Go Back   UG Community @ Ultimate-Guitar.Com > UG Community > The Pit
User Name  
Password
Search:

Reply
Old 03-07-2014, 12:01 AM   #61
Nelshizzle
Find a place and go there
 
Nelshizzle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Far out man
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cianyx
obama ****ed up and stupidly issued that redline statement and putin was a bro and gave him a way out. also a black belt in judo, performs piano recitals and swims in russian rivers.

the biggest bro to ever exist


Kim Jong Un is fond of those activities as well. Did you know he won the olympic gold all by himself?
__________________
Too many thoughts

Not enough action

Too much action

Not enough thoughts
Nelshizzle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2014, 12:14 AM   #62
Jackal58
Pit Daddy
 
Jackal58's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: If I was up your ass you'd know it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nelshizzle
Kim Jong Un is fond of those activities as well. Did you know he won the olympic gold all by himself?

All of them even!
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by SomeoneYouKnew
You should be careful what you say. Some asshole will probably sig it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Axelfox
Yup, a girl went up to me in my fursuit one time.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Xiaoxi
I can fap to this. Keep going.
Jackal58 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2014, 12:20 AM   #63
ali.guitarkid7
A techno beat
 
ali.guitarkid7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Lacrimosa soos a mal naaier
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arby911
I think it's just a miscommunication, when you said "lost all" I thought you meant they were already gone.

Oh, no, but they've practically lost them already anyway.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by sickman411
We're all the best except for Ali.

Quote:
Originally Posted by deadsmileyface
yeah russia is pretty shit

Quote:
Originally Posted by Veronicuh
This is extremely serious.
ali.guitarkid7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2014, 12:43 AM   #64
progdude93
Banned
 
progdude93's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
I meant it in the sense that the "muslim world" is HUGE. Difference between Pakistan and Qatar, or Egypt and Bosnia, is pretty big. Widely different cultures and sects in each location.

-And yet there are plenty of universals among them and plenty of valid generalizations to be made. As long as its specified that there are numerous exceptions. For example, in the Arab world, there are numerous modern countries that aren't really controlled by Islam (relatively speaking). I believe you lived in Dubai for a while, yes? But there's still a unity among Muslims precisely BECAUSE of stereotypes and anti-Muslim sentiment that arose. It threw them into an "us vs. them" mentality, uniting them against a common enemy.

I said it because that's the language used by Obama. He was talking about the prejudices against muslims. But I'm saying he improved the Middle East, which although largely muslim, certainly doesn't include the entirety of the "muslim world". Different uses, you see.

-But the issue in the Middle East has nothing to do with prejudices against Muslims. It has only to do with prejudices against Jews and prejudices against Palestinians/Arabs.

Once again, that's because the "muslim world" is freaking HUGE. But yeah, it just seemed like you thought it's ALWAYS a 'damned if you do' thing. It's not, really. Often-times it depends on how the media here wants to portray events (the majority of our media is pretty much Fox news in that they can spread misinformation and work largely on fear).

-well, to be more precise, it's a "damned if you don't, often damned if you do." there are plenty of countries controlled by radical Imams who will not hesitate to spin ANYTHING into a western plot.

I'm not either, and I'm not saying that drone strikes are a good thing, but I just don't see them as defining his administration. I think the US military or intelligence would've been using more drones regardless of his say or his election.

-the drone strikes don't define his administration. his approach defines his administration. whether or not he was more judicious with drone usage than someone else would've been is irrelevant. and the fact is that he is all too willing to do things he had publicly condemned others for doing. i don't necessarily blame him for all of it; obama ran for office as the ideological opposite as bush, and he might have believed what he said then. but once he was in office, he realized he had to be a bit more realistic. that's fine. but you can't then still take the high road all the time, like your predecessor was a piece of shit and you'd never step in it.

I know, that's why I put him in contrast to his predecessor Obama's not an idealist when it comes to foreign policy. He doesn't want to "democratize". He'll promote democracy and issue condemnations but won't fight for it in a 10 year war. He values diplomacy because that way there's less spending, and less of a chance of the US being blamed of something. He's tried alternative ways to all this, the seemingly catchy "express support without really supporting".

-well, he was an idealist, but they're very different ideals.

Yeah, but public opinion on Arabs couldn't exactly be described as positive post-9/11. But the Bush and Blair administrations sought to capitalize on this. Negative depictions of Arabs in the media had been rampant then.

-yes and no. obviously, public opinion on Arabs/Muslims (I'm putting them together because that's what happened naturally in public opinion) in the short-term was awful. i wouldn't say bush capitalized on that, though. i'd say the reaction was an incredibly natural one for a fairly patriotic/nationalistic country faced with the worst terror attack since the Brits burned down the white house. the media shows what will get them ratings. journalism in wartime is sensationalist as it gets, and they won't hesitate to pander to their audience.

I honestly couldn't name a single imam. Don't care 'bout religious leaders, but the depiction of myself in media, and the generalizations and stereotypes I'm attached to. But that's true, there are people who strongly oppose western influence here. But I doubt there are many younger generations that don't embrace it, especially the middle class.

-there are MANY people who strongly oppose western influence. and yes, the younger generation is the friendliest toward western culture, which is to be expected. that's another reason why shit's getting better. it's not obama, it's globalization, which is most tightly embraced by multinational corporations and the youth.

And Islamist recruitment has gone up. Even support for Islamists has gone up, as with hate and resentment towards Islamism. The middle east is sort of split right now between Islamists wanting to establish rule, every country's military and younger generations who dislike both sides. This doesn't have anything to do with Obama (although you can expect that I heard people say it is, cuz racism).

-That's simply untrue. Since 9/11, the scale of terrorist training has dropped by 90%. But the media continues talking about it like it's still as big a threat as they thought it was (Fox News in particular).

And that's not really what Islamists do. They don't just murder people in the quest for Jihad, cuz that's not a thing. They have affiliations and interests beyond idealism, they're political movements after all. Groups like Al Qaeda aren't really Islamists, I think, they're more under the 'global terrorist' umbrella. Islamists like the Muslim Brotherhood have gained power and lost it here in like 2 years, nothing to do with Obama. But promoting the dialogue of "Not all Muslims are Islamists" and stuff is the biggest thing he's done here, in that he improved the US's image, supported democratic movements without firing a single shot and all that jazz. Deserving of a Nobel peace price? Donno. Compared to Putin's influence on the Middle East? Give him three or four more.

-see, you're grasping an important distinction here, which is the distinction between local and global Islamist groups, but you're a bit wrong. Al Qaeda is global, the Taliban and Hamas and Hezbollah and El Shabab are local. Local Islamist groups have a more specific goal, which is to establish a Muslim rule in their country. Global Islamist groups are more about destroying the west. But both are definitely Islamist groups, because both are based upon spreading their ideology through violence.
progdude93 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2014, 12:50 AM   #65
Hydra150
not so cowardly
 
Hydra150's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Scotland
__________________
But boys will be boys and girls have those eyes
that'll cut you to ribbons, sometimes
and all you can do is just wait by the moon
and bleed if it's what she says you ought to do
Quote:
Originally Posted by Philip_pepper
I'm not gonna post pics of my hot mom.
Hydra150 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2014, 01:14 AM   #66
Axelfox
Registered User
 
Axelfox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: All of you copying me please stop it!!!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jackal58
Putin the man probably does not give a crap if somebody is gay or not. But he has to pander to the church. Russia 2014 is as feudal as Russia 1414.


People there seem to get away with gay bashing.

http://www.upworthy.com/here-is-the...amera-in-russia
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spaztikko
I didn't really want another quote in my signature for the foreseeable future but holy shit
Axelfox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2014, 01:18 AM   #67
slipknot5678
Cockblockatoo
 
slipknot5678's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
The Nobel Peace Prize hasn't always had great nominations. Theodore Roosevelt was one of the first recipients of the Nobel Prize, which is worse than Obama and at least as bad as Putin. That was over a hundred years ago but there's been some questionable ones since.
slipknot5678 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2014, 01:34 AM   #68
bradulator
through being cool
 
bradulator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Gandhi never even won the Peace Prize so it's pretty much illegitimate
bradulator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2014, 01:35 AM   #69
eGraham
It's high time, Cymbaline
 
eGraham's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Indiana
I see Russia, and by extension Putin, as the kind of guy who you're acquainted with but don't really know that well and don't know what wild shit they'll do next.

Like a constantly buzzed out frat boy who, if he were caught while stealing your 5 dollar bill, would joke around and say he was kidding, but you know he'd really steal it if you weren't looking.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trowzaa
I wish I was American.




October 23, 2014
eGraham is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2014, 01:35 AM   #70
Jackal58
Pit Daddy
 
Jackal58's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: If I was up your ass you'd know it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Axelfox
People there seem to get away with gay bashing.

http://www.upworthy.com/here-is-the...amera-in-russia

It's encouraged by their church.
Eastern Orthodoxy is homophobic to the core. Violently so.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by SomeoneYouKnew
You should be careful what you say. Some asshole will probably sig it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Axelfox
Yup, a girl went up to me in my fursuit one time.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Xiaoxi
I can fap to this. Keep going.
Jackal58 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2014, 01:41 AM   #71
ali.guitarkid7
A techno beat
 
ali.guitarkid7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Lacrimosa soos a mal naaier
Quote:
Originally Posted by progdude93
-And yet there are plenty of universals among them and plenty of valid generalizations to be made. As long as its specified that there are numerous exceptions. For example, in the Arab world, there are numerous modern countries that aren't really controlled by Islam (relatively speaking). I believe you lived in Dubai for a while, yes? But there's still a unity among Muslims precisely BECAUSE of stereotypes and anti-Muslim sentiment that arose. It threw them into an "us vs. them" mentality, uniting them against a common enemy.

Hah, the Middle East doesn't need any help with their "us vs them" mentality. We've got that all figured out on our own. Honestly, our media is closest to the US than anywhere else, so you'll see what's being dealt with here.

I live in Dubai right now m8. It's sort of controlled by Islam. The country as a whole is ruled by Islamic culture, but the gov't in Dubai understands that they can't be too strict in enforcement otherwise they'll scare foreign investors away (considering it's a mainly hospitality and services based economy now, no longer reliant on natural resources).

Quote:
-But the issue in the Middle East has nothing to do with prejudices against Muslims. It has only to do with prejudices against Jews and prejudices against Palestinians/Arabs.

Yes it does. The Jewish/Arab prejudice isn't the only one that exists. There's buttloads of sects and small religions that get the shit end of the stick. Druze, baha'is, copts and so on. No two belief systems get along here.

Quote:
-well, to be more precise, it's a "damned if you don't, often damned if you do." there are plenty of countries controlled by radical Imams who will not hesitate to spin ANYTHING into a western plot.

No one here will hesitate to spin anything into an anything plot. It's always someone's plot. Like I said, the media is quite far from perfect. Fun story: Egyptian TV was broadcasting the other day a device made by the army that detects people with AIDS without a bloodtest (using an antenna!), and the media started saying it CURES it. Then they said it "cures other viruses, such as cancer". The way the media's set up here they're allowed to say whatever if it helps them garner viewers.

Quote:
-the drone strikes don't define his administration. his approach defines his administration. whether or not he was more judicious with drone usage than someone else would've been is irrelevant. and the fact is that he is all too willing to do things he had publicly condemned others for doing. i don't necessarily blame him for all of it; obama ran for office as the ideological opposite as bush, and he might have believed what he said then. but once he was in office, he realized he had to be a bit more realistic. that's fine. but you can't then still take the high road all the time, like your predecessor was a piece of shit and you'd never step in it.

Well, you can't exactly stay silent when other countries are being shitheads, state dept's gotta come out with something.

Quote:
-well, he was an idealist, but they're very different ideals.

I meant Obama's more concerned with interests than idealism.

Quote:
-yes and no. obviously, public opinion on Arabs/Muslims (I'm putting them together because that's what happened naturally in public opinion) in the short-term was awful. i wouldn't say bush capitalized on that, though. i'd say the reaction was an incredibly natural one for a fairly patriotic/nationalistic country faced with the worst terror attack since the Brits burned down the white house. the media shows what will get them ratings. journalism in wartime is sensationalist as it gets, and they won't hesitate to pander to their audience.

But the media was largely responsible for changing public opinion on the Iraq invasion, and then the continued Iraq occupation. Eventually this changed, but that's what I mean by capitalize on the depiction. Sensationalism doesn't just sell, it encourages a climate of fear and can influence opinion.

Quote:
-there are MANY people who strongly oppose western influence. and yes, the younger generation is the friendliest toward western culture, which is to be expected. that's another reason why shit's getting better. it's not obama, it's globalization, which is most tightly embraced by multinational corporations and the youth.

What I'm seeing from younger generation is an embrace towards western ideals along with condemnation of western foreign policy, assigning the west blame for a lot of what's wrong in the modern Arab world. There's generally a lot of ignorance (present company excluded obvs).


Quote:
-That's simply untrue. Since 9/11, the scale of terrorist training has dropped by 90%. But the media continues talking about it like it's still as big a threat as they thought it was (Fox News in particular).

Syria's changed a lot. Compared to 2001 they've gone down, but compared to pre-Arab Spring figures they've gone up. I mean, Syria will obviously do that. There's around 200,000 Islamist fighters there.

Quote:
-see, you're grasping an important distinction here, which is the distinction between local and global Islamist groups, but you're a bit wrong. Al Qaeda is global, the Taliban and Hamas and Hezbollah and El Shabab are local. Local Islamist groups have a more specific goal, which is to establish a Muslim rule in their country. Global Islamist groups are more about destroying the west. But both are definitely Islamist groups, because both are based upon spreading their ideology through violence.

The Muslim Brotherhood is global They're in the UK as a political group and the rest of the middle east as the movement + military wing. Just an fyi, not opposing anything

I tend to split them between Turkey and Qatar backed Islamists (such as the MB) and the ones working out of Pakistan etc, then there's the smaller less organized ones. But generally, "Islamist" can mean anything that mixes Islam with politics (even groups that aren't seeking to establish an Islamic state). It's a really complicated term, because it's so wide-ranging and makes it seem like they're all working together. Like when Al Qaeda recently disassociated itself from ISIS cuz those dudes are too insane (for Al freakin' Qaeda). But their numbers are definitely going up with the recent conflicts. With conflict come missionaries, and then the opposite.

But anti-west sentiment is hard to talk about because, while widespread and acceptable, weans and intensifies at different periods. One day it's on the street applauding the US for spiritual support, the next they're burning an embassy, the next there's condemnation for not providing sufficient aid. It depends on the group, their location, their political leaning, current events and media coverage of said events. That's why it's difficult to talk about.

I see it this way. Either we're self-sustaining, which is happening never. Or reliant on the west, or reliant on Russia and China. I'm of the opinion that British and French colonization should've never ended, and oh please come back and fix your ****ups.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by sickman411
We're all the best except for Ali.

Quote:
Originally Posted by deadsmileyface
yeah russia is pretty shit

Quote:
Originally Posted by Veronicuh
This is extremely serious.

Last edited by ali.guitarkid7 : 03-07-2014 at 01:44 AM.
ali.guitarkid7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2014, 01:44 AM   #72
ethan_hanus
The BKP Guy
 
ethan_hanus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Cedar Park, Texas
The noble peace prize is a joke, they gave one to odumbster for doing nothing, just being the first black president.
ethan_hanus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2014, 01:50 AM   #73
ali.guitarkid7
A techno beat
 
ali.guitarkid7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Lacrimosa soos a mal naaier
^ Was actually for encouraging and fostering co-operation between the west and the middle east/rest of the world.


Remember that Obama also came out and talked about Russia as though they're allies, wanted to open trade etc. As with China. Obviously things have changed, but it's not like it was any certificate of accomplishment. Just an A for effort.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by sickman411
We're all the best except for Ali.

Quote:
Originally Posted by deadsmileyface
yeah russia is pretty shit

Quote:
Originally Posted by Veronicuh
This is extremely serious.
ali.guitarkid7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2014, 01:59 AM   #74
Axelfox
Registered User
 
Axelfox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: All of you copying me please stop it!!!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jackal58
It's encouraged by their church.
Eastern Orthodoxy is homophobic to the core. Violently so.


Sounds like they need a serious education.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spaztikko
I didn't really want another quote in my signature for the foreseeable future but holy shit
Axelfox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2014, 02:07 AM   #75
Nelshizzle
Find a place and go there
 
Nelshizzle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Far out man
Give the noble peace prize to Eddy Murphy. That'll throw them off.
__________________
Too many thoughts

Not enough action

Too much action

Not enough thoughts
Nelshizzle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2014, 03:24 AM   #76
Cianyx
UG Nerd
 
Cianyx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Absurdistan
Quote:
Originally Posted by ali.guitarkid7
Obama didn't **** up. To recap: He pressured a dictator into giving up his WMDs (again, only under the threat of attack) and is sitting back watching this dictator and his support group battle it out with various radical Islamist groups the US doesn't like anyway.

There was little interest in intervening in Syria in the first place (was their policy right before chemicals) and they ended up being dragged into military action because of a throwaway statement Obama made in August 2012. Keep in mind that the US, by themselves, was on the path of delivering 'punitive strikes' onto Syria despite Assad being ready to comply with disarmament (something that only came to fruition with Russian support).

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/05/w...?pagewanted=all
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...-to-allies.html
http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2014/...erious-mistake/
__________________
| (• ◡•)| (❍ᴥ❍ʋ)

Last edited by Cianyx : 03-07-2014 at 03:28 AM.
Cianyx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2014, 04:52 AM   #77
ali.guitarkid7
A techno beat
 
ali.guitarkid7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Lacrimosa soos a mal naaier
What I'm saying is that the US never wanted to intervene. If they wanted to make those strikes happen, they would've done them the same week of the attack.


Placing that red line on chemical weapons deployment wasn't a "throwaway statement". It was an attempt to prevent the use of such weapons by threatening US force. The US isn't willing to become directly involved in the conflict as that would raise spending on said conflict, but Assad's circle didn't entirely keep that in mind (it's actually unlikely that he gave direct order on its use that night. It was more likely to be a last resort used by a general begging to press the button. Remember that at the time, huge parts of Ghouta weren't under the govt's control and the entire area would've likely been lost in a few weeks. Considering its size, this meant that Damascus would've been weeks away from being entirely under rebel control).

So they bluff. Like I said, it's unlikely that this was a calculated provocation against the US or an attempt to call out the "red line" bluff.

Also, Obama's decision to give the vote to congress and delay was a stroke of sheer genius. It could've forced the US's hand into war, so I agree it was risky. This means that a) the Syrian regime loses considerable assets b) the opposition would make further gains c) Russia's port would come under threat d) the possibility of Islamists gaining stronger footing and opening another conflict with the rest of the opposition and e) the US spends some more money (which they really didn't want, but that's it really). The "Russian Solution" wasn't Putin bailing out Obama. It was Putin bailing out Putin, at the cost of his ally's favorite possession. The US remains largely uninvested in the war (financially speaking), and Putin just narrowly saves one of the worst regimes of the 21st centuries from premature collapse. Iran and its assets in the region are still spending and dying, along with Russia. The allies (and friends-ish) continue to give the rebels just enough boost to keep the conflict even, which doesn't cost much compared to the spending by the other side.

Point is: everyone but the US loses. So, y'know, either he masterminded the whole thing and got what he wanted, or he ****ed up and brilliantly came back from that **** up (although I wouldn't say threatening "consequences" over the use of WMDs is a "**** up"). Either way, how is this to Putin's credit exactly when he needed 'saving' much more than Obama did?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by sickman411
We're all the best except for Ali.

Quote:
Originally Posted by deadsmileyface
yeah russia is pretty shit

Quote:
Originally Posted by Veronicuh
This is extremely serious.
ali.guitarkid7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2014, 05:28 AM   #78
Cianyx
UG Nerd
 
Cianyx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Absurdistan
It's throwaway in the sense that it locked him into military action should chemicals be used. A statement that wildly differed to what he was advised by his aides or what his original 'script' was leading up to- former defence aides have similarly berated him for that comment.

Quote:
Moving or using large quantities of chemical weapons would cross a “red line” and “change my calculus,” the president declared in response to a question at a news conference, to the surprise of some of the advisers who had attended the weekend meetings and wondered where the “red line” came from. With such an evocative phrase, the president had defined his policy in a way some advisers wish they could take back.

“The idea was to put a chill into the Assad regime without actually trapping the president into any predetermined action,” said one senior official, who, like others, discussed the internal debate on the condition of anonymity. But “what the president said in August was unscripted,” another official said. Mr. Obama was thinking of a chemical attack that would cause mass fatalities, not relatively small-scale episodes like those now being investigated, except the “nuance got completely dropped.”

As a result, the president seems to be moving closer to providing lethal assistance to the Syrian rebels, even though he rejected such a policy just months ago. American officials have even discussed with European allies the prospect of airstrikes to take out Syrian air defenses, airplanes and missile delivery systems, if government use of chemical weapons is confirmed.


Congress bought time, sure, but it also entailed massive political backlash, especially considering no one was on the same page on the issue. He was able to save face precisely because he didn't have to go to Congress

I doubt Putin really cared about Syria, imo. If he did, Russia would have assisted in funding the proxy war at its conception
__________________
| (• ◡•)| (❍ᴥ❍ʋ)

Last edited by Cianyx : 03-07-2014 at 05:32 AM.
Cianyx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2014, 05:33 AM   #79
Rossenrot
of Prison and Palace
 
Rossenrot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Swerve City
That wall of text progdude posted might be his worst post to date.
__________________
Rossenrot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2014, 05:33 AM   #80
SlackerBabbath
Est. 1966.
 
SlackerBabbath's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Burnley, UK
Figures that a person like Putin would be nominated for a prize created by armaments manufacturer Alfred Nobel.
__________________
“Our life is what our thoughts make it.”
― Marcus Aurelius

Slacker's Art Website.
SlackerBabbath is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:17 AM.

Forum Archives / About / Terms of Use / Advertise / Contact / Ultimate-Guitar.Com © 2014
Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.0.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.