply, was also created to administer the training programs.
My apologies then. Perhaps it is as Confucius say, "Man who stand on toilet ring high on pot."In any case, I sure didn't post any of this stuff to give you an opportunity to go off on some jackass poorly sourced leftist rant that has nothing more going for it than your disdain for the USA.
"Its about Tribes, Stupid"
Have been working with some volunteer buddies helping various ethnic resistance movements and underground activists in this region at intervals now into our seventh year.
After working with ethnics at political, military and grassroots levels, I am not sure of much of anything in this complex land, since I am not on the ground full time. There are, however, a few observations to share.
The media, along with rants from the political Left and Right as well as American audiences, in general, all remain fixated on simplistic images of Burma ... with Aung San Suu Kyi as "the darling of democracy" imprisoned and now released, juxtaposed against the dictator General Maung Aye backed one way or another by profit-hungry nations and international corporations, to include Chevron and TRANSOCEAN.
This misses the point.
After all we have been through in Iraq and Afghanistan in terms of "not getting it" early on in the matter "ethnic power brokers", it is well to consider that the real issue to be creatively faced in Burma is (1) "Ethnic Balance of Power", as well as (2) the role ethnic resistance armies could play in support of vital US National Security interests.
With over 130 different groups and sub-groups, most of which occupy Burma's border areas, and on whose ancestral lands most of Burma's natural resource wealth lies, these ethnic minorities comprise roughly half of the country's populace and legally 7 of its 14 states. The truth is that "Democracy" per means discrimination again to these minorities at the hands of the Burman majority, as has historically been the case. Ethnics dispute the "Democracy First" affirmation of Aung San Suu Kyi, and instead assert that "Matter of National Reconciliation" among all ethnics is the #1 imperative for what ails Burma. Its all about balance, fairness and the righting of old wrongs.
More importantly, ethnic resistance armies comprise the only internal military capacity able to thwart the Burmese dictator backed by China which is after unfettered access to the Indian Ocean. Aung San Suu Kyi and NLD dont have any such capacity. Ethnics, using simple unconventional warfare methods, can be an enduring thorn in the side of all those who seek to profit off of stolen ethnic lands. A target-rich environment.
UW remains the superior form of war in these parts...something that gives ethnics negative leverage to become potential stakeholders in economic development coming like a freight train at them, rather than being mere speed bumps in the way of others' profit.
The Karen National Liberation Army (KNLA) for example racked up 80:1 KIA and 120:1 WIA ratios against the Burmese Army in 2009. This is testament to the resolve and competency of freedom fighters who have had their families murdered for decades going up against the conscript and child soldiers in the Burmese Army, which has almost fatally bad morale. Ethnics are a force to be reckoned with no matter how materially impoverished they may be.
Ethnics are also the only internal power base to be applied against the spread of radical Islamists coming through Bangladesh and India. (Bali bombers in 2002 admitted that the Islamic populace of Burma was a future target for radicalization).
So also are ethnic potential "players" in the matter of containing the Burmese dictator's aim of developing nuclear power.
America has a bad track record of not cultivating ethnic power bases well in advance of conflict come surely at us. Burma is now a case in point.
Bottom line. Working now on US vital interests in the region to contain China, radical Islamists and nuclear proliferation, is a compelling reality for us. Yet we remain dangerously fixated on 5 meter targets elsewhere.
Harnessing the Unconventional Warfare power potential of ethnic resistance movements should be part of our "condition setting" calculus. Part of that calculus should involve ethnics compelling needed evolution of the dictator's Dark Ages business model. This could be accomplished by experimenting with more enlightened entrepreneurship ventures that empower the masses as a viable tax base, instead of their being the object of rape, pillage and plunder, as is now the case.
Vulnerability? Fear. The dictator and his stakeholders / supporters are fundamentally fearful of loss of profit, loss of image, loss of economic opportunity, fear of increased insurance costs, fear of media and fear of the truth of what is going on in the shadows. In China's case, it is particularly fearful of unstable access to the Indian Ocean.
Getting wrapped up in Aung San Suu Kyi and NLD (an organization with internal effectiveness and corruption problems) is no different than once again putting all our money and hopes on single ponies like Karzai, Chalabi, and other dictators most recently in the spotlight.
As author Robert D. Kaplan once said when talking about SWA, "Its about tribes, Stupid."
Note: We coincentally smuggled him into the jungles of Burma in 2008 to do research for his present book "Monsoon".
Last edited by Tim Heinemann; 02-07-2011 at 09:16 PM. Reason: Misspellings
I could be mistaken, but a significant source of the Junta's revenue seems to flow from the gas pipeline. How feasible would a dedicated effort to sabotage the pipeline be? How would you describe or imagine the effect cycle of such a course of action? What about the assassination of military and civilian leadership, to include outside enablers of the regime? Would such activities be helpful or unhelpful? Thanks.The dictator and his stakeholders / supporters are fundamentally fearful of loss of profit, loss of image, loss of economic opportunity, fear of increased insurance costs, fear of media and fear of the truth of what is going on in the shadows.
Last edited by Backwards Observer; 02-07-2011 at 11:41 PM. Reason: added question
I don't know how helpful they'd be if they came from external sources. In that situation it's entirely possible that China could see them (understandably too) as a threat. That even when their own interests would be better served by regime change. In a lot of respects they're stuck, and that in unpleasant ways. On one hand if they want to get rid of a failed regime, they're stuck knowing that if they replace it with something that looks exactly like the last pile of thugs they'll end up with just a new pile of thugs, on the other toleration of corrupt regimes means that they're never going to realize the sort of trade and prosperity with their neighbors that they really want. In some ways (and this is a very bad & limited comparison), the US has been facing a somewhat similar problem with Mexican cartel violence. The most recent solution that the involved parties there have turned to has been intensive training of Mexican forces by Columbian police & military forces. That effort while very promising, is just getting underway, so the outcomes from it are as yet to be determined. In Burma, it might be possible for China to cut it's ties to the junta & put some support behind their opponents directly without falling into a trap of needing to create ideological and dogmatic models out of any new regime. It would be enough to say that they support self-determination for the people without insisting what that should look like. Such a stance might likely be politically palatable where other, more witlessly complex options would not be.
In part some of the key enablers are corporations like Chevron too, & even trying to get them to grow some ethics is a wretched can of worms. They'll quite happily buy their way out of any criticism, & it's because they're so intractably unethical that they're turning themselves into a valid target.
In terms of the opium trade, as far as I know 90% of it does come from Afghanistan, and an awful lot of it ends up in Arab states too. Iran for instance has a not very well reported serious problem with young people becoming addicted to opium that originates from there. I wouldn't be at all surprised if that has been a factor in muting the natural political opposition there.
stuck in the middle with juntas
I appreciate that you took the time to whip up the diplomatic voodoo.Thanks for your thoughtful response.
Couple of points...
The degree to which the Chevron and Total stakes in the Yabama pipeline "enable" the military regime is I think substantially exaggerated. It's appealing stuff for the knee-jerk anti-corporate crowd but the argument doesn't stand up to scrutiny. The pipeline exists, and the Thais are going to buy the gas in any event: they don't give a hot round one about human rights abuses in Burma. If Total and Chevron tried to influence the Burmese government they'd simply be forced to sell their stakes, which would be bought by Chinese or Thai interests and business would go on as usual. If Total and Chevron backed out the same would happen. If retrospectively, Total and Chevron had refused to build the pipeline, someone else would have. No shortage of oil companies in Russia and China willing and able to take on a project like that. Burma's energy reserves, and the willingness of the neighbors to buy the product, are enabling factors, but placing the blame on those contracted to build the infrastructure doesn't accomplish much.
I don't see how the Chinese are in any way "stuck" by current circumstances. The status quo is acceptable to them. They don't have a US or western ally on that part of their border. The disorder in Burma has no major adverse impact on them. Burma would not be a major market for Chinese goods in any event and an open Burmese economy could emerge as a competitor in industries demanding cheap labor. The Chinese will be perfectly happy to deal with what is. Like the Thais, they don't care about the human rights abuses, any more than they do in Angola, the DRC, or Sudan. They will develop energy resources and build pipelines no matter what anyone else thinks. Of course there's a risk that pipelines could be sabotaged during a rebellion, or that a new government could cancel existing deals and nationalize projects, but the Chinese are taking similar risks in many places and apparently see them as acceptable.
You'd get some publicity by whacking the CEOs of Chevron and Total, but there wouldn't be much impact on Burma. You could certainly wreck the Burmese economy (in a loose sort of way I suppose you could call it an economy) by sabotaging energy projects, or create a leadership vacuum by killing officials... but really, who cares enough to bother? There would be all manner of legal implications and risks, and whose interests are sufficiently threatened by the status quo to take them? As in many other backwaters, Burma's leaders are protected largely by their nation's economic and strategic irrelevance: lots of people will preach and deplore, but at the end of the day nobody is willing to do something about it.I could be mistaken, but a significant source of the Junta's revenue seems to flow from the gas pipeline. How feasible would a dedicated effort to sabotage the pipeline be? How would you describe or imagine the effect cycle of such a course of action? What about the assassination of military and civilian leadership, to include outside enablers of the regime? Would such activities be helpful or unhelpful?
Dayuhan, as always your stolid sobriety is invigorating. You ask,
What make you of this:... but really, who cares enough to bother?
Last edited by Backwards Observer; 02-08-2011 at 09:08 AM. Reason: add quote
The idea of harnessing the unconventional warfare potential of ethnic minorities in SE Asia to "contain China, radical Islamists and nuclear proliferation" seems rather farfetched to me. For one thing, I'm not at all sure the ethnic minorities have any interest in being harnessed, except to the rather limited extent to which it would serve their immediate interests. I doubt they'd be terribly interested in fighting our enemies; they have enemies of their own. I also doubt that the Chinese, the proliferators, or the radical Islamists would even notice.
If China were to occupy Burma the ethnic minorities would resist and could be "harnessed". If AQ were to establish a cell or the North Koreans (or the Burmese junta) were to set up a nuclear lab in the Shan or Karen territories some harnessing might be done... but none of these really seem like high-probability events. About as likely as a full moon on Chinese New Year, IMO, and scarcely worth planning for.
I can't see how they could be harnessed against the above in any sort of offensive capacity, as the subject of the offense would have to be rather far away, and they aren't folks that like to travel, or fight, outside their own domain.
Thanks Dayuhan, I appreciate your taking the time to reply. Perhaps in this Chinese New Year of the Rabbit / Cat, the peoples and polities of Asia could all take a moment to reflect on the wisdom of Confucius, who say, "Man who fart in church must sit in his own pew."
I don't think it's reasonable to consider harnessing anyone in any of the nations bordering China for any purpose affecting China in a negative way. Objectively, things are such a mess in Burma it's entirely possible that resolution of any sort would result in anything other than a lessing of containment. Right now, abject failure is acting as containment. I'd dispute the idea that they need containment too. What I think they need is the sort of successes that teach them that totalitarian brutality is a strategy that only creates failure.
The sort of idea of containment of China isn't an invalid notion, they've got a really dysfunctional streak of hyper-nationalist imperialism going on in some quarters that does need containing. However they have to do that themselves, and have a higher need to do it than anyone else too. It's not something that's going to get accomplished through some ludicrous bankrupt notion of proxy warfare. One of the lessons that come from Iraq as well as other conflicts is just how pompous and silly that idea is. Containment through the use of force really only applies during armed conflict, outside of that I think a lot of containment stems from the strength of peace and success. By way of example, the maritime conflicts nationalist elements in China have been provoking have been contained by neighbor states perceptions of their own successes & the sentiment that they share a stake in keeping those. They don't perceive themselves as weak, or having nations built that are lacking in comparative value, so they are more invested with motivations to stand up to unreasonable international bullying.
Burma has a pile of internal ugly going on that none of it's neighbors like. The conflict there is growing worse, and it's more likely that things will get worse than they will get better. I'm not even so sure that the draft they just instituted won't end up training the army that will end up shooting them.
Rangers to the rescue in Myanmar - Photo Essay by Tony Cliff - Asia Times Online, Feb 18, 2011Rangers to the rescue in Myanmar
Founded 14 years ago by an ex-United States army officer and Karen refugees, the Free Burma Rangers provides a lifeline for displaced people in Myanmar's junta-designated "black zones" where soldiers have license to kill ethnic guerillas and civilians with impunity. Painstaking efforts to bring medical aid in and records of atrocities out make the Rangers a force to be reckoned with.
the world's a mess, it's in my keris
Farce follows tragedy in Myanmar - Bertil Lintner - Asia Times Online, Jan 25, 2011Farce follows tragedy in Myanmar
By Bertil Lintner
BANGKOK - If Karl Marx was right that history repeats itself first as tragedy and then as farce, Myanmar may have just entered the farcical phase of its long-running military rule. The first general election held in over 20 years last November and announcement that a new elected National Assembly will be convened on January 31 have not excited many ordinary Myanmar citizens, but have led to wild speculation among foreign pundits about what it all means for the country's political future.
$$$
Myanmar, North Korea in missile nexus - Bertil Lintner - Asia Times Online, Mar 2, 2011Myanmar, North Korea in missile nexus
By Bertil Lintner
BANGKOK - Military-run Myanmar's growing weapons ambitions, including new revelations that the reclusive regime is producing long-range Scud-type missiles with North Korean assistance, threaten to destabilize the region and make the Southeast Asian country a new global weapons proliferation hotspot.
$$$
Fog lifts on Myanmar-North Korea barter - Bertil Lintner - Asia Times Online, Mar 4, 2011Fog lifts on Myanmar-North Korea barter
By Bertil Lintner
BANGKOK - With the Middle East and North Africa in turmoil, North Korea risks losing some of its oldest and most trusted customers for military hardware. Pyongyang has over the years sold missiles and missile technology to Egypt, Libya, Yemen, the United Arab Emirates, Syria and Iran, representing an important source of export earnings for the reclusive regime. The growing uncertainty among those trade partners could explain why North Korea is now cementing ties with a client much closer to home: military-run Myanmar.
$$$
Bertil Lintner - WikipediaBertil Lintner is a Swedish journalist based in Thailand and the author of several works on Asia, including Blood Brothers: The Criminal Underworld of Asia and Great Leader, Dear Leader: Demystifying North Korea Under The Kim Clan.
Lintner is one of many blacklisted journalists who have not been allowed to enter Burma since 1985. Lintner has written numerous articles and books on Burma, and is considered to be one of the most knowledgeable foreign journalists on Burmese affairs. The State Peace and Development Council says his reports on Burma are groundless and based on wishful thinking.
...
State Peace and Development Council - Wikipedia (entry listed as 'outdated')The State Peace and Development Council [...] is the official name of the military regime of Burma (also known as Myanmar), which seized power in 1988.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-13747912A US warship intercepted and halted a North Korean vessel that was bound for Burma and was suspected of carrying missile technology, US media report.
A scrimmage in a Border Station
A canter down some dark defile
Two thousand pounds of education
Drops to a ten-rupee jezail
http://i.imgur.com/IPT1uLH.jpg
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks