|
|
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 23,453
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 23,453 |
I saw a two page post and I knew it was you  Well, at least you have learned something about Texas. ...and that History is complicated.... At least one of us has shown the ability to learn, and to have a clue.
America needs to understand that our troops are not 'disposable'. Each represents a family; Fathers, Mothers, Sons, Daughters, Cousins, Uncles, Aunts... Our Citizens are our most valuable treasure; we waste far too many.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 37,875
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
OP
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 37,875 |
I'd say Birdwatcher is pretty consistent. The problem is he's usually confused and ignorant. ??? So those, like Smithwick, who fought for Texas Independence AND supported the Union, were "confused and ignorant"? Wait, it gets worse, he thought slavery was the primary cause of secession also Durn it, that the dynamic and entirely remarkable Ranger Captain RIP Ford's collected memoirs ain't on line, he thought the same thing too, tho' he came down on the side of secession, calling notions of the equal creation of men an 'egregious fallacy'. Birdwatcher
"...if the gentlemen of Virginia shall send us a dozen of their sons, we would take great care in their education, instruct them in all we know, and make men of them." Canasatego 1744
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 18,243
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 18,243 |
I lost interest when the usual bickering started so I haven't read the whole thread but my gut reaction is that considering the UN opens every session with a condemnation of the US for bigotry, racism, human rights violations, etc, etc, etc,,,, all the while abusing our laws with all manors of bad behavior by third world "diplomats" ,,, I don't want their f-in fingerprint on anything US related.
Give em half a chance and the f-ers will have rainbow flags flying over the Alamo.
Far as I'm concerned the UN needs to get the hell out, and stay out, of the US.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 23,453
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 23,453 |
Birdwatcher doesn't, or won't... or possibly can't... get it. Are you afraid that people may someday not realize what the Alamo was all about? Oh, is it now? So, the Second Texas Revolution is a complex issue and the Mexicans (trying to preserve their Union) were wrong there whilst fighting against slave owning secessionists? Hmmm... The Second Texas Revolution started when, in 1835 the party of Santa Anna discarded the Constitution of 1824, revolts immediately broke out all over Mexico, Texas being one. If you were for Santa Anna and a dictatorial government you were a Centralista, for the Constitution you were a Federalista. Santa Ana, abrogating the Mexican Constitution was a dictator, whilst others abrogating other Constitutions were "liberators" and "defenders of the Union"? Hmmm... Naturally, given their American roots, most naturalized Mexican citizens in Texas were Federalistas. Most of the Tejanos, given the dreadful massacres that had been visited upon them the last time a bunch of Americans showed up in San Antonio talking rebellion twenty-three years earlier, remained neutral. A few took the Federal/Texian side, others took the Centralist side. The only immigrant group supporting the Centralist side in any numbers were some of the Irish around Goliad, primarily on the basis of religion (they were Catholics). Yet, Texas was a slave state populated by a very large contingent of Virginia, Tennessee, and Kentucky stock (all slave states); the same people that would themselves secede for self-determination just a few years later. Hmmm... The first shots in Texas were fired in October of '35 when Santa Anna's brother-in-law one General Cos, was dispatched to San Antonio to fortify the Alamo compound (which had, for the previous fifty years, been used as a base and warehouse for military endeavors). The occasion was an attempt to retrieve a government cannon on loan to the now-Federalist settlers at Gonzales. So, shots were fired by secessionists and federales over the use of a military storage site... Hmmm.... Two months later in December of '35, these same Texians, mostly Mexican citizens, under Jim Bowie and Stephen F. Austin, forcibly ejected General Cos from San Antonio after a gruelling five-day battle. Cos was allowed to go back to Mexico proper bearing his colors and some arms. At that point the Texians were fighting under the 1824 Mexican flag for the restoration of the Constitution, although an Independence convention would soon be called up at Washington on the Brazos. So, the secessionists kicked the Federals out and raised their own, secessionist flag over the fort.... Hmmmm.... What made Texas different than the other Mexican states was the close proximity to the United States. Thousands of mostly young, footloose Americans, primarily from the South, sensing opportunity, poured in to fight. This was not an unmixed blessing; Susannah Dickinson, the famed white woman at the Alamo, was brought there for her own safety by her husband after she had been physically attacked by a party of Americans looting her home at Gonzales. You mean, those slavers and those that supported slavery, right? A practice that was legal and Constitutional in the United States under the U.S. Federal government, right? Hmmm... Most Texians, ie. prior White residents of Texas who were Mexican citizens, took no part in the actual fighting. Cowardice likely had little to do with it, unlike the Americans pouring in they did have property to protect, and the events after Santa Anna arrived proceeded with bewildering speed. This whole thing was over in just two months. So, you had citizens/residents of Texas (secessionist Texas) that had property to protect and chose not to fight at all; thus, they couldn't be associated with the Federales or the secessionists? Hmmm... In January of '36, less than two months before the arrival of Santa Anna, a party of some 200 American adventurers had stripped the Alamo compound of most of its military supplies and, flying the 1824 Mexican flag, set out to invade Mexico, ostensibly on the Federalist side. "American adventurers"? Isn't that a cute term for secessionists, especially those that supported slavery? Hmmm... When Santa Anna arrived the following month, he was coming from his brutal suppression of the Federalist uprising in Zacatecas. Upon arrival here, he found the Alamo mostly to be full of foreign citizens, primarily Americans, most of whom like Davy Crockett had only just got here and who had taken up arms against the government of Mexico. He called them all criminals and pirates and refused to make any deals with them. So, the man fighting to preserve his Union by crushing secessionists (who were seeking self-determination and self-governance - oh, and where slavery was legal) was guilty of brutal suppression of the uprising and declared all the secessionists to be criminals and pirates and instead of negotiating to allow them their right of self-determination and self-governance, he met them with military force? Hmmm... At that time the motives of the Alamo defenders were threefold. A few, mostly those who had been here for some time, were citizens, and held their property here under Mexican law, were fighting for the restoration of the 1824 constitution.
Most, including almost all of the recently arrived Americans, were probably fighting to separate Texas as an independent nation from Mexico, although independence had not yet been declared before the siege began.
A small but significant faction, also mostly Americans, were fighting to separate both Texas and the Mexican State of Coahuila from Mexico. Indeed it was the two-star "Coahuila y Texas" Mexican flag that most likely flew over the Alamo during the siege, most likely because it was the only flag at hand (although famously captured at the Alamo by Santa Anna who used it as evidence of piracy, there is no evidence that the banner of the New Orleans Greys privately-financed militia company was actually flown over the Alamo at any time during the battle). So, the secessionists weren't unified in their goals to drive out the Federales, and yet whilst slavery was legal there, it wasn't the main issue even though the Federales did not want to allow it? Hmmm... Few entering the Alamo intended or expected to necessarily die there. This was one of those hindsight deals where the number and organization of the forces brung in by Santa Anna were a surprise to everyone. Also, most everyone everywhere, inside and outside the Alamo, expected sufficient reinforcements to arrive to save the day.
As late as March 5th, the day before the fall, the journal of a Mexican officer present indicates that a query was quietly sent out with a local Tejana married to an American defender to the effect that would Santa Anna permit the Alamo defenders to withdraw, bearing colors and arms, as General Cos had been allowed to do three months earlier.
Santa Anna as always refused anything but unconditional surrender, a thing the defenders would not accept. And they were right in their decision: Later that same month more than three hundred recently-arrived American citizens stationed at Goliad DID surrender, out of concern for the welfare of their wounded. Almost all were subsequently executed without trial on grounds of piracy at Goliad. The few that escaped that fate mostly did so as a result of the intervention of local Tejanos on their behalf.
Ultimately the Alamo came down to this; a refusal to submit to a lone dictator in the person of Santa Anna, beyond that, it gets complicated. So, the Federales only offered to accept unconditional surrender in order to preserve the Union and the secessionists would not accept living under that yoke and being denied their rights of self-determination and self-governance? Hmmm... THAT is the story I believe most of us regulars want to be told, as close to the truth as possible.
Birdwatcher Yes, I can see that. You want that version of history to be told, as you believe it to be the truth - and have factual evidence to back it up (at least to whatever degree you choose to accept), about such a short lived, yet complicated issue as Texas secession from Mexico; one involving merely thousands of people on either side in just one Mexican state and lasting just a few months. It certainly seems far more complicated than any such similar situation involving millions of people across more than a dozen states and lasting for more than four years. Yet, the Mexican Federales did not permit slavery, were fighting to preserve their Union against secessionists who did support slavery, and I'm sure they firmly believed that they (the Federales) were doing it for the children and future children of the Mexican Union. I can see how that makes sense. Can you?
America needs to understand that our troops are not 'disposable'. Each represents a family; Fathers, Mothers, Sons, Daughters, Cousins, Uncles, Aunts... Our Citizens are our most valuable treasure; we waste far too many.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 37,875
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
OP
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 37,875 |
*SIGH*... I was hoing to avoid adressing these obvious arguments point by point...
o, the Second Texas Revolution is a complex issue and the Mexicans (trying to preserve their Union) were wrong there whilst fighting against slave owning secessionists?
It is important to remember that the average Mexican soldier at the Alamo, though most often pressed into service, also believed correctly that he was fighting to preserve the integrity of his country.
Does this make the Alamo defenders wrong? In the eyes of your average Mexican citizen I believe it does (tho' they likewise visit the Alamo in droves). They also believe the fifty year career of Santa Anna represented a catastrophe for Mexico.
"Wrong or right" is debatable depending on which side you were on, just as in our own war.
Santa Ana, abrogating the Mexican Constitution was a dictator, whilst others abrogating other Constitutions were "liberators" and "defenders of the Union"?
I have never said that Lincoln's motive was "liberation", I HAVE said repeatedly that he stated up front he was out to preserve the Union, as were the majority of those brave men who fought and died in that cause.
But yes, as stated above, those that fell in Santa Anna's service were fighting to preserve Mexico as they knew it. At that point in time Santa Anna pretty much WAS Mexico, or, like as is true of slavery and the Southern cause, could not be disentangled from it.
Yet, Texas was a slave state populated by a very large contingent of Virginia, Tennessee, and Kentucky stock (all slave states); the same people that would themselves secede for self-determination just a few years later.
...who fought and died in concert with and alongside a very large contingent of people who were NOT from places where slavery was legal.
Unlike the United States, Texas had no prior seventy-year history in which the slavery issue was so divisive and so clearly stated as a primary cause of a secession aimed at dividing Texas.
The Second Texas Revolution initially ignited over the suspension of a Constitution that did not allow slavery, but slavery was NOT an issue. De-facto rule by Santa Anna was.
The Constitution of the Republic of Texas DID allow slavery, but that constitution was not yet a reality until less that two months before the war was over (AFTER the commencement of the siege at the Alamo) nor did anyone scarcely have time to read it while the war was going on, much less debate it. In fact the delegates that drew it up were scarcely if at all even elected to their position.
Does this mean that the majority of new Texians were against slavery? No of course not, not enough to fight over it anyhow, but then no one was calling for a division of Texas over this issue. And most of those fighting to preserve our own Union weren't fighting against slavery per se either.
Birdwatcher
"...if the gentlemen of Virginia shall send us a dozen of their sons, we would take great care in their education, instruct them in all we know, and make men of them." Canasatego 1744
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 23,453
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 23,453 |
You cannot, or will not, even see that you've contradicted your own argument about the American Civil War with your argument about the Texas Secession from Mexico.
America needs to understand that our troops are not 'disposable'. Each represents a family; Fathers, Mothers, Sons, Daughters, Cousins, Uncles, Aunts... Our Citizens are our most valuable treasure; we waste far too many.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 26,524
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 26,524 |
*SIGH*... I was hoing to avoid adressing these obvious arguments point by point...
Pal, you've manage to avoid a lot of things the last couple of days.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 54,284
Campfire Kahuna
|
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 54,284 |
*SIGH*... I was hoing to avoid adressing these obvious arguments point by point...
Pal, you've manage to avoid a lot of things the last couple of days. No, its been a lot longer than a couple of days. I don't have anybody on Ignore formally, but Birdie is one that I've learned to skip over a lot. He's in this endless loop.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 27,091
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 27,091 |
If Texas wanted the Alamo to remain together then they should have kept control in Texas. Anytime the feds take control they will destroy what ever they control. The UN is even faster at destroying the things they control.
Last edited by mtnsnake; 07/07/15.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 42,605
Campfire 'Bwana
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 42,605 |
I bought it, based on your recommendation and I too, highly recommend it!
A good principle to guide me through life: “This is all I have come to expect, standard lackluster performance. Trust nothing, believe no one and realize it will only get worse…”
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 37,875
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
OP
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 37,875 |
You cannot, or will not, even see that you've contradicted your own argument about the American Civil War with your argument about the Texas Secession from Mexico. You'd have a point, if I had said that the Texas Revolutionaries were in the right. I would have fought to preserve the Union in '61. Texas? I most identify with Deaf Smith, along with Santa Anna one of the better things about the otherwise dismal "Texas Rising". Smith, originally from New York via Mississippi (??) was in his fifties and had been in Texas for some time before the war broke out. A true Frontiersman, he is known to have travelled widely in Texas. A stockman by avocation, he went into business driving cattle between San Antonio and Louisiana in partnership with the Ruiz family living near Mission San Jose, then south of town. Ruiz's daughter, in her twenties at the time, was widowed with three daughters when her husband was killed in a fall from a horse. She married the significantly older Deaf Smith some time later, all the indications being it was a love match and happy marriage. A first marriage for Smith. She bore him four children. One of the step-daughters from her first marriage married a free Black by the name of Hendrick Arnold. When war came, like his in-laws Smith wished only to stay out of it. When General Cos arrived in '35, Smith and Arnold were 100 miles away out in the Hill Country, hunting buffalo. Upon his return Smith was attacked and beaten by Mexican lancers, nearly losing his life, whereupon he threw in his lot with the Texians. I'm glad the Texians won, I'm glad Texas is American, actually I wouldn't attempt to defend thousands of Americans pouring in to forcibly wrest Texas away from Mexico by force. Heck, I dunno I could even defend Mexico's claim to Texas in the first place. It all just happened is all. Birdwatcher
"...if the gentlemen of Virginia shall send us a dozen of their sons, we would take great care in their education, instruct them in all we know, and make men of them." Canasatego 1744
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 37,875
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
OP
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 37,875 |
After all, the only reason people have ever been opposed to central authority was because they were for slavery. Where did I say that? However both sides in 1860 said that slavery was the rock upon which the Union foundered. Anyways, slavery in Texas.... https://tshaonline.org/handbook/online/articles/yps01I was wrong on one stat, a bit less than one in six were slaves in 1836, half of what I had said. Nobody knows how many people were in the Alamo when it fell, estimates run in excess of 200, no definite stat on how many slaves were there either, but it would seem less than ten out of this number. Santa Anna did indeed promise freedom to slaves, and at the Alamo the Black folks present were spared. But as for actual slave revolts, the facts were somewhat different.... https://tshaonline.org/handbook/online/articles/jcs02The first major insurrection episode in Texas occurred in 1835–36. Apprehensive Texas leaders, facing the impending arrival of the forces of Antonio López de Santa Anna, charged their enemies with fomenting a black rebellion in the summer of 1835. The greatest uncertainty centered on slaves along the Brazos who in October reportedly "made an attempt to rise" as part of an elaborate scheme to seize the land. Though whites retaliated by rounding up, whipping, and hanging bondsmen, fears of insurrection continued as Texas military fortunes waned....
Testimonials regarding the slaves' intention of revolting in 1835 came from fairly reliable military sources. Otherwise, the evidence suggests that the incidents grew out of emotional tensions and mob actions. Vigilantes often obtained "confessions" through intimidation.
...
That no organized revolutionaries emerged from the ranks of Texas slaves to shed their masters' blood obviously provided whites little comfort, for the slaveowners still judged their bondsmen capable of rebellion....
However, other characteristics which inspired insurrection fleetingly appeared in Texas, no doubt contributing to white uneasiness. Rebellions flourished during times of international conflict, especially when authorities armed slaves for military purposes. This situation very nearly occurred in the Texas Revolution and produced a potential uprising, only to vanish with the speedy end of the war.And Holy Shizizzle! A first-class read on Black folks present in and around the Alamo in 1836.... http://www.tamu.edu/faculty/ccbn/dewitt/adp/history/1836/blacks/jackson.htmlNote that all three link come courtesy of UT and Texas A&M History Departments  Thank you for providing the impetus for me to read up on this issue. Birdwatcher
"...if the gentlemen of Virginia shall send us a dozen of their sons, we would take great care in their education, instruct them in all we know, and make men of them." Canasatego 1744
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 37,875
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
OP
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 37,875 |
Most of us thought it was a ludicrous plot device in "Texas Rising" to have Santa Anna and Houston share the same whore....
---but heck, turns out they shared the same chef. No mention of sex with Ben however, perhaps that woulda been Lincoln if'n he was there.....
Ben, the black man escorting Susannah and her daughter, had watched the final moments of the Alamo battle from a house in San Antonio. He was in the town working as a cook for Gen. Santa Anna and Colonel Juan Nepomuceno Almonte.
A free person, who worked as a steward on several ships sailing out of the east coast of the U.S., Ben met Colonel Almonte in New York. Impressed with Ben, Col. Almonte hired him as a cook. Almonte returned to Mexico and Ben accompanied him to Vera Cruz. When Santa Anna started his 1836 campaign to suppress the Texas Revolution, he assigned Col. Almonte to his staff. Almonte took Ben along.
On the evening of March 5, General Santa Anna ordered Ben to keep coffee and other refreshments ready all night. At 11 or 12 o'clock, Santa Anna and Almonte left, returning at 2 or 3 in the morning with other staff officers. At 4 am, they left again; shortly afterwards, Ben heard the sounds of cannon and musket fire.
Looking from the window of the house, the flashes from the guns illuminated the walls of the Alamo, enabling him to see the Mexican assaulting columns. The firing ended before daylight; a little later, Santa Anna and his staff returned. Ben remembered a staff member "remarking that the victory had cost more than it was worth and that many such would ruin them."
Ben had once seen David Crockett in Washington, DC. Therefore, at daylight, the Mexicans took him to the fort to identify Crockett's body.3A few days after the battle, Santa Anna ordered Ben to escort Susannah Dickinson and her daughter to the Texian lines. After Ben fulfilled his mission, General Sam Houston hired him to serve as his cook. After the battle of San Jacinto, Ben fades from historical record.
Birdwatcher
"...if the gentlemen of Virginia shall send us a dozen of their sons, we would take great care in their education, instruct them in all we know, and make men of them." Canasatego 1744
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 20,683
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 20,683 |
I'm pretty certain when we sing our anthem and mention the land of the free, the original intent didn't mean cell phones, food stamps and birth control.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 21,952
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 21,952 |
Acccording to Birdy: ![[Linked Image]](https://mauryk2.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/confederate-flag-1-1024x768.jpg) = all about slavery ![[Linked Image]](http://www.eco-spheres.com/auctionpix/Band/Flag_Texas.jpg) = "It is important to remember that the average Mexican soldier at the Alamo, though most often pressed into service, also believed correctly that he was fighting to preserve the integrity of his country." Sweet Lord if the chickens haven't come home.... For posterity, or for those who can read books only to draw stick figures with tiddies and bushes in the pages... ![[Linked Image]](http://hickoryinternationalcouncil.com/wp-content/gallery/pangea-mun-2010/un-flag.jpg)
Last edited by HawkI; 07/07/15.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 37,875
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
OP
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 37,875 |
Sweet Lord indeed, here we go again.... *SIGH*
Slavery was the primary cause of the War Between the States, in these people's own words, as also evidenced in the endless series of political gyrations and compromises designed to specifically compromise between Free and Slave portions of this nation over the preceding half century.
Slavery was not the primary cause of the Second Texas Revolution, the abolishment of the Constitution of 1824 was, Texas being but one of the Mexican States that rebelled. Slavery was already existing in Texas, with no effective countermeasures employed to threaten it. Nor was there yet existing in Texas at the time of revolution an all-powerful slave-owning Planter class dictating policy, as was true in the South proper.
Nowhere did I say the average Southerner was not fighting for his country as he perceived it; that collection of self-identified Slave States making up the Confederacy.
Needless to say, personal popularity has never been a major concern of mine <shrug>
I figure the only reason I rile you guys up so much is on account of what I say is true. Can't help that.
Birdwatcher
"...if the gentlemen of Virginia shall send us a dozen of their sons, we would take great care in their education, instruct them in all we know, and make men of them." Canasatego 1744
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 86,168
Campfire Oracle
|
Campfire Oracle
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 86,168 |
I'm just trying to figure how and when you became a liberal? 
If you take the time it takes, it takes less time.
--Pat Parelli
American by birth; Alaskan by choice.
--ironbender
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 37,875
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
OP
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 37,875 |
Perhaps if something is repeated over and over again by enough people it becomes true?
"...if the gentlemen of Virginia shall send us a dozen of their sons, we would take great care in their education, instruct them in all we know, and make men of them." Canasatego 1744
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 21,952
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 21,952 |
Sweet Lord indeed, here we go again.... *SIGH*
Slavery was the primary cause of the War Between the States, in these people's own words"
"Nowhere did I say the average Southerner was not fighting for his country as he perceived it; that collection of self-identified Slave States making up the Confederacy.
Birdwatcher You're getting warm....don't let your "truth" get in the way.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 37,875
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
OP
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 37,875 |
You're getting warm....don't let your "truth" get in the way. Now's the moment. State some of relevance here, truth I mean.
"...if the gentlemen of Virginia shall send us a dozen of their sons, we would take great care in their education, instruct them in all we know, and make men of them." Canasatego 1744
|
|
|
|
|
556 members (1beaver_shooter, 10gaugemag, 1Akshooter, 17CalFan, 007FJ, 1337Fungi, 55 invisible),
2,483
guests, and
1,161
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,191,327
Posts18,468,536
Members73,928
| |
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|
