Not these assholes again: Bundy sons, Militia seize federal building

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Not these assholes again: Bundy sons, Militia seize federal building

«‹›6 »

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

So some background that may explain some of the media coverage, based on what I've read so far:

The participants in both the earlier event and in the current occupation consisted of people from a bunch of different militias and from several neighboring states.
Part of the confusion over calling them "protesters" is because the occupiers are a subset of the group that had held an earlier protest over the Hammond situation. That earlier protest, while dumb, right wing and motivated by crazy "muh land" ideology, was a peaceful nonevent.
The Bundys, while being emphasized in media accounts because they're who America recognizes, aren't leading the occupation- they're being used as voices to promote it. Actual leadership is hard to confirm, but it appears to be organized by "III Percenters" - a very loose set of state-level right wing militias whose name comes from the (bullshit) idea that only 3% of Americans took up arms against the British. This lets them think of themselves as the Spartan Elect, instead of fringe loners. Have an interview video from rightwing internet news. Spoiler alert: vertical wood paneling.
One possible ringleader is a guy named Brandon Curtiss, who runs/ran the Idaho three percent. They're the most organized and media-savvy of the militia in this particular movement. Here's him discussing "Communist Core".
The reason the bizarre "this is really our land" argument has so much traction in the region is because the primary demographic is farmers and ranchers, who have to abide by federal regs on land use. This is the main form of direct interaction with the federal government they have, so it's effective to attack it for a large audience across the farming areas of the country.
The site of occupation is a bit more than a shack- it's all the resources and material being used to maintain the refuge- vehicles and such. At the same time, it's in the middle of nowhere and no one was in the building when it was seized, which is probably a part of why the federal response has been limited so far. The feds are really leery of giving the paranoid right (and the political right in the region, which is somewhat sympathetic to their beliefs) additional ammo.

This local coverage from Oregon Live provides additional detail and gives us some idea of how the groups are received locally- the newspaper is going out of its way to avoid attacking the occupiers.

Bubbacub posted:

Yeah, is there precedent for this? A second jail sentence does seem unreasonable.

It's entirely normal. It's not a second jail sentence, it's a "the sentencing judge broke the law giving you a lesser sentence, you knew that, nice try."

Discendo Vox fucked around with this message at 21:15 on Jan 3, 2016

# ¿ Jan 3, 2016 21:11

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 10, 2024 01:59

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

From Oregon Live on the current stated leaders:

quote:

Ammon Bundy, son of Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy, is acting as the leader, conducting a steady stream of media interviews. Other key militia leaders have joined him, including Ryan Payne, an Army veteran from Montana involved in last year's armed standoff in Nevada with federal agents; Blaine Cooper, an Arizona militiaman who also participated in the Nevada standoff, and Jon Ritzheimer, who made headlines last year for anti-Muslim rhetoric. Days before the refuge takeover, Ritzheimer posted what struck some as a farewell video to his family.

Here's Ritzheimer's video. What a charmer. You can tell he's had acting lessons.

Blaine Cooper's youtube channel has a collection of streams from the compound(sorry, that's what the occupied thing really is) and surrounding area.

He wasn't originally stated as a leader, so my guess is he's become their de facto leader and spox due to publicity surrounding his name. I'll look into the others.

Discendo Vox fucked around with this message at 21:24 on Jan 3, 2016

# ¿ Jan 3, 2016 21:19

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

Xandu posted:

Somebody just said the Bundy's phone number on livestream. Kind of want to start spamming it...

There are a lot of opportunities here- I'd go with a fax of the constitutional convention on loop.

Discendo Vox fucked around with this message at 21:41 on Jan 3, 2016

# ¿ Jan 3, 2016 21:32

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

blowfish posted:

I'm completely in favour of the federal boot stomping on the reactionary domestic terrorist face, forever. This, and not busting random losers, is what America's overequipped police should be doing. If said domestic terrorists want to lose a wannabe armed insurrection over it they have it coming.

Different entities. Fed boots (most likely FBI, here) aren't the same as state police.

Bastard Tetris posted:

These are the saddest loving people, holy crap.

Get that man a forums account, stat.

# ¿ Jan 3, 2016 21:40

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

Be really careful with twitter accounts in this scenario- a lot of them will be folks parroting and creating far right claims about the situation.

This is a link to the press conference stream. It's starting at about 3 PM local time.

Discendo Vox fucked around with this message at 21:50 on Jan 3, 2016

# ¿ Jan 3, 2016 21:46

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

His Purple Majesty posted:

Another reminder that an entire neighborhood was burned down and several people were killed when Philly police attempted to arrest members of MOVE.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/MOVE

Copthread was closed. This isn't the copthread. Please.

Xandu posted:

Three %ers are distancing themselves. Doesn't seem like any Oregonians are involved.

https://twitter.com/intelwire/status/683716830226214912

This may or may not be meaningful- there's no real coordination between the 3% militias, so the out of state 3%s may still be involved. At a minimum, Curtiss is one of the occupiers.

# ¿ Jan 3, 2016 22:27

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

Joementum posted:

Supply room at the compound. They brought their weight training equipment

My guess is a fair amount of that stuff, including the weight equipment, was already onsite. That looks like it's one of the storage outbuildings at the headquarters- the staff who oversee the refuge may have been using it as a rec room.

# ¿ Jan 3, 2016 23:01

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

MariusLecter posted:

Please check your tone, you won't get anywhere posting like this.

I apologize if I offended you in some way, please let me know how and I'd be happy to revise the post.

# ¿ Jan 3, 2016 23:06

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

Wiffle ball bat is trolling, just ignore them.

Xandu posted:

I don't think anyone would be that incensed about them being given a five year sentence, it's that they'd already served their time and been released. It just feels wrong to re-sentence them, even if it's legal. It's like that guy who was accidentally never sent to prison and they discovered it 14 years later and he'd built a whole life for himself. Technically, it's only fair to send him back to jail to serve his sentence, but most people would say that it's wrong.

There are limitations on that sort of scenario. The Hammonds were aware that the term was violative and could/would be challenged the entire time.

# ¿ Jan 3, 2016 23:27

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

wiffle ball bat posted:

Please don't gently caress me, I don't consent to it. Also I don't find your tone constructive or your arguments particularly resplendent with truth value or good faith.

Look sir, I know tone arguments, and that's a bad tone argument. Please :getout:

# ¿ Jan 3, 2016 23:33

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

ufarn posted:

So what's up with Sen. Wyden being so docile about the whole affair and going on a listening tour? Is Wyden a bit of a race/militia dingus?

Wyden, at a minimum, has race/militia dinguses for voter constituents. A listening tour given him safe breathing room on the issue, and lets him collect first person statements from his constituents that he can then present himself as agreeing with.

# ¿ Jan 4, 2016 00:14

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

That was pretty magnificent. I feel a bit sorry for the press corps, who got all set up for it.

# ¿ Jan 5, 2016 00:13

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

per Kelly House, from the Oregonian, it appears that the FBI and local law enforcement are using the local high school (the same place that supertiny presser was just held) as their base of operations.

quote:

Lincoln Junior High School in downtown Burns remained closed to the public Monday, with law enforcement workers replacing the students and teachers who were previously scheduled to fill its halls for the first day back from the winter break.

Instead, the school has become a command outpost of sorts.

Roads within a block of the building were cordoned off Monday afternoon while an officer guarded the school's front doors. Men emerged from vehicles parked outside, carrying large metal boxes. One box was labeled "laptops."

# ¿ Jan 5, 2016 00:28

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

Volkerball posted:

Alright, this is looking more like a strategy I can get behind. I'm not opposed to being cautious, but you have to at least get an actual presence there and get some control of the situation instead of pretending it's not happening.

The press is largely cooperating with the feds in not discussing what they're actually doing.

# ¿ Jan 5, 2016 00:57

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

Early deets on the Obama gun control policies. Very promising stuff- a lot of carefully triangulated provisions that have broad public support when individually identified in surveys, all resistant to most ways they can be legally challenged. I see a couple rhetorical weak spots, but this looks like a good move- and well-timed, of course.

# ¿ Jan 5, 2016 01:17

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

High Country News has some excellent, detailed journalism on not just the current mixup, but the whole history of confrontations and conflict relating to land use. My thanks to whomever first posted a link to the public employee harassment story- their site is an excellent resource.

# ¿ Jan 5, 2016 03:28

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

TheHueManatee posted:

All parties involved in this clusterfuck are idiots.

Mods please change thread title to

All parties involved in this clusterfuck are idiots.

# ¿ Jan 5, 2016 11:52

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

Who What Now posted:

Huh, I had thought that Popehat was a SovCit, but that was fairly straightforward and even-handed. Maybe I was thinking of someone else. Thanks for the link!

Popehat is extreme right libertarian, but also has extensive legal bonafides. It's the go to for right wing academic law sourcing, and is why the post talks out of both sides of its mouth about the justice of the sentence and the conviction.

# ¿ Jan 5, 2016 20:17

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

Small note on cellphone jammer talk- cell phone jammers are very extra special illegal under federal law(FCC I think)- to use or own. Don't run a cell phone jammer.

# ¿ Jan 5, 2016 21:53

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

Astrofig posted:

Man I SO want to mail these inbreds a big package of elephant poo poo but knowing them they'd just use it to trash the building and leave it for the federal workers to clean up.....same with the live roaches and mites I was considering. Any ideas?

Gay/interracial pornography, preferably unlabeled.

# ¿ Jan 6, 2016 02:31

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

Filthy Hans posted:

I have a request: the Bundy people have referred to some incident involving a woman in Utah being abused by the government regarding her right to graze on land set aside for a public monument. I haven't been able to find a single news article or blog entry about the incident, does anyone have a link to an article discussing the allegation?

If you can give a link to them alluding to it, we can give it more of a shot. Without further info, this article, based on a cursory google, is the best I can do.

vvvvv HaHA! I finally beat Anosmoman to the punch for once!

Discendo Vox fucked around with this message at 10:15 on Jan 6, 2016

# ¿ Jan 6, 2016 10:13

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

It appears that local opinion is swaying in favor of the militants- that or substantial numbers in the audience are actually sympathizers/supporters from out of town.

# ¿ Jan 7, 2016 02:40

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

Now would be a good time to cut power to the compound, remove the press, jam cell phones, and start arresting people who leave.

# ¿ Jan 7, 2016 02:48

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

Dapper_Swindler posted:

what sucks is that these clowns will be hailed as heroes in their local community. they will get a slap on the wrist from sheriff and the judge along with wink from both of them. maybe the feds will hit the bundy brothers with a few felonies but then they will become local folk heroes or some poo poo.

This is unlikely. Almost all of the occupiers are from out of state, and the town had previously turned against them when they did this off the back of a nonviolent protest in a nearby town.

# ¿ Jan 7, 2016 03:58

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

I've floated the idea that the Bundies and their cohort could be charged under RICO for damage to federal property, among other possible charges relating to extortion. IANAL and don't know the area well enough- it would be a stretch, but I'm interested in what the broadest reaching set of charges could be.

# ¿ Jan 8, 2016 00:34

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

NewMars posted:

You know, I've always been a bit confused by the helmet on the smiley. Is it supposed to be a Pickelhaube with a halo?

tinfoil hat.

# ¿ Jan 8, 2016 07:15

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

Main Paineframe posted:

And loving RICO? Are you kidding me? Are you insane?

This is awhile back, but I actually looked up the DoJ guidance to prosecutors and RICO might (might) be viable under some of the post-2001 damage to federal property charges. The pattern of conduct part would be harder, but probably doable even using the confrontation at the Bundy ranch.

# ¿ Jan 9, 2016 22:07

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

Condiv posted:

if they had actually blockaded the place this wouldve been over much sooner, instead they let them waltz into town and get supplies

why cant they even arrest the ones going into town? they're not so dangerous without their friends...

The location can't really be blockaded without a tremendous investment of manpower, which would feed the militants' narrative. It's not clear that members of the hardcore occupying group are leaving the compound- and even so arresting them in town would still carry the same risks.

# ¿ Jan 10, 2016 02:14

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

Condiv posted:

how so? 1-2 militia men pose much less of a threat than 12-20 militia men

as for feeding the militants' narrative, isn't fear of exactly that allowing them to further dig in and extend this charade? and doing nothing also feeds their narrative (the 2nd amendment is all you need to protect your rights! don't want the feds trampling your right to whatever you want? take up arms!!)

Who What Now posted:

Who gives a poo poo? Doing nothing feeds into their narrative that the federal government is weak and afraid of them, too.

There's still no reason to arrest them for it now when they can do it in two weeks with zero risk to civilians, and without feeding the oppression narrative. The oppression narrative is the one that has broader draw among their audience, and it's why the feds don't rush in.

The state can charge and arrest these people right up to the statute of limitations, which gives them years to work with. There's no reason to pursue it instantly when it risks getting people killed.

# ¿ Jan 10, 2016 03:31

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

ToastyPotato posted:

Didn't playing the passive game last time result in no arrests and two cops getting killed in a mall?

The federal government still has the ability to charge everyone who committed crimes at the ranch. That they haven't been charged or arrested yet does not mean the feds aren't going to do so. The double murder has to be measured against the risks of alternative approaches, not in a vacuum.

# ¿ Jan 10, 2016 04:55

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

ToastyPotato posted:

Of course the have the ability to do so, but they didn't and they haven't, and because of their hands off approach, these dummies are now trying to instigate a new confrontation elsewhere, and also two cops were murdered because the feds let the situation grow massively toxic through the media.

The older question of how different this would be if they were Muslim ISIS sympathizers really should be brought up as much as possible because the fact of the matter is that no one would be questioning law enforcement's decision to end the situation as quickly as possibly with whatever means they had (again, damage to the refuge itself not being included here). No one would be saying that we shouldn't be putting LEO lives in danger to fight terrorists. The fact that so many people are insisting these guys are totally harmless is what is making some other people angry. They are only being considered harmless and laughable because they are white good ol' boys. The reporting and reactions to this situation would be massively different if these dudes were different looking, and that is infuriating, because no one would be questioning it then.

You're arguing a counterfactual without evidence. The federal government has every reason to believe that the situation would be made much, much worse, and that the escalation by militia imitators would be more severe, if they used force. They believe this would happen because it has happened in the past. Waco and Ruby Ridge motivate this population far more than the current incoherent mess does. The FBI would probably react in the exact same way to Muslim ISIS sympathizers if they were occupying a similarly remote location with a similarly limited likelihood of killing people if unprovoked. The main reason the feds might use force sooner would be to prevent right wing militias from separately attacking them!

Discendo Vox fucked around with this message at 05:14 on Jan 10, 2016

# ¿ Jan 10, 2016 05:12

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

The Oklahoma City bombing's deterrent effect was limited, and generally forgotten when Obama was elected. Participants generally view McVeigh as nonrepresentative of their greivances.

# ¿ Jan 10, 2016 05:25

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

kartikeya posted:

Furthermore, if you (general you) are so intimidated by the possibility of another horrific terrorist attack that you refuse to enforce the law when it comes to a specific group of people, or are afraid of taking actions to limit the possibility of violence and death for everyone involved, militants included, then congratulations, McVeigh won. That's the point of terrorist attacks. The only 'lesson' this and the previous Bundy standoff are teaching is that the feds will back down if you have enough guns and are willing to be terrorists to get your way (and have a lot of politicians and pundits that will yell for you, that's a bonus).

That's not the lesson, that's not what the feds are doing, that's not what militia are taking from this. The feds are behaving this way specifically because the only way this turns into horrific bloodshed is if they rush in and try to breach the compound.

That's also not how terrorism works. Terrorist attacks are effective when they elicit a response that makes the instigator sympathetic to a target audience and furthers their political goals.

# ¿ Jan 10, 2016 06:10

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

ToastyPotato posted:

This is great until you apply this thinking to the first Bundy ranch stand off. What happens when, before they are arrested (because slow and steady wins the race), they break the law again somewhere else? Hold back and wait another 6 months?

bango skank posted:

Is it really cherry picking if its an example that involves the same people doing essentially the same thing?

BrandorKP posted:

They didn't do anything after the first stand off. Which I think was a mistake. Methodical is the word. The follow up has to be methodical and competent.

We won't know what DoJ is doing about the Bundys until they're charged- probably until they're arrested. Just because the FBI hasn't issued a press release about their investigation doesn't mean it isn't happening.

# ¿ Jan 10, 2016 06:45

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

Jizz Festival posted:

No? The goal of terrorism is to control your enemies with fear. I don't know where you got your crazy definition from.

Then you haven't been paying attention.

kartikeya posted:

And 'cordon them off so they can't move freely to resupply/reinforce/get wives and kids in to use as bullet shields then wait them out' is not the same as 'brutal raid'.

Because cordoning them off is what they want. This has been explained several times now.

# ¿ Jan 10, 2016 10:33

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

Jizz Festival posted:

Is this how you admit you were wrong, or...?

Terrorism is like other techniques of minority political groups in that it is primarily effective by manipulating the more powerful opposing party into a response that will make the terrorist sympathetic to third parties, leveraging shifts in the power dynamic. Terrorism is effected with that goal in mind.

vvvv I wasn't aware the Bundys had the tacit support of the government. Your definition of terrorism is both overbroad and outdated. All of your posts in this thread have been backbiting shitposts. :getout:

Discendo Vox fucked around with this message at 12:04 on Jan 10, 2016

# ¿ Jan 10, 2016 11:41

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

Vienna Circlejerk posted:

jurisdiction chat

State law enforcement (i.e. the sheriff) and the FBI both have jurisdiction. The militants are violating non-BLM federal laws on federal property. Even if the only violations were of BLM regs on BLM land, there are agreements and laws that would permit BLM or other groups to let the FBI get involved.

# ¿ Jan 10, 2016 22:24

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

The people turned away a couple days ago were a specific group, the pacific patriots network. That group is an umbrella for a few regional right wing militia. It turns out it's at least de facto headed by a guy named Brandon Curtiss. People reading the thread way too much may remember that name- he was one of the people presenting themselves as leaders of the militants early on- I mistakenly said he was leading the occupiers. Curtiss also runs 3% Idaho, apparently. So the micro read here is that this is infighting between Curtiss and his groups, who want to co-opt the attention the Bundys are getting, and the Bundys. The macro read here is

General_Disturbed posted:

Also there seems to be constant infighting between all of the militia groups. None of them seem to be on the same page with any other groups. At one of the meetings a few nights back one guy from x militia stood up to call out y and z militias for being all racists and white supremacists and said the town should ask -them- to leave.

Right wing groups, especially white supremacist groups (here I mean openly racist ones, stormfronters etc) are among the most fractious fringe movements I've looked at.

Onion Knight posted:

Bundy has turned all(afaik) the more serious militia extremists away

They have not. They've turned other groups away, but have generally welcomed individuals that meet their (inconsistent, non-rigorous) standards. This has included a number of quite disturbed individuals, such as Eyelid Chum.

# ¿ Jan 11, 2016 08:08

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

An incredibly charitable reading would be that they are using the list to signal there are women there with them.

# ¿ Jan 11, 2016 09:30

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 10, 2024 01:59

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

There have been three reported groups going to the militants:
1. The 3%ers, they're gone now
2. A group of fiveish elected officials
3. The local "committee of safety", which didn't actually go to the refuge and just had a meeting and press release.

That's it.

Blockading the refuge carries many of the same risks as raiding it. "Keeping people out" still involves guns and force under the eye of media cameras. It's also not particularly physically feasible.

edit:
Here's one of the representatives for the area venting about the occupation/ against the federal government in the House a couple days ago.

transcript here.

edit 2: The Orgonian has also published a great set of militant profiles. Tarp Man is Robert "LaVoy" Finicum.

Discendo Vox fucked around with this message at 19:52 on Jan 11, 2016

# ¿ Jan 11, 2016 19:33

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Not these assholes again: Bundy sons, Militia seize federal building

«‹›6 »