By Peter Murphy
O Canada, we stand on guard for thee.
God keep our land glorious and free!
- From the national anthem of Canada
Oh, Canada. You’re in trouble.
And America is not far behind its northern neighbor in losing its freedom and becoming an effective dictatorship.
Climate change policies are the root cause of the transformation from a mostly free society to a less free, more tyrannical nation. The Canadian government, led by long-time Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, is climate fanatical and increasingly directing its citizens’ behavior in disturbing, ominous ways.
“There is no vaccine against a polluted planet,” said the prime minister back in late 2020 when he proposed raising the nation’s carbon tax. He also regularly refers to the “climate crisis” to explain his actions.
When the planet itself supposedly hangs in the balance, you can rationalize almost anything, no matter how silly, unscientific, or oppressive, starting with Mr. Trudeau’s false conflating of carbon with pollution, which is typical of the climate obsessives in America, too. The former is essential to life itself and inherent in Earth’s atmosphere, while the latter is a nuisance that has largely been solved as a practical matter in the U.S.
Carbon emissions from manmade sources are about 1/10,000th of the Earth’s atmosphere, and their increase has had no palpable or corresponding effect on global temperature. Yet that scientific fact and historical reality get lost in the pursuit of governmental power and societal control well underway in Canada and the U.S.
As for pollution from particulate matter, it still remains but is nowhere near commonplace in the U.S. as it was in the 1970s when the recently formed U.S. Environmental Protection Agency was implementing the Clear Air and Clean Water Acts and other landmark laws enacted by Congress. With carbon labeled as “pollution,” the EPA found a new purpose and expanded its bureaucracy and power.
But, back to our northern neighbor.
Canada imposes a carbon tax, bans coal power plants, subsidizes electric vehicles, and heavily regulates methane gas emissions in the oil and gas industry. The Trudeau government has been embarking on a plan to achieve “net-zero” carbon emissions by 2050, meaning carbon released into the atmosphere would be fully absorbed by planting trees, installing carbon capture storage facilities, and other measures, including blocking Canada’s provinces from extracting abundant energy from its tar sands.
One step Prime Minister Trudeau announced earlier this year at the “Democracy Summit” in South Korea was to pledge more than $8 million to commission a study on the supposed connection between “democratic decline” and climate change. Specifically, the money will be used to support climate change policy advocates in other countries, to reclaim “civic space to confront the climate emergency [and] support human rights defenders working on climate and industrial issues across the global south,” the prime minister’s statement read.
In reality, climate policies are steadily eroding “human rights” in Canada and the U.S. because they are increasingly restricting what kind of car you can drive, where you can live (or what can be built next to you), what you can soon eat and not eat, and how and where you can travel. Ideas that may seem outlandish now are the canaries in the coal mine, such as forcing high-rise, low-income apartments in suburban communities, banning fertilizer, or eliminating gas-power cars – all in the name of saving the planet from “climate pollution.
We should not doubt this worrisome, restrictive direction since wannabe dictators like Justin Trudeau and President Joe Biden constantly give us not-subtle hints.
In early 2022, Canadian truckers organized a large, days-long protest in Ottawa that was ruthlessly broken up by Mr. Trudeau’s invoking the nation’s Emergencies Act to impose Marshall Law. This included blocking electronic donations to support the truckers and seizing protesters’ bank accounts. (CFACT supported the protests and raised funds for the truckers.)
Shortly following these protests, Mr. Trudeau was applauded by many in the European Parliament for warning against “threats to democracy”, yet his hypocrisy was too much some members, who condemned him for wielding his “quasi-liberal boot” against the protestors trying to protect their rights.
Now comes an effort by Trudeau to incarcerate his nation’s citizens who speak things he opposes with his Online Harms Act, which would effectively censor speech and includes empowering the police and courts to use Internet speech to impose fines and incarcerate those whom the state views as objectionable or threatening.
In the U.S., censorship directed by the Biden administration has been all too real, even though we are governed ostensibly by the Constitution’s First Amendment right to free speech.
“Freedom is never more than one generation from extinction,” said the 40th President of the United States, Ronald Reagan. “It must be fought for [and] protected.”
As the Trudeau government in Canada and the Biden administration here in the U.S. press on with climate policies that reach into every crevice of society, censor speech, and show a willingness to seize the bank accounts and incarcerate those who resist, freedom’s erosion in both countries is coming very rapidly indeed.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
The approach in the US is more of the Murthy v Missouri method, of jawboning media to “mediate” “misinformation”. AKA, the “nice business you have here, damn pity if something happens to it” method.
So where is the difference between the freedom truckers, us truckers sponsored by an us organisation to disrupt the economy of a foreign country, and climate protesters?
And hate speech is not allowed irl, why should it be online. Why should inciting violence be fine if done online?
How little you understand.
He understands plenty. He is merely toying with you. He gets off on having lots of people respond to inane comments on this site.
We’re just feeding is ego.
If you think pointing out hypocrisy is inane, so be it.
Again, no self-awareness or understanding of the post or your what you’re responding to.
You repost things you can’t explain. You don’t understand the things you post.
No, saying stupid things is inane. And you are an expert at saying stupid things, because you are an immature little narcissist who loves to piss everyone off.
mun certainly prods many into ‘conversing’. Why not just ignore, or block?
And igoring is still the best..
Toying and annoying are characteristics of a number of trolls.
Your post is difficult to decipher. Does “us” mean “U.S.?” If so the statement “an us” is grammatically incorrect and makes the post difficult to understand.
In America, all speech, including hate speech, is allowed in real life (irl). It’s in our constitution (Bill of Rights) which draws on political philosophy that established human rights and rule of law going back to the Magna Carta and beyond.
The difference between Canadian freedom truckers and climate protesters is that the truckers protested against anti-freedom policies while climate protesters protest in favor of anti-freedom policies.
Yes.
REMOVE restrictions on freedom of choice
vs
IMPOSE restrictions on freedom of choice
A HUGE difference in governance approaches.
The left wants an exemption to the first amendment, for any speech they disagree with.
In the mainstream Media and with major online platforms in the U.S. they already have it.
And if they don’t tow the party line the FBI rides in to fix things.
toe the line, not tow the line
You just don’t get the whole freedom thing, do you? The government deciding what speech is allowed cannot be tolerated under any circumstances. Calling it “hate speech” is a nebulous tool for restricting speech to government-approved narratives. It never attaches to government-approved hate, only to anything threatening that dictated narrative.
The whole point of free speech is that the government may not limit speech just because some people disagree with it. And that includes “hate speech”.
Just how many lies can you squeeze into one post.
They were one of many supporters, if you don’t know the difference between a sponsor and a supporter, then you are even more stupid than I thought.
Disrupting the economy? Really, is that what they are calling protests these days?
And once again the socialists declare that any speech that they disagree with is hate speech.
I have no doubt that LoserName would support a bill to jail anyone who disagrees with a government that he supports
No one can force another person to do anything using language alone.
The old English children’s poem, “Sticks and stones will break my bones but words can never harm me.” comes to mind.
Too bad your parents forgot to teach you about life properly.
“hate speech” = “speech the government hates”
Wow, you really are going heavy with the online incitement today, aren’t you, Luser..
And lots of hate speech. !
The USA is founded on the principle that rights are not granted by government, that rights preexist the creation of government, AKA “natural rights.”
Not so in Canada and elsewhere. For Canadians, government grants your rights. Power belongs to the government and not the people.
Governments don’t give rights they give privileges.
Canada has bigger problems created by Bill C-63, which allows the Canadian government’s agency, the CRTC, to decide what is hate speech on the internet.
Unlike Americans, free speech is not protected due to the SCC, which has sponsored the idea of hate speech being any comments that detests or vilifies any person or group (oops, that doesn’t include current protests about the Gaza battles). Now Justin has a bill that will allow the CRTC to shut down people based on what it or the court considers hate speech.
Nut Zero is an issue, but the hope is we will get a more responsible government in a year.
Imagine a country where government and politicians can silence their opponents.
Problem is – most of them ASPIRE to do just that.
While at the same time, pontificating about “preserving democracy”.
Only Fascists aspire to silence opposition.
The remedy for poor speech is more speech, not less.
Imagine a country where government and politicians can bring fake felony charges against their opponents in kangaroo courts to silence their opponents.
yes no need to imagine.
Orwell described it well
RUSSIA right now.
“Imagine a country where government and politicians can silence their opponents.”
Yes it’s called RUSSIA, the mad photo copier at work was first tested in Minsk.
“that doesn’t include current protests about the Gaza battles”
It’s OK to protest about Gaza- but if stopping traffic or people going about their business, that’s different. Some of the campus protests were determined to shut down the campuses.
Anybody ever persuaded by being stuck in a traffic jam by protesters?
“Gee, these guys feel so strongly about climate they made me miss my job interview. Maybe they’re onto something?”
Or my chemo session 🙁
Off-topic story tip:
“Lightning strike in Czech Republic injures 18 people.”
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cg33r1313n0o
I only clicked on the link to confirm what I already knew about how the BBC was going to report the story.
due to cc of course!
Authored by Vicky W[r]ong
Just think, she likely got an extra 50 cents a word for adding CC as a causative issue. Or if she’s an employee, got paid hourly for MSU, Making….Up.
Tru-duh should move to Cuba – his home land. Callyfornia should secede from the USA and become the Gavvy Newscum wonder land that is is capable of becoming – problems solved.
California can’t secede right now. We’re huddled indoors trying to stay warm. The current temperature in LA is only 1 °F warmer than Novosibirsk, Siberia.
Siberia can be very warm in summer.
Canada has a Charter of Rights in its Constitution adopted in 1982 that among other things guarantees the right of free speech.
How is the proposed law legal under Canada’s Constitution? Does the Canadian government system allow citizen suits to enforce the rights of Canadians? Do the Canadian courts tend to uphold their Charter of Rights?
Here in the US we have our very first amendment to the US Constitution that guarantees the right of free speech, and it is vigorously enforced including citizen suits against the government when their rights are infringed. The US Justice system does in fact enforce this right, and all the others in the Constitution, with the relatively conservative Supreme Court doing so vigorously.
For now.
The left vilifies the courts when they don’t get their way.
They invent baseless accusations against individual SCOTUS justices in order to sideline them from important decisions.
They will expand the court and pack it with ideologically pure mental midget minions, like Biden’s recent pick.
So a Nazi court. Every time the Left gets dictatorial power not snow but Freedom is a thing of the past.
Everyone has the freedom to be stupid, even under tyrannies. No government supervision is necessary. When tyrants have the power to make everyone shut up, and pretend to be as stupid as the tyrants, we’re all in trouble.
With the exception of one Donald Trump.
Trump’s right to free speech was only limited to the extent that he was not gaming the trial by attacking jurors and family members of the judge and the prosecutor. The instant the trial is concluded the limit is terminated.
And apparently you haven’t been paying attention, because Trump has been relentless attacking and threatening the judge, the prosecutors, and witnesses against him for the obvious purpose of intimidation to circumvent the justice system.
If the courts did not have the ability to prevent speech designed to wreck the court and the trial while it is being tried, then all manner of criminals could bully their way through just about any criminal or civil trial.
All rights do in fact have limitations, they are never absolute, because the rights of others must be balanced. You have the right to bear arms, but you don’t have the right to bear a bazooka. You have the right to free speech, but you don’t have the right to horribly abuse another person with it, such as threatening to kill them and their families.
Pointing out the many “mistakes” the judge has been making, is not attacking him.
Allowing the prosecution and prosecution witnesses to daily slander the defendant, but banning the defendant from responding is not how the system is supposed to work.
The “mistake” over taking someone to court who sees himself above the law.
So the prosecution made the mistake?
No, It was the judge and jury that were outside the law. !
But Judge Merchan didn’t likewise limit star prosecution witness disgraced disbarred attorney convicted liar confessed embezzled Michael Cohen’s free speech.
That may all be true, or not. But keeping him locked up in a courtroom for six weeks sure limited his ability to communicate with potential voters.
Who responded by flooding him with more campaign donation money than any presidential candidate has ever received at this stage in the election process – or so it is reported in the UK media.. .
The gag order does not cover Bragg and Merchan. Defendent have the constitutional right to criticize their prosecutions which is why Merchan’s gag order is unconstitutional and will most likely be included in the state and federal appeals.
The First Section of the Charter effectively negates it.
“1 The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.”
“Reasonable limits” and “demonstrably justified” are wiggle words that politicians and tyrants alike revel in, not to mention lawyers.
Also, the US Constitution never uses the words “democracy” or “democratic” intentionally, but the Communist Manifesto highlights the concept of democracy as a necessary step in the implementation of its goals.
Now we learned that communists and anarchists are not opposed to democratic processes.
No, they are not, because they are aware that democracy is nothing more than a transitional state of confusion and distraction that is fertile ground for exploitation by an elite, and the “climate crisis” is a perfect mythology to that end.
Communists are not opposed to democratic processes, right up to the moment they attain power.
Communists only support democracy, when they are winning.
Sometimes they’ve allowed people to vote. But there’s only one party on the ballot.
I sense that MyUsername is fixed in its ways and is not open to learning anything new.
They only use democratic processes until they get power. Like Hitler.
OK, thank you … that explains it. The weasel words in the charter essentially gut the “right” and turn it into a “You can have this freedom as long as the government gives it to you” rather than being an inalienable right not granted by governments.
They don’t have the right to freedom of speech in the UK either, and no doubt the Canadian constitution was modeled after the Brit’s so-called “constitution” which really isn’t a constitution at all.
It’s an interesting one….private property rights are not part of the Canadian CR…I believe it was intended to tactfully make it impossible for aboriginals to claim ownership of tracts of land that had been ceded to them by the crown 2 centuries ago…but its main result has been that if you defend your property from a home invader, you will go broke from legal fees instead of being a local hero cuz you have no right to protect your property, only your personal safety, so you have to make sure you have a couple of bruises before you level the Red Dot.
Does the Charter of Rights allow Marshall Law to impose martial law?
Hate to be pedantic but “marshall law” should be martial law. To the main point, as a Canadian, Trudeau is the most toxic leader in Canadian history. This narcissistic mid wit wokester has trashed our countries historic accomplishments, enabled rampant inflation, flooded the country with more immigrants than we can handle, shirked our country’s obligations to NATO and western civilization in general. He is basically a fascist at heart.
The mystery to me is that Trudeau is supported in Parliament, and his party keeps getting enough votes to keep him in power. The deeper problem is not him, it’s them.
I don’t believe the turd was elected. I have tried to find anyone who will admit they voted for the turd over the last few years and so far no one has admitted to it.
I know someone who was gushing about him when he was first elected.
Now, she denies having ever said anything favorable about him, let alone voted for him.
The cult followers of ‘celebrity’ are so fickle, aren’t they?
I also think my wife voted for him as she gets so mad when I point out all of the evil things he does. She is normally a very calm individual. 😉
You will never meet such people unless you move to Trudeau’s riding. People in Canada do not vote for the PM, they vote for local politicians and the winning party chooses the PM.
Nansar07 I am not looking for specific giant turd voters. Just idiots that voted for lie-berals. It equates to the same thing.
’Them’ being Canadian voters.
As long as the supply of free stuff is not interrupted, a majority of voters will continue to vote for the party that promises the most free stuff.
Exactly,
Not sure the current U.S. Constitution is so constituted as to avoid that eventuality.
But on the bright side, modern technology has enabled amazing increases in human productivity. Marx may not have foreseen this. The industrial revolution of his day didn’t produce power plants, telephones, computers, air conditioners, automobiles, modern medicine, jet planes, etc. Robotics and AI might change the calculus and save the masses from themselves.
On the other hand, Climate Alarmists …
And on the other, other hand,
Will Durant, Our Oriental Heritage
“Exactly,
Karl MarxNot sure the current U.S. Constitution is so constituted as to avoid that eventuality.”
A simple solution for the US would be that only US citizens who actually pay taxes have the right to vote for those in The House of Representatives, where tax and spending bills are supposed to originate.
So you invent a fiat currency not backed by anything and print it like there is no tomorrow.
But who would do that?
???
You seem to be replying to something I didn’t say.
Or are you adding another thought?
(I agree that our money should be based on something solid. I’d rather the buying power of my $20 bill fluctuate based on the price of an ounce of gold rather than … what? … cryptocurrency?)
Very simple, but virtually impossible to bring about. Bureaucrats wouldn’t vote for it and neither would the 50% of Americans who currently pay no net taxes. And we should not ignore the fact that a large percentage of liberal voters are net tax payers.
‘free stuff’ doesn’t exist. We all pay for it true inflating the fiat currency killing its purchasing power. If printing were the solution all Zimbabweans would have a yacht in Monaco.
Not just only all the Zimbabweans. I have a $20,000,000,000 Zimbabwe bill in my dresser drawer!
(Or maybe it’s only a $20,000,000 Zimbabwe bill? It’s been a while since I looked at it.)
Who is “them”?
You mistake Canada for a real nation…
“a large body of people united by common descent, history, culture, or language, inhabiting a particular country or territory.” Oxford
Why the down votes? Trudeau said it himself…
“In 2015, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, while defining Canadian values, also declared his country to be the world’s first post-national state.”
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postnationalism#:~:text=In%202015%2C%20Canadian%20Prime%20Minister,ideology%20associated%20with%20English%20Canada
Make it Nazi and I agree. Mussolini and the man with the mustache are completely different beast.
Would you be open to swapping Trudeau for Biden?
Canada is the coldest major country in the world, and lightly populated as a result. The entire Canadian population is less than California, the most populous state in the U.S. Canada has only about 1/3rd the population of Guangdong, the most industrialized Chinese province, and mostly tropical. Uttar Pradesh in India, also rapidly industrializing, has eight times more people than Canada.
As such, there is next to nothing Canada can do climate-wise that would show up on a global pie chart. Even if the climatistas’ fever dreams were true — which they are demonstrably NOT — Canada cannot affect climate one way or the other. Besides, why would the world’s coldest major country get into a lather about slight warming? It’s more apt to benefit Canada, than harm anyone.
If that’s Trudeau’s excuse to erode Canadian liberties, it’s a poor one. If Canadians prefer to be liberty-free, as well as math-free, that’s their decision, but it’s a lousy one. They can’t become carbon-free. Carbon is necessary to all life. You have to become chemistry-free and biology-free not to know that.
Tyranny doesn’t have to be logical. It just has to provide endless distractions to establish itself.
‘Canada has only about 1/3rd the population of Guangdong, the most industrialized Chinese province, and mostly tropical.’
There are many apt comparisons between China and Canada, the main one being that the former already has a totalitarian government and the latter is still working on it.
Stated goals are different from real goals.
The whole game is not about preventing the world from getting warmer, but creation of an artificial investment cycle into parasitic green technologies.
“martial” not Marshall, says the grammar Nazi.
It seems like Canada would be a carbon sink no matter what they do with a small population and vast areas.
Trudeau’s party actually came in second to the Conservative party in BOTH of the last 2 elections as a percentage of the popular vote, however the constituency system, somewhat like the electoral college system in the US resulted in more seats for his party. A small stretch of the normal powers available to the Prime Minister allows him to be essentially a dictator for his term in office with all departmental “anything” requiring approval by the PMO (Prime Minister’s Office) before being so much as thought about.
Trudeau is unfortunately, larcenously uses “climate change” to exert control on other departments and industries. His carbon taxes to discourage natural gas use actually exceeds the cost of gas in many rural gas co-ops…yes over 100% tax added….Despite claiming the carbon taxes are distributed back to taxpayers and used in environmental programs, it turns out that very little of this money has been distributed or else has been used in constituencies who voted for Trudeau’s party and are now getting things like EV factory approvals and battery plant subsidies.
He only holds power by having bought out the leader of one of his opposition parties with cash and communist program bobbles so that he controls a majority of the votes in parliament. The Canadian dollar has dropped in value by 30% on world markets…the cost of housing up 30%…inflation is outlandinsh while the government reports it to be 3%, government promises to tax the wealthy a little bit more have resulted everyone cursing their tax increases…..
His eviction date is coming in about a year and a half, unless he figures out a way to destroy the election part of Canadian democracy. Unfortunately the scam of CC as a manipulative tool for the federal government might also be enticing to whoever follows him.
If you destroy your economy only printing (inflating the fiat money supply) can provide the ‘Free Stuff’.
Excellent Poker players are always looking for the “tell” from their opponents, a psychological tip off as to what hand they actually are holding.
Fascists are always anxious to tell the populace what’s good for them. That is their “tell”. They cannot have it any other way, or it wouldn’t be fascism by definition.
To the author:
I generally agree with what you said, but please correct all references to “[atmospheric] carbon.” You are talking about CARBON DIOXIDE, a gas, not CARBON, a solid.
And the Emergencies Act imposed MARTIAL law, not Marshall law.
By definition CO2 has twice as much oxygen as carbon. Should we be fighting oxygen pollution instead?
CO2 is not any sort of pollution…
We should not be fighting it, we should be helping t along.
Classic sign of a nation in decline because the problem started with the voters who votes trash into office then reelect them over and over while they stupidly wonder why it is all going into the toilet.
Very nice Peter. We do not have a climate problem we have a government problem. The climate crisis is the tool government uses to gain power and control. It is clear as day. Government must be stopped from continuing to do this. Sooner or later it will be stopped, the sooner the better. The longer we wait the nastier it will be.
Canada hasn’t a chance of reaching any Net Zero targets by 2030, 2050 or the foreseeable future, and poll after survey after whatever show that the vast majority of the population not only don’t care but also have few intentions of making any major lifestyle or operating changes to help it achieve that goal. The problem is the the current governing Liberal-NDP can’t face this reality and insists on trying to ram its beliefs down citizens’ throats in the form of carbon taxes, EV mandates, restrictions on fossil fuel developments and anything it’s foolish enough to believe is going to save not just the country but maybe all of humanity from the mythological climate crisis. What it hasn’t realized is that unless it starts backing off on its nonsense, it’s guaranteed to lose the next federal election that has to be held no later than October, 2025. It’s trailing the official opposition by a wide margin already; yet it can’t see that its environmental/climate policies are largely responsible for its dwindling support because they’ve been helping to drive up living costs.
There may come a time that real information can not be put on the web anymore. This will lead to the reinvention of the tried and tested samizdat system of underground publishing of pamphlets in the old Soviet Union. Put the message on paper instead of the laptop.
Just what percent of global emissions are estimated to come from Canada? Canada’s government says it’s just 1.5% (https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/services/environmental-indicators/global-greenhouse-gas-emissions.html).
Why the fuss over such small potatoes? How do Canadian voters get duped into this?
Some boring numbers for Canadians….
Canada has over 300 billion trees in its Boreal forest which only have to grow by 1 Kg of cellulose and lignin each year, each tree to offset Canada’s entire anthropogenic emissions, and global greening is likely resulting in more than 2Kg per tree in each new growth ring. Remember the thickness of those tree-mometer rings?
Need I mention expansion of the boreal forest as permafrost moves Northward (supposedly) 120 km in 50 years (from weather network)
Canada’s CO2 emissions from fossil fuels = 548 Megatons (from statista.com)
= 548 x 10^9 Kg. = 548 x 12/44 = 150 x 10^9 Kg of elemental C
Dry wood approx 50% elemental C
So 150 x 10^9 Kg of elemental C will be 300×10^9 Kg of wood.
300x 10^9 Kg of wood/ 300 Billion trees = 1 Kg of wood per tree.
It is clear that the Trudeau government’s fixation on CO2 is more about wealth distribution from people who have to drive to work, farm, heat their houses, and so on… to people who live in their parents basements and in big city condos…both he believes to be big voter demographics for him.
And 5% more growth covers the extra forest fires last year compared to normal, since the mean time between fires in the boreal forest is about 140 years…
Peter Murphy, can you please refrain from using the terms “carbon” and “carbon emissions”. Carbon is a solid, so it cannot be “emitted” and saying that carbon “is essential to life itself” is not quite right in the context. While life is based on carbon, what would have been more accurate to say in the context of what you were saying, would have been that carbon dioxide is essential to life itself. Using the warmists’ terminology like “carbon emissions, carbon pollution”, you are not only giving these dills support, but you are discrediting your arguments.
“Marshall Law” It’s Martial Law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martial_law
How did Canadians devolve into such compliant sheep? They are all huddled within 100 miles of the US border because it’s too cold most of the year. A continuation of the modest warming would be highly beneficial to them.
The censorship being planned is by far the biggest threat to freedom the world has ever experienced. Clueless idiots are goose stepping to totalitarian oppression.