- Israel Shamir is an Israeli journalist based in
Jaffa. His articles can be found on the site http://www.israelshamir.net/
-
- The troublesome concept of the Hidden Hand or the
Elders of Zion is superfluous and unnecessary.
-
- "The latest controversy to involve the Arab World
concerns a TV program A Rider without a Horse that started airing on
Wednesday, Nov. 5th, the first day of the holy month of Ramadan on
several Arab satellite channels. The source of the controversy is that
the program is partly based on "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion",
the old forgery originating in Tsarist Russia", writes Qais S. Saleh,
a business consultant from Ramallah on the excellent website
CounterPunch[1]. Expectedly, Saleh condemns the broadcast and warns
the Palestinians and the Arabs to stay away from the bad old wolf of
anti-Semitism, or, as he put it, "the trend of importation of
anti-Semitic bigotry".
-
- Saleh's view coincides with that of Michael Hoffman,
on whose site the Protocols can be found. Hoffman thinks Arabs have no
need to import anti-Semitic arguments from the old and far-away
sources, provided they have a fresh round-the-clock local source:
actual behaviour of the Jewish state and its Jewish citizens. It is
much more convincing than old tales.
-
- However, the Protocols are still with us and still
entertain minds. Recently, the leading Italian novelist and thinker
Umberto Eco contributed his opinion on the subject to the Guardian[2].
Eco "explains" the popular feelings towards the Jews: "They engaged in
trade and lent money - hence the resentment towards them as
"intellectuals".
-
-
- In my limited knowledge, it is not the intellectuals
who lend money, but bankers and loan sharks, while true intellectuals
find their behaviour repulsive. Probably Eco has a different
definition of 'intellectual' up his sleeve. "The ill-famed Protocols
of the Learned Elders of Zion were a rehash of serialised fictional
material, and prove their own unreliability, since it is hardly
credible that "the baddies" would reveal their fell purposes so
blatantly" - concludes Eco.
-
- One can forgive a business consultant from Ramallah,
but Umberto Eco could notice that his definition would fit some other
books, for instance, Gargantua and Pantagruel, an even older forgery,
pretending to be a real chronicle of the Giants family, and built on
'serialised fictional material'. Don Quixote, Pickwick's Club, 1984 of
Orwell - all these books "pretend" to describe real events to the same
extent. They are 'forgeries', as they are ascribed to somebody else:
Don Quixote to Sid Ahmed Benengeli[3], and Gargantua to Maitre
Alcofribas Nasier[4].
-
- The Protocols of the Elders of Zion are best
described as 'pseudo-epigrapha', rather than 'fake'. They belong to
the same category as Tomas Friedman's Letter of President Clinton to
Mubarak. After all, pseudo-epigraphic genre is an old and venerable
one. It is even better to consider the Protocols, 'a political
pamphlet'.
-
- In this essay, we shall attempt to find out why the
Protocols refuse to lie down and die. We shall stay clear from the
usual question, "who wrote it". Its real author remains unknown, and
it is difficult to imagine this person, for the Protocols are a
literary palimpsest. In the days of yore, a scribe would write his
composition on a piece of old parchment, previously removing an older
text. The erasure was rarely total, and a reader was treated to an
integrated version of the Golden Ass and Fioretti of St Francis. In
the Protocols, there are layers of old and even older stories, and it
precludes meaningful quest for ultimate creator. Every text should be
treated on its own merits, disregarding the question of authorship.
Although, Jorge Luis Borges wrote that the author is an important part
of a text. Indeed, if we would know the Protocols contain real
blueprint of some Jewish elites, we would have our answer ready in
minutes. But Protocols were published in the end of 19th-beginning of
20th century "as found", as apocrypha. They became a great bestseller
and still stay there, though in some countries (notably the Soviet
Union), mere possession of the text was punishable by death.
-
- The Anonymous author of the Protocols describes a
master-plan for vast restructuring of society, creation of a new
oligarchy and subjugation of millions. The final product is not too
different from the one described in a contemporary piece of writing,
The Iron Heel by Jack London, the great radical from Oakland,
California. However, London expected harsh cracking down, while
Anonym's way to subjugation leads through Machiavellian manipulations
and mind control a la Orwell's 1984. (Orwell's homage to the Protocols
is even more striking as it is rarely noticed).
-
- The difficulty of the Protocols is in an uncanny
dissonance between its uncouth language and deep social and religious
thought. It is a rude parody-like rendering of a satanic, subtle and
well-thought out plan, wrote the Nobel Prise winning novelist
Alexander Solzhenitsyn[5] in his (written in 1966 and published in
2001) analysis of the Protocols.
-
- "The Protocols . show a blueprint of a social
system. Its design is well above abilities of an ordinary mind,
including that of its publisher. It is a dynamic process of two
stages, of destabilization, increasing freedom and liberalism, which
is terminated in social cataclysm, and on the second stage, new
hierarchical restructuring of society takes place. It is more
complicated than a nuclear bomb. It could be a stolen and distorted
plan designed by a mind of genius. Its putrid style of an anti-Semitic
grubby brochure [intentionally] obscures the great strength of thought
and insight" .
-
- Solzhenitsyn is aware of faults of the Protocols.
"Its style is that of a filthy leaflet, the powerful line of thought
is broken and fragmented, mixed up with ill-smelling incantations and
psychological blunders. The system described is not necessarily
connected with the Jews; it could be purely Masonic or whatever; while
its strongly anti-Semitic current is not an organic part of the
design".
-
- Solzhenitsyn makes a textual experiment, removes
words "Jews", "Goyim" and "conspiracy" and finds many disturbing
ideas. He concludes: "The text demonstrates impressive foresight on
the two systems of society, the Western and the Soviet one. While a
strong thinker could possibly predict the development of the West in
1901, how could he grasp the Soviet future?"
-
- Solzhenitsyn braved the Soviet regime, dared to
write and publish the mammoth Archipelago Gulag, an indictment of the
Soviet repression, but even he stalled and did not publish his
research of the Protocols. He asked it to be published after his death
only, and it was printed against his will in a very small number of
copies in 2001. Let us follow Solzhenitsyn's line of thought and gaze
into the crystal ball of the Protocols, while temporarily discounting
its "Jewish line" and paying heed to the idea of creating a new
system, not necessarily a Jewish-dominated one. The master-plan begins
with reshaping of human mind:
-
- "People's minds should be diverted (away from
contemplation) towards industry and trade, and then they will have no
time to think. The people will be consumed by the pursuit of gain. It
will be vain pursuit, for we shall put industry on a speculative
basis: what is withdrawn from the land by industry will slip through
the hands of workers and industrialists and pass into the hands of
financiers.
-
- The intensified struggle for survival and
superiority, accompanied by crises and shocks will create cold and
heartless communities with strong aversion towards religion. Their
only guide is gain that is Mammon, which they will erect into a
veritable cult".
-
- Foresight of Anonym is amazing: in the days of the
Protocols' publication, Man was still the measure of things, and full
eighty years would pass, until Milton Friedman and Chicago School
would proclaim Market and Profit as the only guiding light.
-
- The tool for enslavement of minds is the media,
writes Anonym. "There is a great force that creates the movement of
thought in the people, and that is the media. It is in the media that
the triumph of freedom of speech finds its incarnation. Through the
Press we have gained the power to influence minds while remaining
unobserved. We shall erase from the memory of men the historical facts
we do not want them to know, and leave only those we wish".
-
- Years will pass since the publication until a small
group of people who control our discourse while remaining unobserved,
the media lords, would rise. The free discussion of the media barons,
Berlusconi and Black, Maxwell and Sulzberger, Gusinsky and Zuckerman
is banned from the media they own, while their cooperative affinity
remains impressive. The freedom of discourse survives wherever
independent (from media barons) media still exists. Hundred years ago,
this force was much weaker than it is now, and it is amazing the
Anonym recognised its potential.
-
- Century before the rise of World Bank and IMF, the
Protocols noticed the foreign loans are the best tools to rob
countries of their wealth. "While the loans were internal, money
remained in the land, but with externalisation of loans, all nations
pay tribute of their subjects to the oligarchy". Indeed, the bigger
loans poor countries get, the poorer they become.
-
- Concentration of capital in the hands of financiers,
concentration of media in few hands, extra-judicial killings of
unyielding leaders, stock market with its derivatives sucks out wealth
and it accumulates in the hands of the priesthood of Mammon, gain (or
"market forces") as the only measure of successful strategy. Yes, the
interest to the Protocols does not disappear because the described
plan of creating oligarchic (not necessarily Jewish) rule is being
implemented in real time and it is called the New World Order.
-
- Sometimes, the Protocols are described as
extreme-right-wing anti-utopian piece of writing. However, it spans
both left and right-wing discourse. A right-wing writer would bless
strengthening of Law and Order, but the following prediction of Anonym
could be written today by a leftist libertarian, say, Noam Chomsky,
witnessing the present transition to the New World Order: "The race of
armaments and the increase of police force will bring forth society
where are only the masses of the proletariat, a few millionaires,
police and soldiers".
-
- However, the deepest thought of Anonym remains in
the spiritual sphere:
-
- "Freedom might be harmless and have its place in the
State economy without injury to the well-being of the people if it
rested upon the foundation of faith in God, upon the Brotherhood of
humanity. This is the reason why it is indispensable for us to
undermine all faith, to tear out of the people's mind the very
principle of God and the Spirit, and to put in its place arithmetical
calculations and material needs".
-
- Anonym connects the Faith and the idea of
Brotherhood of humanity. Undermining of Faith ruins the Brotherhood.
Freedom, instead of desirable and beautiful state of mind, turns into
destructive drive when unhinged from the Faith. Instead of Faith, the
Enemy offers pursuit of Mammon.
-
- While reading in today's (16.11.02) IH Tribune
philippics against gay priests and nuns, one notes the following lines
in the Protocols: "We have taken care to discredit the Christian
priesthood and ruin their mission which might still hinder our plans.
Day by day, their influence on the people is falling lower. Collapse
of Christianity is nigh".
-
- We witness implementation of this plan: religion is
removed from consideration, neo-liberalism or Mammon worship takes its
place, while with disestablishment of socialism, this brave attempt of
a non-faith-based brotherhood collapsed, leaving ideological vacuum.
This observation caused some reviewers to exclaim, "The true designer
of the Master-plan is our old foe, the Prince of the World, whose
ultimate aim is elimination of Divine Presence and ruination of Man".
True, but the Prince of the World can't act directly. He needs free
agents that choose to accept his plan. These chief agents and possible
allies, according to the pamphlet, are financial capitalists and
Masters of Discourse, 'the Mind'.
-
- They promote to the highest positions "politicians
who, in case of disobedience to our instructions, must face criminal
charges or disappear. We shall arrange elections in favour of
candidates with some dark, undiscovered stain in their past. They will
be our trustworthy agents out of fear of revelations" For us,
contemporaries of Watergate and Lewinsky, it sounds familiar.
-
- The shift from Stage One (liberalism and freedom) to
Stage Two (tyranny) took place in our lifetime. If in 1968 the NY
Times promoted the Freedom Riders, in 2002 it supports Patriot Act. An
important American lawyer, Alan Dershovitz of Harvard made a U-turn
from Human rights to Right to torture. This U-turn was predicted by
the Protocols, as the purpose beyond the struggle against the old
elites.
-
- "The aristocracy enjoyed the labour of the workers,
and it was interested in seeing that the workers were well fed,
healthy, and strong. The people have annihilated the aristocracy, and
have fallen into the grips of merciless money-grinding
scoundrels".
-
- In less emotional terms, the new bourgeoisie removed
the old elites with support of people, while promising freedom and
objecting to their privilege. After its victory, it took the privilege
to itself, and turned out to be as bad (or worse) as the feudal lord.
Marx referred to this complaint of aristocracy in one of the numerous
additions to the Communist Manifesto, and considered it futile if
partly justified. However, he did not live to witness a similar
process which took place in the last days of the Soviet Union. The
rising new bourgeoisie took control over the discourse, convinced
people to fight the privilege of Nomenclature for the sake of equality
and freedom, and after their victory, it assumed and multiplied the
privilege, and rejected equality and freedom.
-
- The Protocols predict rise of New Bourgeoisie,
globalist Mammon-worshippers,
-
-
- who are inherently hostile to Old Elites, to spirit,
to religion, to the ordinary people. For a long while, they were the
engine of the left, democracy-seeking movements, until their purpose
was completed, and then they made the U-turn towards oligarchy.
-
- This U-turn can be quantified by the inheritance and
land tax rate in England: while the financial bourgeoisie and Masters
of Discourse fought against the old ruling classes, the rates were
high and eventually dismantled their power base; after their victory,
the rate decreased allowing consolidation of the new ruling classes.
It is possible that the Old Order had had some advantages. It is
almost certain that a transition from the Old Order could be different
if the people would understand the intentions of the enemy. But
history can't be reversed, and it is quite futile to dream of return
of the good lords and benevolent Party bosses.
-
- Thus, the Protocols (purified of references to the
Jews and conspiracies) are useful as they describe a blueprint of the
New World Order, and help its adversaries to form a defensive strategy
against the designs of Enemy. But the references to the Jews
constitute large and important part of the text.
-
- The Jews and the Protocols
-
- The Protocols identify the moving force of the New
World Order with a powerful group of extremely chauvinist,
manipulative and domination-obsessed Jewish leaders. The leaders,
according to the Protocols, despise ordinary community members; they
utilise and support anti-Semitism as the means to keep their "lesser
brethren", innocent ordinary folk of Jewish origin, in thrall to their
rule. The leaders are described as pathological goy haters, bent on
destroying culture and traditions of other nations while preserving
their own. Their goal is to create world government and rule the
homogenised and globalised world.
-
- Their aims and intentions are stated in extremely
contrarian and obnoxious way. Solzhenitsyn concluded that no sane
person would deliver his favourite ideas in such self-demeaning and
self-defeating way. "We extract gold from their blood and tears", "our
power is based on workers' hunger", "revolutionaries are our human
tools", "brutish minds of Goyim" are, in his opinion, words ascribed
to the Jews by their enemies. A Jew would rather put such ideas in an
oblique way, he felt.
-
- It is not a water-tight argument. Some people speak
in oblique way, others prefer a direct one. An Armenian from the Azeri
capital, Baku told me in long gone 1988, "The Azeris are our cattle,
without our Armenian mind their country would collapse in course of
days, as they are silly donkeys". (A few months later, an explosion of
native violence expelled the clever Armenians from Azerbaijan, and
since then the Azeris manage their own land quite all right.) David
Ben Gurion, the first ruler of the Jewish state, coined an equally
arrogant maxim: "Who cares what Goyim say? What matters is what the
Jews do!" This sentence is an almost direct quote from the
Protocols.
-
- The Protocols ascribe to the Elders a saying, "Each
Jewish victim is worth in the sight of God a thousand goyim". This
line, a pinnacle of arrogance, is not a vain invention of an
anti-Semite. Two ministers of Sharon's government, Uri Landau and Ivet
Lieberman demanded to kill one thousand Palestinian goyim for each
Jewish victim. A Jewish extremist at a demo for the Jewish Temple
Mount (18.11.02) called each Jew to kill one thousand Palestinian
goyim. Apparently, some ideas of the Protocols are not foreign to some
Jews.
-
- The late Israeli scholar Israel Shahak and an
American Jewish writer Norton Mezvinsky present in their Jewish
Fundamentalism in Israel[6] a plethora of sayings by Jewish Rabbis
that wouldn't be out of place in the Protocols. "The difference
between a Jewish soul and souls of non-Jews is greater and deeper than
the difference between a human soul and the souls of cattle" (p. ix).
Shahak and Mezvinsky proved the rage of the Jewish chauvinists does
not differentiate between Palestinians, Arabs and Goyim in general. In
other words, whatever happened to Palestinians could happen to any
Gentile community standing on the way of the Jews.
-
- Indeed, if the Protocols would have no relation to
reality, they probably wouldn't be as popular as they are. The Jews
are sufficiently powerful to dream of domination, and some do.
Apparently some Jewish ideas found their way into the text. Other
thoughts are ascribed to the Jews on the basis of "qui bono".
-
- The least acceptable idea of the Protocols is the
presumption of an extremely ancient conspiracy of the Jews aiming to
take over the world. The extreme philo-Semitic view denies the Jews
their ability to act together and presents them as separate
individuals united by prayer only. This view is not accepted by the
Jews, and it does not agree with the common sense.
-
- Solzhenitsyn does not believe in existence of the
Elders of Zion, though "the togetherness and coordination of Jewish
activity for the sake of their advancement caused many writers
(beginning from Cicero) to imagine there is a single commanding centre
to direct their attacks". "Without such a world centre, without
conspiring, the Jews understand each other and are able to coordinate
their actions".
-
- The Jews are perfectly able to coordinate their
actions, but I doubt human beings, Jews or English, Russians or
Chinese are able to form long-standing plans spanning centuries and
continents. Nobody was able to prove such a plot exists. Usually,
'anti-Semites' (the people who doubt or deny inherent benevolence of
the Jews to Gentile society) argue for its authenticity as Henry Ford
did. The car king said[7]: "the only statement I care to make about
the Protocols is that they fit in with what is going on." Indeed they
do, exclaims Victor Marsden, the English translator of the
Protocols.
-
- However, it is not a proof of Jewish plot. We can
reach similar results rejecting the conspiracy line altogether, by
applying the concept of self-interest to the real Jewish community as
it was aptly described by Shahak-Mezvinsky. We shall prove that the
troublesome concept of the Hidden Hand or the Elders of Zion is
superfluous and unnecessary.
-
- Traditional Jewish community had a structure of
"upturned pyramid", in words of Zionist theoreticians: it contained
many persons of wealth, learning and management, and very few workers.
It appears an odd thing, until one understands that the Zionists
artificially view the Jews in divorce of the society they live in. The
Jewish 'upturned pyramid' couldn't exist without a real down-turned
pyramid of Gentile low classes. The Jews compete with the native
elites of the Gentile society for the right to exploit the Gentile
worker and peasant. The modus operandi of the two competitors differs.
While native elites shared some values with their lower classes and
usually provided for some upward mobility, the Jewish community had
its own structure and values.
-
- Economically it stood for capitalist or
quasi-capitalist exploitation of the natives, while ideologically the
community declared loyalty to its leaders, rejection of common
humanity with the natives, extreme ethnocentrism, feeling of racial
and religious superiority towards the natives. It was a marginal
community, forming no bonds of marriage and friendship with the
natives. As a marginal community, it was free of long-standing
considerations the native elites had had.
-
- For instance, the Jewish community of 17th century
Ukraine has been a collective tax-farmer and leaseholder, extracting
from the natives SIX times more taxes and dues per person than a
gentile landlord did, wrote a prominent Jewish Ukrainian historian
Saul Borovoy in a recently published in Jerusalem book. The Jewish
communities of Maghreb supported the colonial power against their
gentile neighbours, etc. Their traditions forbade normal relations
with the natives.
-
- Let us presume that such a community acts in its
egoistic interests. Forget conspiracy; forget the Elders of Zion,
learned or otherwise. The community's only aim is to promote its own
well-being. For a marginal group it means to make the social gap
between its members and the native population as broad as possible,
while minimising the backlash potential.
-
- The group would naturally, for its self-interest,
support every movement against native elites, whether initiated by the
King (as the Jews did before the French Revolution) or by the
rebelling low classes. It would not be done for the Jewish love of
democracy or rebellious nature, but for improvement of their own
positions. Ideal situation would be created by massacre or expulsion
of the native elites, as the group members would be able to
appropriate their positions. Indeed, it happened in Soviet Russia and
Soviet Hungary in the aftermath of World War One. Massacre and exile
of the native elites made the positions of power and influence
available to the competing Jews.
-
- Self-interest explains the Jewish involvement with
the dreaded Cheka, the Soviet security services. Until 1937, the Jews
occupied the top echelon of the KGB predecessor body, while millions
of Russians lost their life or liberty. Objectively, these
executioners made jobs and houses available for their fellow Jews.
After the massacre and exile of Russian elites, the Jews were ready
for equality, as a son of a Rabbi could easily compete with a son of
Russian worker or peasant, though he wouldn't be able to compete with
a son of Russian noble.
-
- In a similar way, the Jews in Israel granted limited
equality to the Palestinians in 1966, after confiscation of 90% of
native lands and expulsion of 90% of natives. Now, the settlers
promise to extend equality to the rest of Palestinians, after they
will expel the majority of them elsewhere. In the light of great
Jewish support for Israel, there is no reason to presume that the
Jewish modus operandi in Palestine is intrinsically different from the
Jewish intentions abroad.
-
- Solzhenitsyn writes: "Executed <during the
revolution army officers were Russians, the noblemen, priests, monks,
deputies were Russians. In 1920s, the pre-revolutionary engineers and
scientists were exiled or killed. They were Russians, while their
place was taken by Jews. The best Russian Psychiatric institute in
Moscow, its Russian members were arrested or exiled, while their place
was taken by the Jews. Important Jewish doctors blocked the
advancement of Russian medical scientists. The best intellectual and
artistic elites of Russian people were killed, while the Jews grew and
flourished in these (deadly for Russians) years".
-
- The new Jewish elite did not fully identify with
Russia but carried out separate policy. It had a fateful effect in
1991, when over 50 p.c. of Jews (as opposed to 13 p.c. of Russians)
supported pro-Western coup of President Yeltsin. In 1995, 81% of Jews
voted for pro-Western parties, and only 3% for the Communists (as
opposed to 46% of Russians), according to the publication by the
Jewish sociologist Dr Ryvkina in her book Jews in Post-Soviet Russia
(1996).
-
- In ever-expanding America, the Jews did not have to
kill or remove the native elites; they became its important part,
controlling discourse and wielding considerable financial clout. They
still do not identify with the goyish America: every year, they force
the Congress and the Administration to send five billion dollars to
their Israeli offshoot and now try to let America fight their war in
Iraq. They do discriminate other Americans, otherwise 60% of the
leading positions in the media would not become Jewish[8].
-
- Jews of France do not identify with France, either.
"Their identification with Israel is so strong; it overshadows their
ties to the country they live in". - writes Daniel Ben Simon in
Haaretz. - "This dual loyalty was made very clear to me by a Jewish
doctor in Nice."If the choice is between Israel and France, there's no
question I feel closer to Israel," he said, without a moment's
hesitation. He was born and bred in France; he went to medical school
in France; his patients are French; he speaks French with his wife and
children. But in the depths of his heart, he feels a greater affinity
with the Jewish state".
-
- In Palestine, the Jews have no compassion for the
natives. They travel by segregated roads, study in segregated schools,
while a Jew consumes ten times more water resources than a goy, and
has seven times higher income. Thus, the Jewish separateness remains a
fact of life for many Jewish communities.
-
- For their own well-being the Jews have to obscure
their unique position, wealth and power by the following means:
-
- - Holocaust discourse helps to fight envy.
-
- - In a mono-ethnic society, the Jews as the only
foreign body do stick out and attract attention, while in
multicultural society they are hardly seen. For this purpose, the Jews
support immigration from non-European countries, as their presence
would remove the stamp of Jewish exclusiveness.
-
- - The Political Correctness is another device
forbidding the discussion of Jewish influence.
-
- - Fight against Christianity and the Church makes
sense for a non-Christian community: if the Church would be strong,
the Christians would prefer their own, Christian elite.
-
- - Globalisation is a natural development for the
people spread all over the globe, if they attach but little importance
to the local ways.
-
- - Impoverishment of the natives is but another side
of growing wealth of the Jewish community.
-
- Summing it up, a big share (though not all) of the
ideas ascribed to the Jews by the Protocols are indeed the ideas
useful or necessary for the Jewish communal well-being, without any
need for great hatred towards Gentiles and/or the guidance of mythic
Elders of Zion. That is the reason of the Protocols' long life.
Paradoxically, without Israeli apartheid these facts would remain
invisible for the host communities.
-
-
-
- --------------------------------------------
-
- [1] A HORSELESS RIDER, THE PROTOCOLS OF THE ELDERS
OF ZION & IMPORTED BIGOTRY By Qais S. Saleh, CounterPunch November
13, 2002 http://www.counterpunch.com/saleh1112.html see more on
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/world/DailyNews/egypt021121_TV.html
-
- [2]
http://books.guardian.co.uk/review/story/0,12084,775668,00.html The
poisonous Protocols by Umberto Eco
-
- [3] CIDE HAMETE BENENGELI, in Cervantes'
spelling
-
- [4] Nom de plume of François Rabelais.
-
- [5] Alexander Solzhenitsyn, Evrei v SSSR i v
budushei Rossii, 2001 (in Russian)
-
- [6] Pluto Press, 1999
-
- [7] in an interview published in the New York World,
February 17th, 1921
-
- [8] The data provided by Kevin MacDonald of
California University.
-
- Israel Shamir is an Israeli journalist based in
Jaffa. His articles can be found on the site
www.israelshamir.net
|