| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Dhimmi Watch | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Raymond Ibrahim | Robert Spencer |  |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
Why didn't the Vast Majority of Moderates™ in the mosque turn him over to police? "Terrorist suspect flees police in mosque," by Daniel McGrory and Richard Ford in the TimesOnline, with thanks to Ben:
A British-born terror suspect was on the run last night after breaking his control order and evading police by taking shelter in a mosque.The man, aged 26, is thought to have escaped abroad after claiming that he wanted to undertake terror training in Afghanistan.
His disappearance is a further embarrassment for John Reid, the Home Secretary, as he is the third terror suspect under a control order to escape in less than six months.
It raises serious questions about the effectiveness of the orders, which were introduced by Government in 2005 and are designed to control and monitor terrorist suspects who can’t be prosected or deported from Britain.
Opposition MPs last night demanded that the suspect be identified. Currently there is an anonymity order in place and the Government has not applied to overturn it.
The man, who is of Pakistani origin and lives in Manchester, was only placed under the control order this month. But within four days he disappeared. Police sources say that the man failed to show up at a local police station to surrender his passport. He was traced to a nearby mosque, where community leaders say he had sought sanctuary. Police rarely enter a mosque: they began discussions with both local community figures and leading officials connected to the mosque.
It is understood that while these talks were taking place, the young suspect was helped to escape through a back entrance while officers from Greater Manchester Police were stationed outside.
Posted by Robert at January 17, 2007 10:22 AM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
|
The defeaning silence of these alleged moderate muslims is just a regular response.
They should had burned down the mosque.
Moderate muslims can be found as easily as the Lochness monster or Santa Claus.
THIS article should be read by all apologists, leftists, and muslim lovers around the world.
England is already an islamic colony run by dhimmi, British politicians.
Posted by: Hungarian Crusader![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/nav-commenters.gif)
at January 17, 2007 10:46 AM
Any mosque that shelters escaped criminals needs to be immediately closed.
Posted by: ISLAMSFORLOSERS at January 17, 2007 10:51 AM
Another sign the Brits have surrendered to Islam. It's getting difficult to tell the difference between England and France any more(other than the food of course).
Posted by: walterc at January 17, 2007 10:53 AM
Lol this man is probably in Pakistan by now, he stole his sisters burkhini and used a curtain as a veil......straight through customs lol!
Posted by: W_D_J_D at January 17, 2007 10:57 AM
As I recall - the right to "sanctuary" in a church was revoked several years ago in the UK - so why should a mosque be any different?
Posted by: drk at January 17, 2007 10:58 AM
In fairness to Britain all Western nations need to close down (and probably demolish) any mosque that spews jihadist crap, hides criminals or engages in any other treasonous or criminal behavior. The problem is that no Western nation has the guts to do so because they all consider the cult of death a legitimate religion and they won't dare trample on freedom of religion-much to the detriment of the infidel majorities (for now) populating these nations. Much work needs to be done to change the false image of Islam as a peaceful religion to the true image of death loving cult of treason to get the job done.
Posted by: ISLAMSFORLOSERS at January 17, 2007 11:02 AM
Any mosque that shelters escaped criminals needs to be immediately closed.
Posted by: ISLAMSFORLOSERS
Where is the common sense of self protection? People who understand the seriousness of the threat to Britain need to step it up and if the politicians and governmental agencies are not stepping it up... the British people need to hold them publicly accountable. We no longer have the luxury of pushing 'our protection' off on those who are supposed to be doing the work. They're not... neither in Britain nor the United States. The common people need to make this clear and put those politicians and agencies on notice.
at January 17, 2007 11:02 AM
a 12foot Rome Plow (a huge bulldozer), works wonders when removing debris...
Posted by: exsgtbrown at January 17, 2007 11:17 AM
another good example of why Muslim Immigration should be banned....
Posted by: exsgtbrown at January 17, 2007 11:20 AM
I suspect the suspect was a regular mosque attendee...and that the clerics inside laughed with him when he relayed his tale of heroic escape....
Posted by: exsgtbrown at January 17, 2007 11:22 AM
Vast Majority of Moderates®
.... when did CAIR trademark it?
drk~ interesting that they revoked the Church as a Refuge. You are correct, it should apply to the mosque as well- but it is possible the police were in fear for their lives if they chose to enter.
Posted by: Gary at January 17, 2007 11:24 AM
12foot Rome Plow (a huge bulldozer), works wonders when removing debris...
Posted by: exsgtbrown at January 17, 2007 11:17 AM
Hmm, I wonder how long it would take one of these to clear the average sized "debris"? It would make for an interesting experiment.
You really need to get your own site like others here have done. This site is too limiting for your insights. I'd certainly add such a site to my bookmarks and I suspect a few others here would too.
at January 17, 2007 11:25 AM
drk
The right to "sanctuary" in a church was revoked 400 years ago but it still has an emotional pull. Mosques are no different - but they are "sensitive"
BTW, The Times was the only paper to headline this story the rest lead on alleged racist remarks to an Indian actress on a c*** TV programme. Our journalists have their priorities after all.
at January 17, 2007 11:30 AM
I understand the basic story. A terror suspect was helped to escape by a vast 'fifth' column inside the UK. On the particulars and wording, I am puzzled. Due to a 2005 law, the suspect was under control..does that mean the same as 'under house arrest' in the US? Further, the article says that the law was meant to cover individuals who could not be prosecuted or deported from Britain. So, what would have happened to this guy in the long run? One further question for any from the UK who might know the answer. I read that the unemployment rate among "Asians" is much higher than the native born Brit and that they are more likely to need public support. So, if that is true, why does the UK need more immigration from anywhere, if the 'Asian' unemployment rate is 30-40%? That really makes no sense, but then many government policies in the US make no sense either.
Posted by: maryrose at January 17, 2007 11:32 AM
Let's see;
he is identified as a terrorist suspect but he cannot be prosecuted or deported as one because he is a British citizen.
He is free to roam the streets of Manchester on what is defined as a control order which would have the British Government spend thousands of Euros, or pounds monitoring him unsuccessfully.
He can't be identified due to anonymity order .
He can't be pursued inside of a mosque.
DUE THE MATH FOLKS; THERE IS NO SECURITY DEMONSTRATED AGAINST TERRORISM HERE AT ALL.
PS: And he probably walked off wearing a hijab as well.
at January 17, 2007 11:42 AM
Officers rarely enter mosques?! Are those mosques not British territory that police officers are sworn to police? WHAT THE FUCK IS WRONG WITH THE BRITS?!
Posted by: george_rem at January 17, 2007 11:47 AM
Please call or email your congressman and the White House re: a pardon for the Border guards that have been convicted of shooting a Mexican Drug Runner. They are to report to jail tomorrow to serve their 10 year sentences in a federal jail. As the jails in California are controlled by the Mexican Mafia, it is likely that they will not survive their sentence.
If Clinton could pardon an array of rogues on a Quid pro Quo basis such as cocaine dealer Carlos Vignali and con man and tax evader Marc Rich then Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean are worthy of pardon. If Bush can pardon fraudulent banker Edwin Cox Jr in exchange for political donations from his father, Pakistani heroin distributor Aslam Adam, and Cuban plane bomber/terrorist Orlando Bosch, then Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean are worthy of pardon.
Re: the Drug Runner who was shot, he was given a free pass for smuggling over 100lbs of marijuana. No prosecution and release from custody.
Follow up: The same Drug Runner was recently arrested for smuggling in 1,000lbs of marijuana. The indictment was sealed and it looks like he is going to get kid gloves treatment.
Posted by: GrimReaperxxx at January 17, 2007 11:48 AM
Please call or email your congressman and the White House re: a pardon for the Border guards that have been convicted of shooting a Mexican Drug Runner. They are to report to jail tomorrow to serve their 10 year sentences in a federal jail. As the jails in California are controlled by the Mexican Mafia, it is likely that they will not survive their sentence.
Yes. These guys are heroes.
Posted by: george_rem at January 17, 2007 11:53 AM
This is a "King's X" war. It just baffles me how we can let the enemy of civilization spell out the rules (rules?) of war.
Posted by: Carolyn2 at January 17, 2007 11:55 AM
Exactly.
Where are the moderate muslims now?
Those muslims who claim they are against terrorsim.
Why cant the do the simple act of handing over the terrorist to the authorities.
Ask the marines to go in the mosque and these same moderate muslims who right now seem to have no voice will suddenly find sound in high decibels to protest.
Isn't this equaivalent of supporting terrorism.
WAKE UP UK , USA , India and other democratic countries.In trying to do everything politically correct , al we are doing is giving the enemy an advantage. The same enemy cares a hoot about laws of engagement and secularism and all other problems which prevent us from taking corrective action.
As someone correctly said, He must have worn a burkha and dissapered to pakistan by now. Thats why these moderate muslims protest for burkha. So it can be useful at times like this.
Posted by: Rajesh_singh at January 17, 2007 12:10 PM
Mosques are not simply places of worship.
Mosques are quite different from churches, temples, synagogues etc.
Mosques are bunkers, places for weapons storage, centers for plotting & planning terrorist attacks, centers for indoctrination and subversion.
http://sheikyermami.com/2006/12/22/what-is-a-mosque/
at January 17, 2007 12:13 PM
Being that so many mosques are the central nervous system for spreading terror and sedition, they should be fair game for law enforcement! Instead, they are treated like sacred holy ground that no infidel dare intrude upon. What gets me is that law enforcement officials wouldn't hesitate to intrude upon a church under such conditions. Anyone harboring fugitives, whether it's the Catholic church with illegal immigrants or Mosques with terrorists, should be legally charged with a crime.
at January 17, 2007 12:18 PM
Follow up: The same Drug Runner was recently arrested for smuggling in 1,000lbs of marijuana. The indictment was sealed and it looks like he is going to get kid gloves treatment.
This drug runner also has a multi-million (or is it billion) dollar lawsuit against the Border Patrol. Watch for a settlement for "pain and suffering" and reckless endangerment (they forced him to drive at high speeds to evade them) and whatever else the traitorous lawyers can find.
Posted by: PMK at January 17, 2007 12:20 PM
'Muslims against terrorism' simply means YOU are forcing them to fight against kuffars trying to stop them from spreading Islam.
Resisting Islam makes YOU an opressor and an opressor is the enemy of Islam. That makes YOU a terrorist.
STOP RESISTING ISLAM NOW!
(One of the best signs I have ever seen in one of the demonstrations)
http://sheikyermami.com/2007/01/17/police-action-needed-against-hate-preachers/
at January 17, 2007 12:22 PM
http://www.wouldyoubelieve.com/
Posted by: ssa at January 17, 2007 12:23 PM
Evidently, Mosques are seen as places of refuge....like a foreign embassy.
The west is allowing "countries with countries" so to speak, which will surely tear our countries apart if allowed to continue this way.
As long as these mosques exist, it will always be us vs. them, a state within a state vs. a state.
I truly believe in freedom of religion but not when the religion protects, assumes or interferes with or subdues the affairs of state or the safety of the citizens and that is what Islam does best.
The west has allowed religion and state divisions to becomed so blurred/smudged so that people such as the posters here at JW become defined as Bigots or Islamophobes. Our society has lost its way.
Freedoms of any kind can only be taken so far. These freedoms cannot be extended to include the rights of genocidal, facist elements. There has to be a limit. These limits are not understood by most liberals, PCs, SPs and on and on. These type tend to hop, skip and jump down the golden brick road, sipping cool aid along the way, oblivious to the dangers from within. In other words live how one would like life to be, not at is is.
If these mosques are allowed to continue unimpeded, afording all the rights todays society expects, then other groups such as pedophiles could expect to have a right to their own mosque/church/meeting house, whatever you want to call it, as disgusting as that is.
We need to re-set rights and rigtesousness!
Posted by: sounder at January 17, 2007 12:26 PM
FRED,
The right to sanctuary was revoked 400 years ago? Wouldn't that have been right at the time of the Reformation, when the state was conducting its own war against what it perceived as rebel faiths?
Has it been observed since then, or has the need for sanctuary not come up in the last 400 years?
It still exists in America, so American Muslims would have the same option this guy had. Right now, an illegal alien who had previously been deported and then snuck back into the country is fighting a lawful deportation order by hiding in a church, with the full support of her community. At least she can't get out of the church without being picked up by the police or ICE.
What about the Brits? This guy ran into a mosque. Did they ever hear of cordoning off the area and checking everyone who came out? Are there no Muslim officers who could have entered the mosque to keep tabs on this guy? From this side of the pond, Britain sounds lawless.
at January 17, 2007 12:30 PM
From the Article,
"It raises serious questions about the effectiveness of the orders, which were introduced by Government in 2005 and are designed to control and monitor terrorist suspects who can’t be prosected or deported from Britain."
"Opposition MPs last night demanded that the suspect be identified. Currently there is an anonymity order in place and the Government has not applied to overturn it."
In all seriousness, with these types of laws in place in the UK, one can not expect a large opposing voice to his taking refuge in a mosque and subsequent escape from the country.
For God's sake, if I lived in a country with laws like those, I'd just be happy the anonymous suspect got scared and left the country under his own volition. At least he's gone. That's more than Britain's government can do.
at January 17, 2007 12:31 PM
Apparently, the leaders of the mosque haven’t signed on to the European Proposed Charter of Muslim Understanding (and its Article 7) …
http://answering-islam.org.uk/Terrorism/EuropeCharter.pdf
… like all the other moderate muslims have(?)
… or soon will(?)
at January 17, 2007 12:32 PM
maryrose
One further question for any from the UK who might know the answer. I read that the unemployment rate among "Asians" is much higher than the native born Brit and that they are more likely to need public support.
Fair question!
The truth is that in the UK there is not necessarily a relationship between being unemployed and drawing welfare. With no national ID database the welfare system is screwed rotten and people with foreign names have the time of their lives. I think one of the “Successful” London bombers two years ago was an “asylum seeker” drawing SIX yes SIX different welfare payments in FIVE different names.
An assessment officer once said to me many years ago. “This is a stupid country”.
at January 17, 2007 12:33 PM
"It is understood that while these talks were taking place, the young suspect was helped to escape through a back entrance while officers from Greater Manchester Police were stationed outside." --from the article.
That statement sums up a great deal about the trouble with Islam.
Posted by: Archimedes at January 17, 2007 12:34 PM
Clair, well said. But i'd like to go even further. I've always found it troubling that a UN ambassador can commit a crime like even murder and the local cops cant touch him. Free from all prosecution.
Posted by: guest worker at January 17, 2007 12:34 PM
maryrose
PS. There are families who spend a good part of each year in Pakistan or Bangladesh where the welfare money goes a lot further.
Posted by: Fred at January 17, 2007 12:37 PM
We have a word for those who help criminals, Accessories, before the fact, after the fact. It doesn’t matter, an accessory to a crime or criminal is a crime itself. But never mind. We aren’t arresting or prosecuting any of them. You have to understand that the police and guvment are scared. Scared that their families will be butchered if they offend or arrest the islamists. Totally worthless for us, a great asset for the islamists.
Posted by: tgusa at January 17, 2007 12:58 PM
A little OT,
Did anyone else watch the "Daily Show" last night?
There was a guy who wrote a book on the middle-east and our early involvement there.
Facts such as ; we had a middle-east policy from the beginning of the USA.
The first death of a US soldier on foreign soil was in the middle-east, etc.
John Stewart had never heard of the Barbary pirates.
I was half asleep when I was watching and can't remember the guy's name or the title of the book. (It was as thick as a phone book) Did any of you catch the book title? I'd like to buy it.
at January 17, 2007 1:06 PM
Any mosque that shelters escaped criminals needs to be immediately closed.
Posted by: ISLAMSFORLOSERS
Yes I agree, and any organisation, mosque, church or otherwise, that 'gives refuge' to illegal immigrants (i.e. immigrants that have broken our law and have entered our country illegally - not going through the lawful channels), should ALSO be closed down.
Break the law (which is a crime), pay the penalty.
Posted by: The Goobs at January 17, 2007 1:17 PM
Off topic from Minnesota:
Minneapolis: Muslims sue for right to pray
Posted by: ummahnewslinks at January 17, 2007 1:18 PM
We have a word for those who help criminals, Accessories..... Posted by tgusa
Would this include preachers/priests also?
The law needs to apply to all religious groups if it is going to have teeth.
Posted by: The Goobs at January 17, 2007 1:19 PM
Does it include priests and such? The law must apply to all universally, otherwise we end up rifght where we are. Not a good place to be, the islamists are here for one purpose, and it ain’t work as other posters have pointed out. They have no desire to help us build a better country, quite the contrary as a matter of fact. Myself, I am suspicious of them all, I think they have infiltrated us at every level and they have a mission. It’s a foreign army that the authorities have imported. They can proceed with silent terror, which is what they are doing now. Heads need to roll, legally. No mercy for the merciless, that is my rule.
Posted by: tgusa at January 17, 2007 1:34 PM
Thanks, Fred, for the explanation. I, too, live in a stupid country, the USA. The latest proof is the conviction and prison time for two border patrol officers doing their duty to protect our southern border.
Posted by: maryrose at January 17, 2007 1:35 PM
Close the mosques,too many times we hear of how they use them to plan, and to hide inside, so it is just a building and nothing more by their actions.
Posted by: WildThing at January 17, 2007 1:40 PM
"It is understood that while these talks were taking place, the young suspect was helped to escape through a back entrance while officers from Greater Manchester Police were stationed outside." --from the article.
As peaceful religionists from Indonesia to Saudi Arabia to Nigeria destroy churches (most typically private homes) and those who worship in them, we here in the West quiver fearfully like timorous mice lest the Islamocrats among us take umbrage with a dopey cartoon depicting a masjid being used as a staging area for the peaceful inner struggle.
http://illustratedpig.blogspot.com/2007/01/dilemma-of-mr-plod.html
at January 17, 2007 1:59 PM
I’ve been looking for instances of recent French bravery in action against Islamists and all I can find is a few mentions about not going out at night because its dangerous and the opening of a new flag factory.
Are you sure Walter that you are talking about the Britain that doesn’t have the Euro, and is fully committed to the war on Islam? Or have you confused us with the one that people who believe anything they read think is Britain?
This particular idiot was on a Nu Labour control order. What the hell is that? If you’re a terrorist you should be inside doing porridge. If you’re not a terrorist then you shouldn’t need controlling.
at January 17, 2007 2:22 PM
Hey mert,
How’s your dad doing? Porrige for all of the islamists, to go of course.
at January 17, 2007 2:47 PM
Hey tgusa,
He’s had six days of anti C-Diff medication and a change of ward to go with his new doctor. Today the old man was talking although you’d need a translator to get past the fact that he’s not wearing his false teeth. Still I felt like jumping around this afternoon when he said he would like to watch Countdown! Happy days.
Posted by: Mert at January 17, 2007 3:05 PM
FIRE UP THE BULLDOZERS!
Posted by: squire at January 17, 2007 3:14 PM
The man, aged 26, is thought to have escaped abroad after claiming that he wanted to undertake terror training in Afghanistan.
And the Brits won't extradite this scum because they might be subject to torture at home??!!!!
That really takes the cake!!
These guys travel to attend jihad-camps and then they can stay in the West for fear of being tortured in the very same land they just learned to terrorize other people in!!
Let me quote from a probably not very well-known German law here. If properly applied it could be very useful.
Under this Law it is illegal for a convicted felon to learn Martial Arts. Committing a crime while using Martial Arts is considered the same as using a weapon during the commission of the crime.
Would it not be logical to consider paramilitary training such as what they learn at their little jihad camps a Martial Art? At least in Germany this could be of use to at least incarcerate some of them.
Maybe there are similar laws elsewhere too and I don't know about them..
I still think it's utterly ridiculous that police won't go into a mosk in pursuit of a criminal. Public safety and protection of the Native population is the FIRST and FOREMOST responsability of any guvment.
Scru the mosk if a criminal terrorist is inside - GO GET 'IM!
Posted by: MeanieMo at January 17, 2007 3:36 PM
drk
The right to "sanctuary" in a church was revoked 400 years ago but it still has an emotional pull. Mosques are no different - but they are "sensitive"
Oh.. now that most anyone who has any interest has seen the TV4 documentary which shows insurmountable proof of the war and hatemongering that routinely goes on in these mosks.. isn't it time to reassess some of our policing practices when it comes to moslems?
Mosks are terrorist breeding grounds and safehouses for them!
Has anyone in British Law Enforcement seen this documentary???
Posted by: MeanieMo at January 17, 2007 3:39 PM
You are correct, it should apply to the mosque as well- but it is possible the police were in fear for their lives if they chose to enter.
Posted by: Gary
That would be plausible - but nothing that a few reinforcements couldn't handle. Since when should our policemen be afraid of foreigners on our European streets??!!
at January 17, 2007 3:41 PM
'moderate' muslims = 'moderate' Nazis
Posted by: MeanieMo at January 17, 2007 3:42 PM
How does somebody under a control order flee the country? Drive out? Last I looked the UK was an island, and only specialized athletes can swim the Channel without drowning.
Posted by: aynrandgirl at January 17, 2007 3:45 PM
They expect to live in Israel - but if a Jew lives among them - the Jew takes his/her life in their hands.
And if they let them move to Israel then the Israeli Jews are taking their lives in their hands. Sorry to ruin your daydreams, liberal Jews.
at January 17, 2007 3:52 PM
PMK
Actually the abolition of the right of sanctuary was revoked just before the Reformation but for some reason it lives in the popular imagination.
About 20 years ago it took 2-3 years to boot out ONE Ceylon illegal who holed up in a Manchester Church with the support of every liberal and leftie in the country.
Posted by: Fred at January 17, 2007 3:52 PM
look in burkas
Posted by: A_Plague_on_Both_Houses at January 17, 2007 3:53 PM
"It is understood that while these talks were taking place, the young suspect was helped to escape through a back entrance while officers from Greater Manchester Police were stationed outside." --from the article.
That statement sums up a great deal about the trouble with Islam.
Posted by: Archimedes
Actually, this sounds exactly like Tora-Bora.
Now what are they going to do to follow up on this? Will British MI5 investigate to find out WHO exactly aided this guy? Obviously there is a connection here!
This terrorist knew exactly where to go to shke his tail. I sure hope they have an aiding-and-abetting law and will enforce it. I'd hate to see innocent Native British come to harm because their guvment is recklessly negligent about National Security.
If ever a bungled case like this leads to injury or death.. i'd lOVE to be a lawyer and take on the guvment for criminal negligence. Something to keep in mind for the future.
if the guvment doesn't enforce the laws that are on the books then it should be held accountable for criminal neglect.
Criminals and terrorists are constantly suing. Maybe the time has come where we should make use of the legal weapon as well.
Since we are so "immoral" I mean.
Posted by: MeanieMo at January 17, 2007 3:57 PM
look in burkas
Posted by: A_Plague_on_Both_Houses
You may want to plug your noses before you do.. LOL
at January 17, 2007 4:11 PM
I say we fight enemy with their own rules
They are exploiting our democratic values and peace lovinf nature.
Id thjey are so much in love with Islam why dont they all just stay in Middle East or pakistan.
Why immigrate to the western countries.
No they want to immmigrate and want the countries to change for them not change themselves.
at January 17, 2007 4:15 PM
Found it.
http://www.comedycentral.com/motherload/player.jhtml?ml_video=80893&ml_collection=&ml_gateway=&ml_gateway_id=&ml_comedian=&ml_runtime=&ml_context=show&ml_origin_url=%2Fshows%2Fthe_daily_show%2Fvideos%2Fjon_stewart%2Findex.jhtml&ml_playlist=&lnk=&is_large=false
The book title is, "Power, Faith and Fantasy" by
Michael B.Oren
at January 17, 2007 4:53 PM
PMK
Should read
Actually the the right of sanctuary was revoked just before the Reformation but for some reason it lives in the popular imagination.
Posted by: Fred at January 18, 2007 3:58 AM
Polititions are normaly wimpy geaky idividuals and turn white when a muslim says BOO!!!
A brown paper bag full of petro dollars usually does the trick with the more difficult polly.
This is why the West is in the state that its in today.
Only people power will reverse the cancer that is slowly destroying our civilized countrys today.
at January 18, 2007 4:10 AM
Comments are turned off and archived for this entry.
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)