About Me

Name: Catmman
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Already? - Tax Payment stripped from Amnesty

At the urging of...drum roll...President Bush.  This is just a nightmare we can't awake from.  Posted from Hot Air:

We can put a man on the moon and win two world wars and everythingelse, including figuring the taxes for over 100 million legal citizens,  but figuring the back taxes on illegals would be "too challenging"? 

Hey, look on the “bright side” — it would have been stripped anyway once illegals started complaining about it.

A provision requiring payment of back taxes had been in the initial version of a bill proposed by Senator Edward M. Kennedy, the Massachusetts Democrat. But the administration called for the provision to be removed due to concern that it would be too difficult to figure out which illegal immigrants owed back taxes…

Laura Capps, a spokeswoman for Kennedy, said a provision for requiring back taxes was in Kennedy’s original bill and that [DHS Secretary Michael] Chertoff called for it to be removed. “Chertoff thought it would be too challenging to accurately determine the amount of an applicant’s back taxes,” she said…

Pete Sepp, spokesman for the National Taxpayers Union, which says it has 362,000 members, was stunned that the provision was removed. While saying it would be difficult to come up with a precise estimate of the amount of back taxes owed by undocumented residents, he said it would be in the tens of billions of dollars, with a similar amount in fines for failure to pay the taxes.

Too challenging, you see. In contrast to, say, the bureaucracy that’s going to be needed to enforce the moronic, purely symbolic touchback requirement. That’s not too challenging.

The real reason they stripped it is because they know illegals wouldn’t comply with it, just like many of them aren’t going to comply by paying the $5,000 penalty. Which is why that’ll end up being stripped too.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Roger Daltrey Blasts Al Gore and Live Earth

Rich.  Content Warning:  Language.  Posted from Newsbusters: 

Better strap yourself in for a dose of alternate reality, for a rock legend has actually come out against Al Gore’s upcoming concerts to promote global warming hysteria.

Can’t be, you say?

Well, Britain’s The Sun reported Saturday (h/t Glenn Reynolds):

THE WHO's ROGER DALTRY [sic] has blasted the big Wembley gig Gore is organising to raise awareness of global warming.

Shocked? There’s much more, although readers should be cautioned about imminent vulgarity in the quotes (emphasis added throughout):

But Roger, who played with U2 at Live Aid and Live8, reckons the whole thing is a waste of time.

Speaking exclusively to Bizarre, Roger said: "Bo***cks to that! The last thing the planet needs is a rock concert.

"I can't believe it. Let's burn even more fuel.

"We have problems with global warming, but the questions and the answers are so huge I don't know what a rock concert's ever going to do to help.”

How marvelous. But Roger was just getting warmed up:

"Everybody on this planet at the moment, unless they are living in the deepest rainforest in Brazil, knows about climate change.”

The rocker, who used to sing about my g-generation, added: "My answer is to burn all the f***ing oil as quick as possible and then the politicians will have to find a solution.”

Well, I agree with burning all the oil as quickly as possible. As for letting the politicians find a solution, they’ve had 34 years since the first energy crisis, and haven’t accomplished much in my view.

Regardless, Daltrey isn’t alone in his sentiments:

Roger's comments come hot on the heels of SIR BOB GELDOFs equally scathing views.

Last week the Live Aid hero lashed out, saying: "Why is Gore actually organising them? To make us aware of the greenhouse effect?

"Everybody's known about that problem for years. We are all f***ing conscious of global warming."

How could we not be, Bob? That’s all we hear about from an alarmist media 24 hours a day, seven days a week.

For those interested, a May 12 Associated Press article reported more about Geldof’s views on these concerts:

“I would only organize (Live Earth) if I could go on stage and announce concrete environmental measures from the American presidential candidates, Congress or major corporations," he told the newspaper. "They haven't got those guarantees, so it's just an enormous pop concert or the umpteenth time that, say, Madonna or Coldplay get up on stage."

Geldof also criticized the former vice president's choice of the name Live Earth.

"It sounds like Live 8," he told the paper. "We're getting lots of responses from people who think we are organizing it."

All this makes one wonder if the next time Roger sings “My Generation,” the lyrics will be changed to “Hope I die before I get Gored!”

Talkin’ ‘bout my g-g-g-g-generation. 

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Here's one for the Ron Paul Supporters

Ron Paul Back on LGF Poll

Since Ron Paul’s supporters were so incredibly bent out of shape when I removed their candidate’s name from our silly internet poll (resulting in more hate mail than for any other LGF post), I’ve decided to reach out, build bridges, and create a poll just for them.

Please go to the site and vote.  Are you happy now?

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Ron Paul Supporters: Leave MSNBC alone!

This is pretty funny.  Posted from LGF:

In an MSNBC article ranking the Republican candidates, Ron Paul comes in dead last. And MSNBC’s only comment is priceless.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

"There is nothing in the Qu'ran that violates human rights."

Not according to the Qu'ran.  Go get 'em Robert Spencer!  Posted from Jihad Watch: 

Tackling "stereotypes" and "misconceptions" at a Philosophy Tea at Buena Vista University in Iowa. "Jihad and human rights," by Jennifer Yeske for The Tack Online of BVU:

Since the terrorist attacks on September 11, Americans have strived to put together some understanding of why it happened and how to prevent it from happening again.

While doing this some Americans have developed stereotypes and wrong ways of thinking about Islam.

On Tuesday, Wood's House hosted a Philosophy Tea entitled, "Jihad and Human Rights" held by senior Amy Servantez and junior Courtney McGarry. Their goal was to clarify any misconceptions that people had about the Islam religion.

"What we really wanted people to get out of our Philosophy Tea was that Islam is not a violent religion. There is nothing in the Qur'an that violates human rights. It is the interpretation and the governments that use Islam as a blanket to cover their crimes and violations," Servantez said....

"There is nothing in the Qur'an that violates human rights."

Rather than regarding women as human beings equal to men, the Qur'an likens a woman to a field (tilth), to be used by a man as he wills: "Your women are a tilth for you (to cultivate) so go to your tilth as ye will" (2:223).

The Qur'an also declares that a woman's testimony is worth half that of a man: "Get two witnesses, out of your own men, and if there are not two men, then a man and two women, such as ye choose, for witnesses, so that if one of them errs, the other can remind her" (2:282).

It allows men to marry up to four wives, and have sex with slave girls also: "If ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly with the orphans, marry women of your choice, two or three or four; but if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one, or (a captive) that your right hands possess, that will be more suitable, to prevent you from doing injustice" (4:3).

It rules that a son's inheritance should be twice the size of that of a daughter: "Allah (thus) directs you as regards your children's (inheritance): to the male, a portion equal to that of two females" (4:11).

The Qur’an tells husbands to beat their disobedient wives: "Men are in charge of women, because Allah hath made the one of them to excel the other, and because they spend of their property (for the support of women). So good women are the obedient, guarding in secret that which Allah hath guarded. As for those from whom ye fear rebellion, admonish them and banish them to beds apart, and scourge them" (4:34).

It allows for marriage to pre-pubescent girls, stipulating that Islamic divorce procedures “shall apply to those who have not yet menstruated” (65:4).

And of course it counsels Muslims to make war against Jews and Christians until they submit to Islamic authority and pay a special tax: "Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued" (9:29).

And it says that those who "make war upon Allah and His messenger and strive after corruption in the land" -- an elastic term that could mean almost anything -- should be punished by crucifixion, double amputation, or exile: "The only reward of those who make war upon Allah and His messenger and strive after corruption in the land will be that they will be killed or crucified, or have their hands and feet on alternate sides cut off, or will be expelled out of the land" (5:33).

Now, in light of all that and more, please don't tell us that "there is nothing in the Qur'an that violates human rights." We can read, and at face value passages like these are clearly in violation of numerous human rights norms. Now, it may be that these passages and others like them are interpreted in some benign way in mainstream Islam, although that is often asserted and seldom buttressed with any evidence. In that case, it would be more honest to acknowledge that there are many problematic passages in the Qur'an, but that mainstream Islam has spiritualized them, or rejected their universal validity, or some such.

But if you just deny they're there at all, Ms. Servantez, you give the impression that you are either uninformed or dishonest. And I'm sure you don't want that.

"I chose to add Jihad to the philosophy tea because it is such a controversial topic after 9/11. It's misconceptions that give Muslims around the world bad stereotypes and I wanted to try and fight those stereotypes," McGarry said.

[...]

"I thought it was a good chance for people to hear a different perspective about Jihad and human rights. Until I took the Islam class, I thought Jihad meant war; but as outlined so eloquently by Courtney and Amy; it was shown to mean personal struggle. I was happy by the turn out and hope more people take the opportunity to educate themselves about Islamic traditions and rituals," Golonka said.

Unfortunately, the hadith in which Muhammad makes a distinction between “greater jihad” of spiritual struggle and the “lesser jihad” of warfare doesn't appear in any of the hadith collections that Muslims consider most reliable. Jihad understood as warfare against unbelievers in order to establish the hegemony of Islamic law has much greater support in Islamic scripture, tradition, and historical practice -- and leading jihad theorists including Hasan al-Banna, the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood, and Abdullah Azzam, Osama bin Laden’s friend and intellectual mentor and co-founder with him of Al-Qaeda, challenge the authenticity of the saying in their writings.

Instead of ignoring or denying this, the BVU students would do better to acknowledge it, and then to try to formulate positive ways to deal with it -- including asking their Muslim friends to try to develop some way to respond to and blunt the force of the challenge from Al-Banna, Azzam, and their ilk.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

McCain: Voters not 'rational' on Immigration

Voters aren't rational?  What?

Take a look in the mirror Senator!  Then tell us who's not rational.

I'm sure we'll be rational enough to keep you from getting any closer to the Presidency.  How rational will we be then?  You blew it pal!  Posted from Newsbusters:


Globe Echoes McCain's Disdain: Voters Not 'Rational' on Immigration

Posted by Mark Finkelstein on May 19, 2007 - 07:18.
This is the first step. We can and must complete this legislation sooner rather than later. We all know that this issue can be caught up in extracurricular politics unless we move forward as quickly as possible. -- Sen. John McCain [R-AZ], May 17th.
Now is probably the last window for action on comprehensive reform before presidential politics thwart any rational debate. -- Boston Globe editorial, May 19th.
That the Boston Globe would want to ram through the amnesty-based immigration bill comes as no surprise. But what does it say about Republican presidential hopeful John McCain that the Globe's entreaty tracks McCain's so closely?

Hugh Hewtt has described the operative sentiment as "a repulsive attitude of contempt towards the voters who elected the senators."

It is hard to see it as anything else. For implicit in "McGlobe's" decrying of "politics" is a shared disdain for the people. The great unwashed proletariat, nativist yahoos that they are, cannot be permitted to intrude as their enlightened betters do what is necessary and right.

Except that what is being proposed in this amnesty-first immigration bill is unnecessary and wrong. And as for keeping people and politics out, it's way too late. For with his avid support for this legislation, McCain has sealed his fate with Republican primary voters. He will not be the nominee, and I would predict will not even be in the race by the time New Hampshire rolls around.

You might say the Globe has played a useful role with its predictably pro-amnesty editorial. It has clearly exposed in just what kind of circles John McCain is running.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Buck up Conservatives!

Watch this short motivational video.  We can win this fight!  (H/T: Jawa)
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Seatle Public Schools? or Madrassas?

H/T: LGF:  The Seattle Public School system is doing its part to make sure American children will be ready to welcome their new Islamic overlords: Seattle Public Schools | Equity and Race Relations.

Presenter: Hate Free Zone

Mission and Goals: Hate Free
Zone Washington is a nonprofit organization whose mission is to uphold the fundamental principles of democracy and justice. Our goals are to:

* Empower immigrant communities to advocate for equality, dignity and respect.
* Build a collective voice for immigrants and refugee communities in the political system.
* Restore and protect civil liberties and human rights, regardless of citizenship status
* Undo stereotypes and free society from discrimination and hate.

Our Programs:
Our work integrates three critical areas that act as the catalyst for systemic change: Political advocacy and mobilization, community support and education.

Post 9.11 Backlash
This training covers the specific impact of the backlash against immigrant and religious minority communities in the U.S. after September 11th, 2001. Real stories will be shared including those of people targeted with hate crimes, bullying/harassment, employment and housing discrimination, and detentions and deportations.

Bias-based Bullying (Religion, Race and Culture)
How can we recognize and prevent bullying, harassment, and violence based in bias regarding a student’s religion, race, or culture? This training will explore this topic and show a short video of students speaking from their own experience.

Islam and Muslim Americans
How can we better understand our Muslim students? This presentation covers many aspects of Islam including:

Common Misconceptions and Stereotypes
Women in Islams
Basics of Islam
Jihad
Key Terms and Phrases
Muslims in America in the World

Muslim Prayer in Schools
Why do Muslim students need to leave my class to pray? This presentation focuses on accommodating Muslim students in school. Specifically, we cover prayer requirements for Muslim youth as well as other important information for making a school and classroom Muslim-friendly.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Islamic Hate Speach - University California Irvine

Video.  This is sick stuff.  H/T: LGF:  You’re not going to believe this one; video of an evil antisemitic rant by Amir Abdel Malik Ali, in a private room at the Muslim Students Union hatefest this week at University of California Irvine. Absolutely sickening, with paranoid conspiracy theories about the Mossad being behind 9/11, and claims that “Zionist Jews” are plotting around the world to make Muslims look bad.

The student recording the video is thrown out when they notice him. This is really nasty stuff.

(Video player requires Flash Player.)

Here’s a post about the video at the OC Blog: UCI Intifada: Preaching Terror on Campus.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

High School Honors Student Takes on Al Gore

Awesome.  Just, awesome!  Posted from Newsbusters:

Here is a story that should make every parent proud, even those on the left side of the aisle.

A high school student up in Portland, Maine, created a website for extra credit in her Honors Earth Sciences class. Called “Ponder the Maunder,” fifteen-year-old Kristen Byrnes took on the subject of global warming, and was eventually asked to examine the veracity of Al Gore's schlockumentary “An Inconvenient Truth.”

In her piece, Byrnes quickly demonstrated what few in the media, especially Gore sycophants Laurie David, Sheryl Crow, and Leonardo DiCaprio, were able to grasp about this farcical film (emphasis added throughout):

Al Gore’s film An Inconvenient Truth does indeed have some correct facts, but as he even says himself, sometimes you have to over-exaggerate to send the message to people:

Q. There's a lot of debate right now over the best way to communicate about global warming and get people motivated. Do you scare people or give them hope? What's the right mix?

A.  I think the answer to that depends on where your audience's head is. In the United States of America, unfortunately we still live in a bubble of unreality. And the Category 5 denial is an enormous obstacle to any discussion of solutions. Nobody is interested in solutions if they don't think there's a problem. Given that starting point, I believe it is appropriate to have an over-representation of factual presentations on how dangerous it is, as a predicate for opening up the audience to listen to what the solutions are, and how hopeful it is that we are going to solve this crisis.

 http://www.grist.org/news/maindish/2006/05/09/roberts/ (Interview with Grist Magazine’s David Roberts and Al Gore about An Inconvenient Truth)

Al Gore said this, so how are we supposed to know fact from fiction in the global warming debate?

Bravo, Kristen. You’ve quickly pinpointed what folks much older than you choose to ignore.

From there, Kristen quickly debunked many of the claims made by Gore in his atrocity that I suggest the reader take some time with. She marvelously incorporated charts, graphs, figures, and supporting evidence with citations to buttress her arguments.

It is well worth the read.

After her lengthy analysis (once again, I can’t be more hopeful that you will read the entire thing), Kristen marvelously concluded:

It’s easy to see why Al gore’s [sic] movie should not be shown in schools. An Inconvenient Truth is a political commercial that misrepresents a whole area of science. He admittedly uses scare tactics to get people to listen then shows them a professional slide show that blames every thing bad on so called man made global warming

Al did not make and publicize this movie because he cares; something obvious when you consider his own lifestyle. He did not make this movie to run for president. This movie has grossed over 60 million dollars to date and it hasn’t even made it to cable. Al charges over $100,000 per slide show. But the real money that Al will make is through his new company, Generation Investment Management, a company that seeks to establish the rules and licensing for the new carbon-trading scheme. We have all heard of politicians who lie for money and power; it looks as if Al did not retire after all.

Brava, Kristen! Welcome to the fight.

And, Brava for the name of your website.

For those who didn’t catch it, maunder means to talk in a rambling, foolish, or meaningless way. As such, in this instance Kristen is asking us to ponder Gore’s ramblings.

I couldn’t agree more, and wonder why people in the media with far more education and experience than our dear Kristen refuse to.

Alas, I guess that's what we love about them.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

"It's time to attack the myth of Global Warming."

Great ammo against the climate change alarmists.  Posted from Newsbusters:

The air continues to seep out of the global warming consensus balloon, ladies and gentlemen.

Meet Augie Auer, the former University of Wyoming professor of atmospheric science turned New Zealand meteorologist who isn’t buying what soon-to-be-Dr. Al Gore and his band of not so merry global warming alarmists are selling.

As reported by the New Zealand Timaru Herald (emphasis added throughout):

Man's contribution to the greenhouse gases was so small we couldn't change the climate if we tried, [Auer] maintained.

"We're all going to survive this. It's all going to be a joke in five years," he said.

A combination of misinterpreted and misguided science, media hype, and political spin had created the current hysteria and it was time to put a stop to it.

"It is time to attack the myth of global warming," he said.

Unlike folks such as Gore, Sheryl Crow, Laurie David, and Leonardo DiCaprio, Auer has actually studied and taught this science. As such, he walks the walks AND talks the talk:

Water vapour was responsible for 95 per cent of the greenhouse effect, an effect which was vital to keep the world warm, he explained.

"If we didn't have the greenhouse effect the planet would be at minus 18 deg C but because we do have the greenhouse effect it is plus 15 deg C, all the time."

The other greenhouse gases: carbon dioxide, methane, nitrogen dioxide, and various others including CFCs, contributed only five per cent of the effect, carbon dioxide being by far the greatest contributor at 3.6 per cent.

However, carbon dioxide as a result of man's activities was only 3.2 per cent of that, hence only 0.12 per cent of the greenhouse gases in total. Human-related methane, nitrogen dioxide and CFCs etc made similarly minuscule contributions to the effect: 0.066, 0.047 and 0.046 per cent respectively.

"That ought to be the end of the argument, there and then," he said.

"We couldn't do it (change the climate) even if we wanted to because water vapour dominates."

Auer correctly concluded: "It's become a witch-hunt; a Salem witch-hunt."

Yes it has, Doctor. Unfortunately in this instance, the hunt is more serious because there are a lot more people involved, and the consequences far more dire. 

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Daily Dilbert

 Dilbert May 18, 2007
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Ted Kennedy on Immigration

Then and now.  Posted from RWN:

Ted Kennedy on Immigration

1965: "The bill will not flood our cities with immigrants. It will not upset the ethnic mix of our society. It will not relax the standards of admission. It will not cause American workers to lose their jobs."

1986: "This amnesty will give citizenship to only 1.1 to 1.3 million illegal aliens. We will secure the borders henceforth. We will never again bring forward another amnesty bill like this."

2007: "Now it is time for action. 2007 is the year we must fix our broken system." -- Mark Krikorian

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Offensive: Against Ron Paul and Illegal Aliens

Ron Paul is a wacko and the current ‘not-an-amnesty-but really-is-and-worse’ bill is bad news for America.

I got hit yesterday here and here by people who disagreed with the opinions of others I happen to agree with on both subjects.

You people who support Ron Paul really need to examine your guy. If you are being intellectually honest with yourself, you must realize he has ZERO chance or receiving the Republican nomination for President. You realize this don’t you?

I’m trying to be nice. Mr. Paul is just too kooky on the war, 9/11, and foreign policy. I understand there are social and economic policies he is liked for, but these are not enough to overcome the kookiness. If you can’t see this, you are too blinded by your own kookiness. I posted a video this morning of Mr. Paul here featuring him cavorting with 9/11 truthers! If this isn’t enough to red flag your guy, you are indeed lost. If you believe in 9/11 Trutherism, your worse than lost, your insane. (I know, not being nice.)

As for the current amnesty bill. If you are one to believe that the provisions of this bill are good for America, you are also a bit kooky. I’m not attacking your apparent sincerity for ‘immigrants’. But this shouldn’t even be called an immigrant issue. It should be framed around the RULE OF LAW!

Illegal aliens are criminals. Regardless of their intentions – earning a better living, helping their family, whatever. They are breaking the law and should face the consequences as stipulated under current law. This isn’t pretty. It may offend the delicate sensibilities of some, but the law is the law.

If we allow the law to be broken and simply circumvent the laws “we don’t like”, what good does any law we have become? Following the rule of law is the most basic tenet of a civilized society. If we disregard the law, we destroy the meaning of it.

“We must do something!” Yes, I agree. There is a process in place already – use it. Use the money for this current monster to enable enforcement of the laws and policies on the books.

How can we allow anyone wanting to become a citizen in this nation to attain that citizenship by circumventing, or outright breaking, the law?

You Ron Paulers out there and you proponents of this type of “immigration reform” – convince me I’m wrong.

I’m getting tired trying to convince you I’m right.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Prescient Words

Take Heed:

“Social gains,” “social aims,” “social objectives” have become the daily bromides of our language. The necessity of a social justification for all activities and all existence is now taken for granted. There is no proposal outrageous enough but what its author can get a respectful hearing and approbation if he claims that in some undefined way it is for “the common good.”

The greatest guilt today is that of people who accept collectivism by moral default; the people who seek protection from the necessity of taking a stand, by refusing to admit to themselves the nature of that which they are accepting; the people who support plans specifically designed to achieve serfdom, but hides behind the empty assertion that they are lovers of freedom, with no concrete meaning attached to the word; the people who believe that the content of ideas need not be examined, that principles need not be defined, and that facts can be eliminated by keeping ones eyes shut. They expect, when they find themselves in a world of bloody ruins and concentration camps, to escape moral responsibility by wailing: “But I didn’t mean this!”

Those who want slavery should have the grace to name it by its proper name. They must face the full meaning of that which they are advocating or condoning; the full, exact, specific meaning of collectivism, of its logical implications, of the principles upon which it is based, and of the ultimate consequences to which these principles will lead.

They must face it, then decide whether it is what they want or not.

- Ayn Rand, from the Authors Forward of the novella “Anthem”

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive