8JUN67. USS Liberty

DarkWizard12 said:

You expect me to believe Israel would deliberately attack its only ally?

Click to expand...

Why not? It's what actually happened; no belief required.

RetiredUSN said:

I didn't say McGonagle plced his ship there voluntarily. The Admiral told him to go on station.

Click to expand...

I find this to be a little lopsided. A two sentence response to my post makes further communication on this topic unappealing.

Sadling said:

Why not? It's what actually happened; no belief required.

Click to expand...

To say that it was deliberately done, is to assume intent. To assume that the Israeli government would deem it within its interest to attack their only ally in the middle 1967 war, is an extraordinary claim, requires extraordinary evidence. However, to say that it was a mishap caused by ineffeciancy and ineffective leadership isn't such an extraordinary claim, and justify's the US's stance in negotiating this issue. Afterall, if the US were to take such a hard line on everyone that attacked us, we would be at war with every country that have ram into our ships and killed US sailors. We had quite a few of those 2 years ago, and good sailors died from it.

So, PeteEU, or anyone who endorses this claim, needs to prove why this is deliberate, as opposed to an accident.

You(or, peteEU, since I was originally talking to him) also needs to explain why, after nearly 60 years, is the issue is not settled after both sides of come an aggreement? Why, after 60 years of friendly relations between our 2 countries, should the US renew a grudge against the Jewish state, over this? Pete, what exactly does the US government have to gain by reopening long closed wounds?

DarkWizard12 said:

To say that it was deliberately done, is to assume intent.

Click to expand...

I assume nothing.

You must have missed this:


Israeli Terrorism - The USS Liberty And Executing Egyptian POWs

_______________________________

And here's some stuff that seems to corroborate that theory:

CNN- Mass grave may strain relations - Sept. 25, 1995

WRMEA | Telling the truth for more than 30 years - Did Israel's Armed Forces Commit One War Crime to Hide Another?

The foreign ministry is officially responsible of the POW Case in Egypt – Egyptian POWs

Sadling said:

I assume nothing.

You must have missed this:


Israeli Terrorism - The USS Liberty And Executing Egyptian POWs

_______________________________

And here's some stuff that seems to corroborate that theory:

CNN- Mass grave may strain relations - Sept. 25, 1995

WRMEA | Telling the truth for more than 30 years - Did Israel's Armed Forces Commit One War Crime to Hide Another?

The foreign ministry is officially responsible of the POW Case in Egypt – Egyptian POWs

Click to expand...

So you don't really know, you just have pure conjecture, from questionable sources. You do not pass examination. You should not have resort to conjecture, much of which is contradictory, to explain why Israel would intentionally attack a US ship.

But since you insist, lets ASSUME, for a moment, that Israel did deliberately attack it. Why then, would they cease fire? Even if it was just to cover it up, they could have just sunk it and be done with it. If this were their intention, as we agree to assume, why then would they stop and let the ship leave? Either their military is simply too stupid to be a threat, or it was never their intention to begin with. A tragic mistake. You and I both know that Israel killing americans would be political suicide for them, so they could not possibly have an interest in doing so.

and you have yet to answer, why should we open 50 year old closed wounds? Both the US government and Israel have taken care of this issue, and our countries have prospered together ever since. What interest is there to single out Israel over this?

DarkWizard12 said:

So you don't really know, you just pure conjecture, from questionable sources.

Click to expand...

Explain why those sources are questionable.

You believe that, since the ship wasn't sunk, it wasn't a deliberate attack on a U.S. vessel in international waters. And yet that's exactly what it was.

EMNofSeattle said:

Why? The Sailors on the vessel at the time were not present during closed doors during the investigations in Israel and the US, they probably weren't present when command decisions were made by the Israeli chain of command, etc. I mean there's a lot of important information going in to attack decisions those sailors wouldn't have access to, so while you're free to question whatever, I don't view this as a strong argument.

Click to expand...

I'm not only relying on them. From that link:

A former Navy attorney who helped lead the military investigation of the 1967 Israeli attack on the USS Liberty that killed 34 American servicemen says former President Lyndon Johnson and his defense secretary, Robert McNamara, ordered that the inquiry conclude the incident was an accident.
In a signed affidavit released at a Capitol Hill news conference, retired Capt. Ward Boston said Johnson and McNamara told those heading the Navy's inquiry to "conclude that the attack was a case of 'mistaken identity' despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary."

Boston was senior legal counsel to the Navy's original 1967 review of the attack. He said in the sworn statement that he stayed silent for years because he's a military man, and "when orders come ... I follow them."

He said he felt compelled to "share the truth" following the publication of a recent book, "The Liberty Incident," which concluded the attack was unintentional.

Click to expand...

Of course, everyone is entitled to an opinion, but I believe that person had access to whatever facts the military had discovered.

Anyway, this is a rather old debate, so I really don't want to rehash it.

Sadling said:

Explain why those sources are questionable.

Click to expand...

None of them are academic. They are just media articles, 2 of which aren't even mainstream, and the CNN article offers no real substance. There have been experts in military and foreign policy speak on this matter. I wouldn't think you would need a source that labels itself 'alt-news'.

You believe that, since the ship wasn't sunk, it wasn't a deliberate attack on a U.S. vessel in international waters. And yet that's exactly what it was.

Click to expand...

Then What interest would Israel have in ceasing fire, then? It's really quite simple. If you're going to attribute israel's interest in attacking the ship, you must assess and name Israel's interest in ceasing fire. I don't really think you've really examined this issue in length, as an expert would, if you can't answer such basic questions. You just say "that's what it is", without any critical thinking.

Sadling said:

Explain why those sources are questionable.

You believe that, since the ship wasn't sunk, it wasn't a deliberate attack on a U.S. vessel in international waters. And yet that's exactly what it was.

Click to expand...

Ships get sunk real quick in international waters during wartime.

DarkWizard12 said:

You just say "that's what it is", without any critical thinking.

Click to expand...

Really? It seems to me that if you had done some critical thinking of your own, you would have thought about the fact that those Israeli planes probably exhausted their arsenal. Have you even researched this issue enough to know how long the attack went on for and what was used against the USS Liberty?

Also, you've not answered the question of why you call the sources I've provided questionable. So far you've done nothing but a lot of handwaving. So why do you call those sources questionable; or more to the point, do you have anything that would show that the information they've offered is made up? That would go a long way toward you being taken seriously here.

And why are you still using the faulty reasoning that if the Liberty wasn't sunk, that proves that the Israelis didn't know it was a U.S. vessel in international waters? Perhaps you could explain that reasoning, as it really makes no sense at all.

Sadling said:

Really? It seems to me that if you had done some critical thinking of your own, you would have thought about the fact that those Israeli planes probably exhausted their arsenal. Have you even researched this issue enough to know how long the attack went on for and what was used against the USS Liberty?

Click to expand...

Enough arsenal to destroy 450 planes in the 1967 war, but in the middle of it, they ran out in attempt to sink an american ship? Interesting hypothesis, no, I do not believe it.

Also, you've not answered the question of why you call the sources I've provided questionable. So far you've done nothing but a lot of handwaving. So why do you call those sources questionable; or more to the point, do you have anything that would show that the information they've offered is made up? That would go a long way toward you being taken seriously here.

Click to expand...

Not one sourced proved the government's account wrong, or listed any special interest Israel would have in sinking an American ship. I'm the one asking questions about your position, and you're just not coming with any proof.

And why are you still using the faulty reasoning that if the Liberty wasn't sunk, that proves that the Israelis didn't know it was a U.S. vessel in international waters? Perhaps you could explain that reasoning, as it really makes no sense at all.

Click to expand...

That's not my reasoning. I'm sure there are MANY reasons why the Israelis refused to sink the ship, upon realizing that it was mistake, but you have yet to give me one that isn't pure conjecture. I want proof and evidence. If they had intended to attack a US vessel, why didn't they sink it? Answer me, and have some proof.

DarkWizard12 said:

Enough arsenal to destroy 450 planes in the 1967 war, but in the middle of it, they ran out in attempt to sink an american ship? Interesting hypothesis, no, I do not believe it.

Not one sourced proved the government's account wrong, or listed any special interest Israel would have in sinking an American ship. I'm the one asking questions about your position, and you're just not coming with any proof.

That's not my reasoning. I'm sure there are MANY reasons why the Israelis refused to sink the ship, upon realizing that it was mistake, but you have yet to give me one that isn't pure conjecture. I want proof and evidence. If they had intended to attack a US vessel, why didn't they sink it? Answer me, and have some proof.

Click to expand...

You didn't answer my questions. How long did the Israeli attack on the USS Liberty go on for? What weapons were used during the attack? When you finally answer those questions, you'll realize that though the deliberate Israeli attack on the Liberty failed to sink it, it certainly wasn't for lack of trying.

As for your assumption that no source has proved the government's account wrong, you should probably see this:

This is a testimony by Mr. Gabby Bron, a famous military historian who fought in 1967. He wrote it down in the famous Israeli newspaper Yediot Ahronot in year 1995, and it caused a big reaction, as it was from the rare times the Israelis, especially those who worked in the IDF during 1967 admit that the IDF did war crimes against the Egyptian and the Arab POW. It came after the publications made by Dr. Aryeh Yitzhaki who exposed the terrible massacre done by the “Shaked Battalion” which was led by current minister Ben Eliezer.

By Gabby Bron

It was the publication of the claims, made by Dr. Aryeh Yitzhaki”1”, about what really occurred during the Six Day War [June 1967] that caused me to recall what had happened and what I and my comrades had seen during my reserve service.On the third day of that war we saw Egyptian POWs being executed after a “court martial”. The explanation given to us was that those killed were Palestinian “Fedayin” fighters from the Gaza Strip who had disguised themselves as soldiers in order to escape from our forces”. I witnessed their executions with my own eyes in the morning of June 8, 1967 in the airport area in al-Arish, Sinai. This was where the headquarters of the brigade commanded by General Israel Tal, in which I had served, were located.

On that morning we heard that hundreds of Egyptian POWs were being held in the headquarters and we had time to go to look at them. About 150 POW’s were held in an open building serving as a cover for airplanes, surrounded on three sides by high sand-bag embankments. They were densely crowded and sitting on the ground with their hands on the back of their necks.

Adjoining the prison compound, guarded by military police, there were two men sitting at a table. They wore Israeli army uniforms and steel helmets with faces almost entirely covered by sun glasses and khaki-colored handkerchiefs. Every few minutes, the military police took one of the POWs from the prison compound and escorted him to the table. A short conversation, which we were not able to hear, was then conducted. Following it, the POW was escorted by two military policemen to a place behind the building.

I followed the procedure. The POW was escorted to a distance of about 100 meters from the building and given a spade. I watched the POW digging a big pit which took about 15 minutes. Then the policemen ordered him to throw out the spade. When he did so one of them pointed his Uzi gun at the POW inside the pit and shot two short bullet bursts, consisting maybe of three four bullets each. The POW fell dead.

After few minutes another POW was escorted to the same pit, forced to go into it and was also shot dead. A third POW was brought to the same place and also shot dead. Since the process was repeated a number of times, the grave was filled up. I witnessed about ten such executions.

We were standing there, near the place where the POW’s were being held and we watched silently. The fact that a number of soldiers were watching the spectacle was apparently unwelcome because after a time Colonel Eshel, the commander of the communication battalion of the brigade, appeared and shouted at the soldiers, ordering them to leave. When we didn’t show any willingness to obey, Colonel Eshel pulled out his personal revolver and threatened us with it. Raising his voice even more, he was able to get the soldiers to obey, including me.
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Now, do believe these people don't exist, or do you have reason to doubt their honesty--other than the fact that their experience detracts from your beliefs about the matter?

Sadling said:

You didn't answer my questions. How long did the Israeli attack on the USS Liberty go on for? What weapons were used during the attack? When you finally answer those questions, you'll realize that though the deliberate Israeli attack on the Liberty failed to sink it, it certainly wasn't for lack of trying.

Click to expand...

I'm the one questioning you, since you're the one proposing an account, while I am not. I'm asking you questions so that you can prove that this was an intentional attack on the US, and not an accidental one. Therefore, the proof is on you, not me, and you've not given any proof. Since you're the one asking me the questions, I assume that you already know the answers. So, I, as the one examining YOUR position, will ask, WHEN did the attack stop, and why, according to your position, did the attack stop? Did they simply want to kill a few Americans for target practice, and then go home? Or do you have another hypothesis?

As for your assumption that no source has proved the government's account wrong, you should probably see this:

This is a testimony by Mr. Gabby Bron, a famous military historian who fought in 1967. He wrote it down in the famous Israeli newspaper Yediot Ahronot in year 1995, and it caused a big reaction, as it was from the rare times the Israelis, especially those who worked in the IDF during 1967 admit that the IDF did war crimes against the Egyptian and the Arab POW. It came after the publications made by Dr. Aryeh Yitzhaki who exposed the terrible massacre done by the “Shaked Battalion” which was led by current minister Ben Eliezer.

By Gabby Bron

<snip>

Now, do believe these people don't exist, or do you have reason to doubt their honesty--other than the fact that their experience detracts from your beliefs about the matter?

Click to expand...

I'm sure that's really nice, but he does not represent either the Israeli, nor the American, investigators on this matter(the matter being the USS liberty attack). therefore, his word is nothing, and irrelevent on this issue. Lets get back to the topic at hand.

DarkWizard12 said:

I'm the one questioning you, since you're the one proposing an account, while I am not. I'm asking you questions so that you can prove that this was an intentional attack on the US, and not an accidental one. Therefore, the proof is on you, not me, and you've not given any proof. Since you're the one asking me the questions, I assume that you already know the answers. So, I, as the one examining YOUR position, will ask, WHEN did the attack stop, and why, according to your position, did the attack stop? Did they simply want to kill a few Americans for target practice, and then go home? Or do you have another hypothesis?



I'm sure that's really nice, but he does not represent either the Israeli, nor the American, investigators on this matter(the matter being the USS liberty attack). therefore, his word is nothing, and irrelevent on this issue. Lets get back to the topic at hand.

Click to expand...

Uh, no. You need to show why Gabby Bron can't be trusted to tell the truth. You've failed to do so.


Now, as far as the fact that it was a deliberate attack, you've offered no rebuttal to that.

But I have some more to offer you:

Never before in the history of the United States Navy has a Navy Board of Inquiry ignored the testimony of American military eyewitnesses and taken, on faith, the word of their attackers.--Captain Richard F. Kiepfer, Medical Corps, US Navy (retired), USS Liberty Survivor.

"The evidence was clear. Both Admiral Kidd and I believed with certainty that this attack...was a deliberate effort to sink an American ship and murder its entire crew.... It was our shared belief. . .that the attack. . .could not possibly have been an accident.... I am certain that the Israeli pilots [and] their superiors. . .were well aware that the ship was American."-- Captain Ward Boston, JAGC, US Navy (retired), senior legal counsel to the US Navy Court of Inquiry.

"It appears to me that it was not a pure case of mistaken identity."
-- Captain William L. McGonagle, Commanding Officer, USS Liberty, speaking at Arlington National Cemetery, June 8, 1997.

Ralph Hoppe, Colonel, US Army, retired, reports that dozens of intelligence reports soon after the attack described the attack as deliberate including a "consensus report" which summarized the collective view of the US intelligence community. Soon orders came from Washington to collect and destroy all such reports. Nothing more in official channels described the attack as deliberate.--Aerotech News and Review, March 2, 2001, by John Borne, PhD, and conversations with James Ennes.

CONTINUED . . .

. . . U.S. Secratary of State Dean Rusk.

CIA Director Richard Helms.

CIA Deputy Director Admiral Rufus Taylor.

Former NSA Director retired Army Lieutenant General William Odom.

Former NSA/CIA Director Admiral Bobby Inman.

Chief of Naval Operations and later Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Thomas Moorer.

Deputy CIA director, as quoted by CIA director Admiral Rufus Taylor.

Of four former NSA/CIA seniors with inside knowledge, none was aware of any agency official who dissented from the position that the attack was deliberate--David Walsh, writing in Naval Institute Proceedings.

"Inconceivable that it was an accident; 3 strafing passes, 3 torpedo boats. Set forth facts. Punish Israelis responsible"--Clark Clifford, Secretary of Defense under Lyndon Johnson, in Minutes of NSC Special Committee Meeting, 9 June 1967.

"The attack was clearly deliberate."--General Marshall Carter, former director, National Security Agency, in a telephone interview with James Ennes.

The attack was deliberate"--Lucius Battle, former presidential advisor, as keynote speaker for 1982 USS Liberty reunion.

"I can tell you for an absolute certainty (from intercepted communications) that they knew they were attacking an American ship."--Oliver Kirby, former deputy director for operations/production, National Security Agency. Kirby participated in NSA's investigation of the attack and reviewed translations of intercepted communications between pilots and their headquarters which he reports show conclusively that they knew their target was an American ship. Kirby is considered the "Godfather" of the USS Liberty and USS Pueblo intercept programs. (Telephone interviews with James Ennes and David Walsh for Friendless Fire, Proceedings, June 2003).

On the strength of intercept transcripts of pilots' conversations during the attack, the question of the attack's deliberateness "just wasn't a disputed issue" within the agency.--Lieutenant General William E. Odom, former director, National Security Agency, interview with David Walsh on March 3, 2003, reported in Naval Institute Proceedings, June, 2003.

USS Liberty Conspiracy Theorists, unmasked
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________



Now why don't you get busy and tell me the problem you have with these people?

DarkWizard12 said:

To say that it was deliberately done, is to assume intent. To assume that the Israeli government would deem it within its interest to attack their only ally in the middle 1967 war, is an extraordinary claim, requires extraordinary evidence. However, to say that it was a mishap caused by ineffeciancy and ineffective leadership isn't such an extraordinary claim, and justify's the US's stance in negotiating this issue. Afterall, if the US were to take such a hard line on everyone that attacked us, we would be at war with every country that have ram into our ships and killed US sailors. We had quite a few of those 2 years ago, and good sailors died from it.

So, PeteEU, or anyone who endorses this claim, needs to prove why this is deliberate, as opposed to an accident.

You(or, peteEU, since I was originally talking to him) also needs to explain why, after nearly 60 years, is the issue is not settled after both sides of come an agreement? Why, after 60 years of friendly relations between our 2 countries, should the US renew a grudge against the Jewish state, over this? Pete, what exactly does the US government have to gain by reopening long closed wounds?

Click to expand...

I agree 100%. These posters always seek to stir the pot. It seems that the Jews are the only group in the world not allowed to have their own state. Funny how this seems to work.

JBG said:

I agree 100%. These posters always seek to stir the pot. It seems that the Jews are the only group in the world not allowed to have their own state.

Click to expand...

Check out the title of the thread. It's about the Israel's deliberate attack on the USS Liberty. But somehow you've interpreted proof to that effect as a declaration that Jews are not allowed to have their own state. Hysterical much?

Sadling said:

Check out the title of the thread. It's about the Israel's deliberate attack on the USS Liberty. But somehow you've interpreted proof to that effect as a declaration that Jews are not allowed to have their own state. Hysterical much?

Click to expand...

Alleged deliberate attack.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vyiP1tUOxig

I recently watched this BBC documentary on this subject. Call me lazy but I didn't go through all 25 pages of this thread to see if it had already been linked. Apologies if it has

zyzygy said:

Alleged deliberate attack.

Click to expand...

I'm afraid your argument is with these guys:

Never before in the history of the United States Navy has a Navy Board of Inquiry ignored the testimony of American military eyewitnesses and taken, on faith, the word of their attackers.--Captain Richard F. Kiepfer, Medical Corps, US Navy (retired), USS Liberty Survivor.

"The evidence was clear. Both Admiral Kidd and I believed with certainty that this attack...was a deliberate effort to sink an American ship and murder its entire crew.... It was our shared belief. . .that the attack. . .could not possibly have been an accident.... I am certain that the Israeli pilots [and] their superiors. . .were well aware that the ship was American."-- Captain Ward Boston, JAGC, US Navy (retired), senior legal counsel to the US Navy Court of Inquiry.

"It appears to me that it was not a pure case of mistaken identity."
-- Captain William L. McGonagle, Commanding Officer, USS Liberty, speaking at Arlington National Cemetery, June 8, 1997.

Ralph Hoppe, Colonel, US Army, retired, reports that dozens of intelligence reports soon after the attack described the attack as deliberate including a "consensus report" which summarized the collective view of the US intelligence community. Soon orders came from Washington to collect and destroy all such reports. Nothing more in official channels described the attack as deliberate.--Aerotech News and Review, March 2, 2001, by John Borne, PhD, and conversations with James Ennes.

U.S. Secratary of State Dean Rusk.

CIA Director Richard Helms.

CIA Deputy Director Admiral Rufus Taylor.

Former NSA Director retired Army Lieutenant General William Odom.

Former NSA/CIA Director Admiral Bobby Inman.

Chief of Naval Operations and later Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Thomas Moorer.

Deputy CIA director, as quoted by CIA director Admiral Rufus Taylor.

Of four former NSA/CIA seniors with inside knowledge, none was aware of any agency official who dissented from the position that the attack was deliberate--David Walsh, writing in Naval Institute Proceedings.

"Inconceivable that it was an accident; 3 strafing passes, 3 torpedo boats. Set forth facts. Punish Israelis responsible"--Clark Clifford, Secretary of Defense under Lyndon Johnson, in Minutes of NSC Special Committee Meeting, 9 June 1967.

"The attack was clearly deliberate."--General Marshall Carter, former director, National Security Agency, in a telephone interview with James Ennes.

The attack was deliberate"--Lucius Battle, former presidential advisor, as keynote speaker for 1982 USS Liberty reunion.

"I can tell you for an absolute certainty (from intercepted communications) that they knew they were attacking an American ship."--Oliver Kirby, former deputy director for operations/production, National Security Agency. Kirby participated in NSA's investigation of the attack and reviewed translations of intercepted communications between pilots and their headquarters which he reports show conclusively that they knew their target was an American ship. Kirby is considered the "Godfather" of the USS Liberty and USS Pueblo intercept programs. (Telephone interviews with James Ennes and David Walsh for Friendless Fire, Proceedings, June 2003).

On the strength of intercept transcripts of pilots' conversations during the attack, the question of the attack's deliberateness "just wasn't a disputed issue" within the agency.--Lieutenant General William E. Odom, former director, National Security Agency, interview with David Walsh on March 3, 2003, reported in Naval Institute Proceedings, June, 2003.
__________________________________________________________________

You should probably take it up with them.

Sadling said:

I'm afraid your argument is with these guys:

Never before in the history of the United States Navy has a Navy Board of Inquiry ignored the testimony of American military eyewitnesses and taken, on faith, the word of their attackers.--Captain Richard F. Kiepfer, Medical Corps, US Navy (retired), USS Liberty Survivor.

Click to expand...

It seems like everyone "ignores" this craziness.

RetiredUSN said:

You don't agree and that is fine with me, but the American government placed that crew in peril, not the Israeli's. I still thinks it's accidental, but from what I have learned since...............after?

Israel would have had every ****ing right to attack this ship, especially after finding out that it was communicating with the Arabs.

Click to expand...

Pleased to meet you, thanks for your Service.
Yeah, LBJ or someone put that crew and ship in harm's way. The normal Navy Command channels don't seem to have been fully briefed, the special comms in place were compartmented and the traffic routed funny...the crew was unaware of the specifics of the mission...America assured Israel no vessels of ours would be in those waters.
The initial attack was an 'honest' mistake, the Israeli planes were reporting back to their Command who were calling US and we denied the Liberty was ours, at least at first. It May be that because her mission was so black, that normal means of assurance/diplomacy/deconfliction between the Israelis and us were insufficient to meet this emergency.
I 'think', don't have the evidence in front of me, that Israel asked us at least twice during the attack if she was ours, we denied her. I think this is why LBJ aborted the alpha strike to aid her, he knew the horrific mess he or someone very close to him set up.

The pilots called, we denied her and the attack continued. But we could have stopped it by simply acknowledging her.

If you look at the Israeli political and military leadership and decision-making at those moments, it is simply not possible to imagine they knowingly staged an unprovoked attack on her knowing she was ours.

The crew simply had no clue what happened, they only know they were hit. The Navy couldn't figure out exactly what because LBJ or someone very close to him was running a very black op. So...accept Israel's apology and war is hell.

JBG said:

It seems like everyone "ignores" this craziness.

Click to expand...

Well, only after they've been shown to be wrong.

Stymie_X said:

If you look at the Israeli political and military leadership and decision-making at those moments, it is simply not possible to imagine they knowingly staged an unprovoked attack on her knowing she was ours.

Click to expand...

Then what's your answer to everything that points to the fact that the Israelis knew that they were attacking a U.S. vessel in international waters?

Exactly!