"We are Preparing for Massive Civil War", Says DHS Informant

[Salt Jones]

Cracker...least effective pejorative ever.

Really, cracker?

 

[saveliberty]

Cracker...least effective pejorative ever.

Really, cracker?

I thought you said only whiteys would say that? Man, you're off your normally lame game.

 

[frazzledgear]

Didn't Obama say once that he wanted a federal police force of strength comparable to our present military?

No.

He specifically said he wanted a Civilian National Security Force that was just as strong and just as well funded as the military -oh in order to provide for national security, of course. Like we haven't been well defended all this time without it, right? Obama Civilian Security - YouTube

 

[saveliberty]

Has DHS covered chickens declaring the sky is falling yet?

 

[Missourian]

Cracker...least effective pejorative ever.

Really, cracker?

Really.

 

[francoHFW]

Everyone knows crackers are southern Republicans....What knuckleheads- it's easy to make that mistake with terminal Rush/Foxbots...like the OP.

 

[eots]

Some are predicting a collapse of the American dollar and riots later this year. Not sure whether to take this seriously, but the government did buy 450 million hollow points. Of course, the public has been buying up guns and ammo. I don't think it's to start a coup or anything, but more a fear that the liberal administration would ban all guns if Obama gets re-elected.

Hagmann goes on to say that his sources tell him the concerns of the DHS stem from a collapse of the U.S. dollar and the hyperinflation a collapse in the value of the world’s primary reserve currency implies to a nation of 311 million Americans, who, for the significant portion of the population, is armed.

Uprisings in Greece is, indeed, a problem, but an uprising of armed Americans becomes a matter of serious national security, a point addressed in a recent report by the Pentagon and highlighted as a vulnerability and threat to the U.S. during war-game exercises at the Department of Defense last year, according to one of the DoD’s war-game participants, Jim Rickards, author of Currency Wars: The Making of the Next Global Crisis.

Through his sources, Hagmann confirmed Rickards’ ongoing thesis of a fear of a U.S. dollar collapse at the hands of the Chinese (U.S. treasury bond holders of approximately $1 trillion) and, possibly, the Russians (threatening to launch a gold-backed ruble as an attractive alternative to the U.S. dollar) in retaliation for aggressive U.S. foreign policy initiatives against China’s and Russia’s strategic allies Iran and Syria.

"We are Preparing for Massive Civil War", Says DHS Informant

Read more: “We are Preparing for Massive Civil War,” Says DHS Informant | Beacon Equity: Penny Stocks, Stock Alerts

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=68LAbJtd4uk]Circle Jerks - When The Shit Hits The Fan (Repo Man) - YouTube[/ame]

in a sluggish economy
inflation,recession
hits the land of the free
standing in unemployment lines
blame the government for hard time

we just get by
however we can
we all gotta duck
when the shit hits the fan

10 kids in a cadillac
stand in lines for welfare checks
let's all leach off the state
gee!the money's really great!

soup lines
free loaves of bread
5lb blocks of cheese
bags of groceries
social security
has run out on you and me
we do whatever we can
gotta duck when the shit hits the fan

 

[Emma]

Didn't Obama say once that he wanted a federal police force of strength comparable to our present military?

No.

He specifically said he wanted a Civilian National Security Force that was just as strong and just as well funded as the military -oh in order to provide for national security, of course. Like we haven't been well defended all this time without it, right? Obama Civilian Security - YouTube

context is everything ...

He was speaking of expanding opportunities for citizens to volunteer --- and that those programs are vital to our national security as well.


One of those moments came on September 11, 2001. Whether you lived in Manhattan or thousands of miles away in Colorado, you felt the pain and loss of that day not just as an individual, but as an American. You also felt pride – pride in the firefighters who rushed up the stairs while workers rushed down; pride in the police who provided comfort, and the neighbors who lent a hand; pride in your citizenship, and the tattered flag that flew at Ground Zero. That’s why Americans lined up to give blood. That’s why we held vigils and flew flags. That’s why we rallied behind our President. We were ready to step into the strong current of history, and to answer a new call for our country. But the call never came.

---

The burden of service has fallen on to the backs of our military – and their families – who have endured tour after tour of duty bravely and brilliantly, even though they haven’t always gotten the care and support they have earned.

---

This will not be a call issued in one speech or one program – this will be a central cause of my presidency. We will ask Americans to serve. We will create new opportunities for Americans to serve. And we will direct that service to our most pressing national challenges.
There is no challenge greater than the defense of our nation and our values. The men and women of our military – from Fort Carson to Peterson Air Force base, from the Air Force Academy to the ROTC students here on campus – have signed up at a time when our troops face an ever-increasing load. Fighting a resurgent Taliban. Targeting al Qaeda. Persevering in the deserts and cities of Iraq. Training foreign militaries. Delivering humanitarian relief. In this young century, our military has answered when called, even as that call has come too often. Through their commitment, their capability, and their courage they have done us all proud.

But we need to ease the burden on our troops, while meeting the challenges of the 21st century. That’s why I will call on a new generation of Americans to join our military, and complete the effort to increase our ground forces by 65,000 soldiers and 27,000 Marines.


A call to service must be backed by a sacred trust with anyone who puts on the uniform of the United States. A young person joining our military must know that we’ll only send them into harm’s way when we absolutely must. That we’ll provide them with the equipment needed to complete their mission safely, and deployments that allow adequate time back home. They must see that we’ll care for our military families while they’re deployed, and that we’re providing our veterans with the support, benefits, and opportunity that they have earned when they return home. That’s what I’ve fought for on the Senate Veteran’s Affairs Committee. That’s what I’ll promise as Commander in Chief.


Just as we must value and encourage military service across our society, we must honor and expand other opportunities to serve. Because the future of our nation depends on the soldier at Fort Carson, but it also depends on the teacher in East LA, the nurse in Appalachia, the after-school worker in New Orleans, the Peace Corps volunteer in Africa, and the Foreign Service officer in Indonesia. Americans have shown that they want to step up. But we’re not keeping pace with the demand of those who want to serve, or leveraging that commitment to meet national challenges. FDR not only enlisted Americans to create employment, he targeted that service to build our infrastructure and conserve our environment. JFK not only called on a new generation, he made their service a bridge to the developing world, and a bright light of American values in the darkest days of the Cold War.

Today, AmeriCorps – our nation’s network of local, state and national service programs – has 75,000 slots. I know firsthand the quality of these programs. My wife Michelle once left her job at a law firm to be the founding director of an AmeriCorps program in Chicago that trains young people for careers in public service. These programs invest Americans in their communities and their country. They tap America’s greatest resource – our citizens.

As President, I will expand AmeriCorps to 250,000 slots, and make that increased service a vehicle to meet national goals like providing health care and education, saving our planet and restoring our standing in the world, so that citizens see their efforts connected to a common purpose. People of all ages, stations, and skills will be asked to serve. Because when it comes to the challenges we face, the American people are not the problem – they are the answer.


We’ll send more college graduates to teach and mentor our young people. We’ll call on Americans to join an Energy Corps to conduct renewable energy and environmental cleanup projects in their neighborhoods. We’ll enlist veterans to help other vets find jobs and support, and to be there for our military families. And we’ll also grow our Foreign Service, open consulates that have been shuttered, and double the size of the Peace Corps by 2011 to renew our diplomacy. And we’ll use technology to connect people to service. We’ll expand USA Freedom Corps to create an online network where Americans can browse opportunities to volunteer. You’ll be able to search by category, time commitment, and skill sets; you’ll be able to rate service opportunities, build service networks, and create your own service pages to track your hours and activities. This will empower more Americans to craft their own service agenda, and make their own change from the bottom up.

 

[frazzledgear]

Cracker...least effective pejorative ever.

Really, cracker?

Oh I'm sure saying it again will make it more insulting, right? ROFL! Are you seriously under the impression that is a word that really stings and cuts to the quick or something? Do you even know the origins of that one and what it really means? I doubt it or you wouldn't be so quick to use it or assume others find it to be some kind of dreadful insult. How can you expect a word that many people proudly wear as part of their own history to get people bent out of shape? Not your most grown up moment, is it....

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Another scared cracker thread. Hahahaha.

If I was you I would be very afraid. Racist like you will not be hard to point out, and gang bang drive by shooting style that you are accustom too is not very effective

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Cracker...least effective pejorative ever.

Really, cracker?

Oh I'm sure saying it again will make it more insulting, right? ROFL! Are you seriously under the impression that is a word that really stings and cuts to the quick or something? Do you even know the origins of that one and what it really means? I doubt it or you wouldn't be so quick to use it or assume others find it to be some kind of dreadful insult. How can you expect a word that many people proudly wear as part of their own history to get people bent out of shape? Not your most grown up moment, is it....

He knows the history of the term cracker like he know's where the baggy wear blow the ass pants came from.
Prison bitches wear their pants down blow there ass.

 

[Cowman]

Pew pew.

 

[frazzledgear]

No.

He specifically said he wanted a Civilian National Security Force that was just as strong and just as well funded as the military -oh in order to provide for national security, of course. Like we haven't been well defended all this time without it, right? Obama Civilian Security - YouTube

context is everything ...

He was speaking of expanding opportunities for citizens to volunteer --- and that those programs are vital to our national security as well.


[/I]

No he wasn't -he merely expanded on finding other things for this SECURITY FORCE to do to justify its existence and multibillion dollar budget! How do you think the rest of his bullshit really explained what first came out of his mouth when he said we shouldn't rely just on our military to DEFEND the nation? And when he said this civilian SECURITY FORCE should be JUST AS POWERFUL as the military and JUST AS WELL FUNDED as the military? I don't give a shit what he said after that to soften the shock of even suggesting a massive, powerful civilian SECURITY FORCE. Saying we can't rely JUST on the military to DEFEND the nation means a hell of a lot more than sending some kids to college!

He used the words "security force" to describe them -a group he wanted AS POWERFUL as the the military. You don't find it odd he was comparing their strength to the military instead of something touchy-feely like the Red Cross or something? ROFL There is a reason he compared them to the military and a reason he wants that at least as strong as the military. The words "security force" means a group that will use FORCE to provide SECURITY. So the only question ANYONE should care about here given the fact they would be operating inside our own country -is security from whom?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

No.

He specifically said he wanted a Civilian National Security Force that was just as strong and just as well funded as the military -oh in order to provide for national security, of course. Like we haven't been well defended all this time without it, right? Obama Civilian Security - YouTube

context is everything ...

He was speaking of expanding opportunities for citizens to volunteer --- and that those programs are vital to our national security as well.


One of those moments came on September 11, 2001. Whether you lived in Manhattan or thousands of miles away in Colorado, you felt the pain and loss of that day not just as an individual, but as an American. You also felt pride – pride in the firefighters who rushed up the stairs while workers rushed down; pride in the police who provided comfort, and the neighbors who lent a hand; pride in your citizenship, and the tattered flag that flew at Ground Zero. That’s why Americans lined up to give blood. That’s why we held vigils and flew flags. That’s why we rallied behind our President. We were ready to step into the strong current of history, and to answer a new call for our country. But the call never came.

---

The burden of service has fallen on to the backs of our military – and their families – who have endured tour after tour of duty bravely and brilliantly, even though they haven’t always gotten the care and support they have earned.

---

This will not be a call issued in one speech or one program – this will be a central cause of my presidency. We will ask Americans to serve. We will create new opportunities for Americans to serve. And we will direct that service to our most pressing national challenges.
There is no challenge greater than the defense of our nation and our values. The men and women of our military – from Fort Carson to Peterson Air Force base, from the Air Force Academy to the ROTC students here on campus – have signed up at a time when our troops face an ever-increasing load. Fighting a resurgent Taliban. Targeting al Qaeda. Persevering in the deserts and cities of Iraq. Training foreign militaries. Delivering humanitarian relief. In this young century, our military has answered when called, even as that call has come too often. Through their commitment, their capability, and their courage they have done us all proud.

But we need to ease the burden on our troops, while meeting the challenges of the 21st century. That’s why I will call on a new generation of Americans to join our military, and complete the effort to increase our ground forces by 65,000 soldiers and 27,000 Marines.


A call to service must be backed by a sacred trust with anyone who puts on the uniform of the United States. A young person joining our military must know that we’ll only send them into harm’s way when we absolutely must. That we’ll provide them with the equipment needed to complete their mission safely, and deployments that allow adequate time back home. They must see that we’ll care for our military families while they’re deployed, and that we’re providing our veterans with the support, benefits, and opportunity that they have earned when they return home. That’s what I’ve fought for on the Senate Veteran’s Affairs Committee. That’s what I’ll promise as Commander in Chief.


Just as we must value and encourage military service across our society, we must honor and expand other opportunities to serve. Because the future of our nation depends on the soldier at Fort Carson, but it also depends on the teacher in East LA, the nurse in Appalachia, the after-school worker in New Orleans, the Peace Corps volunteer in Africa, and the Foreign Service officer in Indonesia. Americans have shown that they want to step up. But we’re not keeping pace with the demand of those who want to serve, or leveraging that commitment to meet national challenges. FDR not only enlisted Americans to create employment, he targeted that service to build our infrastructure and conserve our environment. JFK not only called on a new generation, he made their service a bridge to the developing world, and a bright light of American values in the darkest days of the Cold War.

Today, AmeriCorps – our nation’s network of local, state and national service programs – has 75,000 slots. I know firsthand the quality of these programs. My wife Michelle once left her job at a law firm to be the founding director of an AmeriCorps program in Chicago that trains young people for careers in public service. These programs invest Americans in their communities and their country. They tap America’s greatest resource – our citizens.

As President, I will expand AmeriCorps to 250,000 slots, and make that increased service a vehicle to meet national goals like providing health care and education, saving our planet and restoring our standing in the world, so that citizens see their efforts connected to a common purpose. People of all ages, stations, and skills will be asked to serve. Because when it comes to the challenges we face, the American people are not the problem – they are the answer.


We’ll send more college graduates to teach and mentor our young people. We’ll call on Americans to join an Energy Corps to conduct renewable energy and environmental cleanup projects in their neighborhoods. We’ll enlist veterans to help other vets find jobs and support, and to be there for our military families. And we’ll also grow our Foreign Service, open consulates that have been shuttered, and double the size of the Peace Corps by 2011 to renew our diplomacy. And we’ll use technology to connect people to service. We’ll expand USA Freedom Corps to create an online network where Americans can browse opportunities to volunteer. You’ll be able to search by category, time commitment, and skill sets; you’ll be able to rate service opportunities, build service networks, and create your own service pages to track your hours and activities. This will empower more Americans to craft their own service agenda, and make their own change from the bottom up.

Yes emma context is everything let's keep it in context and not what you want it too mean.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tt2yGzHfy7s]Obama Civilian Security - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Clementine]

Everyone knows crackers are southern Republicans....What knuckleheads- it's easy to make that mistake with terminal Rush/Foxbots...like the OP.

The more you post, the more you show your ignorance.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

He specifically said he wanted a Civilian National Security Force that was just as strong and just as well funded as the military -oh in order to provide for national security, of course. Like we haven't been well defended all this time without it, right? Obama Civilian Security - YouTube

context is everything ...

He was speaking of expanding opportunities for citizens to volunteer --- and that those programs are vital to our national security as well.


One of those moments came on September 11, 2001. Whether you lived in Manhattan or thousands of miles away in Colorado, you felt the pain and loss of that day not just as an individual, but as an American. You also felt pride – pride in the firefighters who rushed up the stairs while workers rushed down; pride in the police who provided comfort, and the neighbors who lent a hand; pride in your citizenship, and the tattered flag that flew at Ground Zero. That’s why Americans lined up to give blood. That’s why we held vigils and flew flags. That’s why we rallied behind our President. We were ready to step into the strong current of history, and to answer a new call for our country. But the call never came.

---

The burden of service has fallen on to the backs of our military – and their families – who have endured tour after tour of duty bravely and brilliantly, even though they haven’t always gotten the care and support they have earned.

---

This will not be a call issued in one speech or one program – this will be a central cause of my presidency. We will ask Americans to serve. We will create new opportunities for Americans to serve. And we will direct that service to our most pressing national challenges.
There is no challenge greater than the defense of our nation and our values. The men and women of our military – from Fort Carson to Peterson Air Force base, from the Air Force Academy to the ROTC students here on campus – have signed up at a time when our troops face an ever-increasing load. Fighting a resurgent Taliban. Targeting al Qaeda. Persevering in the deserts and cities of Iraq. Training foreign militaries. Delivering humanitarian relief. In this young century, our military has answered when called, even as that call has come too often. Through their commitment, their capability, and their courage they have done us all proud.

But we need to ease the burden on our troops, while meeting the challenges of the 21st century. That’s why I will call on a new generation of Americans to join our military, and complete the effort to increase our ground forces by 65,000 soldiers and 27,000 Marines.


A call to service must be backed by a sacred trust with anyone who puts on the uniform of the United States. A young person joining our military must know that we’ll only send them into harm’s way when we absolutely must. That we’ll provide them with the equipment needed to complete their mission safely, and deployments that allow adequate time back home. They must see that we’ll care for our military families while they’re deployed, and that we’re providing our veterans with the support, benefits, and opportunity that they have earned when they return home. That’s what I’ve fought for on the Senate Veteran’s Affairs Committee. That’s what I’ll promise as Commander in Chief.


Just as we must value and encourage military service across our society, we must honor and expand other opportunities to serve. Because the future of our nation depends on the soldier at Fort Carson, but it also depends on the teacher in East LA, the nurse in Appalachia, the after-school worker in New Orleans, the Peace Corps volunteer in Africa, and the Foreign Service officer in Indonesia. Americans have shown that they want to step up. But we’re not keeping pace with the demand of those who want to serve, or leveraging that commitment to meet national challenges. FDR not only enlisted Americans to create employment, he targeted that service to build our infrastructure and conserve our environment. JFK not only called on a new generation, he made their service a bridge to the developing world, and a bright light of American values in the darkest days of the Cold War.

Today, AmeriCorps – our nation’s network of local, state and national service programs – has 75,000 slots. I know firsthand the quality of these programs. My wife Michelle once left her job at a law firm to be the founding director of an AmeriCorps program in Chicago that trains young people for careers in public service. These programs invest Americans in their communities and their country. They tap America’s greatest resource – our citizens.

As President, I will expand AmeriCorps to 250,000 slots, and make that increased service a vehicle to meet national goals like providing health care and education, saving our planet and restoring our standing in the world, so that citizens see their efforts connected to a common purpose. People of all ages, stations, and skills will be asked to serve. Because when it comes to the challenges we face, the American people are not the problem – they are the answer.


We’ll send more college graduates to teach and mentor our young people. We’ll call on Americans to join an Energy Corps to conduct renewable energy and environmental cleanup projects in their neighborhoods. We’ll enlist veterans to help other vets find jobs and support, and to be there for our military families. And we’ll also grow our Foreign Service, open consulates that have been shuttered, and double the size of the Peace Corps by 2011 to renew our diplomacy. And we’ll use technology to connect people to service. We’ll expand USA Freedom Corps to create an online network where Americans can browse opportunities to volunteer. You’ll be able to search by category, time commitment, and skill sets; you’ll be able to rate service opportunities, build service networks, and create your own service pages to track your hours and activities. This will empower more Americans to craft their own service agenda, and make their own change from the bottom up.

Yes emma context is everything let's keep it in context and not what you want it too mean.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tt2yGzHfy7s]Obama Civilian Security - YouTube[/ame]

Wait a moment.

Are you really trying to claim "context" with the same 20-second clip?

"Context" is the whole speech - what Emma posted. Not the 20 second clip. That's the definition of "out of context", actually.

 

[frazzledgear]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it the job of the DHS to prepare for various possible events?

How many Americans would agree the DHS needs to prepare for waging a war against its own people....

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Thread moved, merged with existing thread.

 

[frazzledgear]

context is everything ...

He was speaking of expanding opportunities for citizens to volunteer --- and that those programs are vital to our national security as well.


[/I]

Yes emma context is everything let's keep it in context and not what you want it too mean.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tt2yGzHfy7s]Obama Civilian Security - YouTube[/ame]

Wait a moment.

Are you really trying to claim "context" with the same 20-second clip?

"Context" is the whole speech - what Emma posted. Not the 20 second clip. That's the definition of "out of context", actually.

No, no NO! Just like any important speech or any significant writing, the thrust of the entire message is in the first opening paragraph. The rest is either to provide cover, window dressing or to soften the impact of what is said in the first paragraph. The rest of the speech isn't "context", it isn't to nullify what he says right up front. In this case it was to soften what was said right off the bat by offering further justification for its existence until such time fulfilling its primary role of acting as a SECURITY FORCE with powers EQUAL TO THE MILITARY was necessary! The fact he calls it "Civilian" is to distinguish it from the MILITARY he compared it to.

This is a group he wants to have as much power as the military. Not as much power as the Red Cross, not as much power as FEMA, etc. -but as much power as the MILITARY. His words, not mine. If it was about just providing touchy-feely things like COLLEGE OPPORTUNITIES, then he would have compared it to, wanted to give it identical powers to and called it some non-defense sounding, touchy-feely title totally unrelated to anything remotely military sounding -but he chose the one with the power to WAGE WAR!

He called it a SECURITY FORCE and explained its primary function right off the bat, not buried paragraphs later. Its primary purpose for existing would be TO PROVIDE FOR DEFENSE with the identical powers to wage war as the military. He wasn't comparing it to some vague government agency but to the sole institution with the power to wage war and the use of violence -except THEY could carry out those powers inside this country while the military is banned from doing so. That's one way of getting around the intent of that restriction, isn't? Just make up a new army with a new name! The only worse title he could have chosen is "The People's Army" but he came as close as he dared.

You have to wallow in self-delusion in order to pretend he was really talking about touchy-feely shit as if it would operate as some kind of first aid station or college scholarship program! He made it clear right off the bat he meant a civilian MILITARY force with the same kind of POWER the military has -and what kind of power does it have? The power to WAGE WAR using force and violence. Which is why he even called it a Civilian Security FORCE. Not the Good Time Opportunity Center or even the Civilian Security Buddy.

So again, given the fact this Civilian Security Force would be operating inside this country with the same powers of the military -it would be providing for defense and security of the nation against WHOM?

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Yes emma context is everything let's keep it in context and not what you want it too mean.

Obama Civilian Security - YouTube

Wait a moment.

Are you really trying to claim "context" with the same 20-second clip?

"Context" is the whole speech - what Emma posted. Not the 20 second clip. That's the definition of "out of context", actually.

No, no NO! Just like any important speech or any significant writing, the thrust of the entire message is in the first opening paragraph. The rest is either to provide cover, window dressing or to soften the impact of what is said in the first paragraph. The rest of the speech isn't "context", it isn't to nullify what he says right up front. In this case it was to soften what was said right off the bat by offering further justification for its existence until such time fulfilling its primary role of acting as a SECURITY FORCE with powers EQUAL TO THE MILITARY was necessary! The fact he calls it "Civilian" is to distinguish it from the MILITARY he compared it to.

This is a group he wants to have as much power as the military. Not as much power as the Red Cross, not as much power as FEMA, etc. -but as much power as the MILITARY. His words, not mine. If it was about just providing touchy-feely things like COLLEGE OPPORTUNITIES, then he would have compared it to, wanted to give it identical powers to and called it some non-defense sounding, touchy-feely title totally unrelated to anything remotely military sounding -but he chose the one with the power to WAGE WAR!

He called it a SECURITY FORCE and explained its primary function right off the bat, not buried paragraphs later. Its primary purpose for existing would be TO PROVIDE FOR DEFENSE with the identical powers to wage war as the military. He wasn't comparing it to some vague government agency but to the sole institution with the power to wage war and the use of violence -except THEY could carry out those powers inside this country while the military is banned from doing so. That's one way of getting around the intent of that restriction, isn't? Just make up a new army with a new name! The only worse title he could have chosen is "The People's Army" but he came as close as he dared.

You have to wallow in self-delusion in order to pretend he was really talking about touchy-feely shit as if it would operate as some kind of first aid station or college scholarship program! He made it clear right off the bat he meant a civilian MILITARY force with the same kind of POWER the military has -and what kind of power does it have? The power to WAGE WAR using force and violence. Which is why he even called it a Civilian Security FORCE. Not the Good Time Opportunity Center or even the Civilian Security Buddy.

So again, given the fact this Civilian Security Force would be operating inside this country with the same powers of the military -it would be providing for defense and security of the nation against WHOM?

The out of context quote that you guys love so much wasn't from "the first paragraph" of his speech, it was in the middle - 17 minutes in, actually.