Zionism is an Example of National Self-Determination

[JB Globe]

Can a political objective still be called self-determination if it involves denying other people their own self-determination?

Personally I think one groups' right to self-determination ends where another peoples' right to self-determination begins.

Your post made no mention that your interpretation of Zionism involved such a thing.

Did you just not think about it, or was the exclusion deliberate, and if so, why?

[WIP]

I consider Zionism to be an exercise in self-determination, similar to what many anti-Western groups lobby for. The difference is that many who support other groups' "self-determination" do so only when it is harmful to the West's interests.

And who are these anti-Western groups? The Tibetans? The Uygurs? The Chechens? Or is this just sucking up to the Neocons?

At the same time, other peoples, such as the Poles, the Lithuanians, etc. began to lobby for self-determination. Most got their wish after WW I when the Russian, German and Austro-Hungarian empires were dismembered. The Jews got a vague promise from the British, the Balfour Declaration. The events of WW II led to the formation of the State of Israel, largely, in my opinion, since the Jewish survivors of the concentration camp could not return to their (expropriated) homes and businesses, and the murderous intent of their "hosts" was clear and obvious.

Sure, those people lobbied for self-determination, but aren't you glossing over some of the ugly realities of self-determination? For one thing, very few of these movements have a homogeneous population to liberate! For example, when Poland was reconstituted after WWI, the League of Nations determined that the new nation needed an outlet to the sea, and the Polish Corridor was created between Danzig and East Prussia. Most of the Germans living there either left of their own accord or were forced out. And today, the Kurds living in Northern Iraq want to be independent, but there are sizeable populations of Turkmen and Arabs that would be ethnically cleansed to make nationhood possible.

In Palestine, the Zionist Movement had that messy inconvenience of Arab populations living in most of the "Promised Land."

Zionists have as much right as any other people to "self-determination". The Arabs have plenty of their own countries:

1. 
   

I know the list! When Menachem Begin started the movement to build settlements in the West Bank, this point that the Arabs should move out and go to one of the many Arab nations, was frequently raised. It overlooked the fact that if the Occupied Territories were annexed by Israel, they would either have to forcibly evict the Palestinians living there, or set up an apartheid system where Arabs would not have full rights of citizenship, since a large Arab population would dilute the Jewish State. This is why Israeli pragmatists want to give up most of the Occupied Territories - with a growing Arab population in those territories, Israel would have to choose between being a democratic state or a Jewish state.

[socred]

Maybe not. But Christians have never lacked for countries willing to receive them. During the Shoach most countries, including Canada and the US, largely closed their doors. to the Jews.

There have always been people willing to receive the Jews. Turns out that they often don't make good tenants, and are shown the door. If you think Germany was the first country to try to rid itself of its Jewish population, you are sadly mistaken.

[White Doors]

There have always been people willing to receive the Jews. Turns out that they often don't make good tenants, and are shown the door. If you think Germany was the first country to try to rid itself of its Jewish population, you are sadly mistaken.

you think Jews make bad citizens of countries that aren't predominately jewish?

Aren't you answering your own question here in an anti-semetic way?

[M.Dancer]

Why should there be a state for the followers of Judaism?Google "Kisinev", or "L'Affaire Dreyfusse" or "Holocaust".

or pogrom, Spanish Inquisition....

[M.Dancer]

Really, what nation do "Christians" have?

Are you asking, are there nations where the State religion is a form of christianity?

I'm glad you asked that question.

There are about 19 nations whose sole official religion is "christian"

Thanks for asking.

[M.Dancer]

Do Christians around the world have the 'right of return" to any of these nations?

By law I can obtain Scotish or British citizenship via my grandparents birthright.

...SO YES.

[M.Dancer]

There have always been people willing to receive the Jews. Turns out that they often don't make good tenants, and are shown the door. If you think Germany was the first country to try to rid itself of its Jewish population, you are sadly mistaken.

Holy moses!!!

[Jerry Galinda]

Are the Jews always the victim?

As a population , as a nation - for ages - THEY WERE ONLY VICTIMS .

HOW LONG - I suspect that ALMOST 1800 YEARS.

[jbg]

Can a political objective still be called self-determination if it involves denying other people their own self-determination?

Of course. It happens all the time. The modern Czech Republic includes some German-speaking people, for example. Canada has some French-speaking people. Borders are, by their own definition, not perfect.

It seems that your problems with self-determination denying other people their own self-determination begin and end with the Jewish state. This is typical thinking over the years.

And who are these anti-Western groups? The Tibetans? The Uygurs? The Chechens? Or is this just sucking up to the Neocons?

I said nothing about the neo-cons. I don't know much about the Uygurs. The Chechens, like the Bosnians, on their face seem to have some grievances but I'm beginning to suspect some of them are manufactured. After all what about Beslan?

Sure, those people lobbied for self-determination, but aren't you glossing over some of the ugly realities of self-determination? For one thing, very few of these movements have a homogeneous population to liberate! For example, when Poland was reconstituted after WWI, the League of Nations determined that the new nation needed an outlet to the sea, and the Polish Corridor was created between Danzig and East Prussia. Most of the Germans living there either left of their own accord or were forced out. And today, the Kurds living in Northern Iraq want to be independent, but there are sizeable populations of Turkmen and Arabs that would be ethnically cleansed to make nationhood possible.

Great point. However, I doubt you are arguing that Poland should have remained carved up between Germany and Russia because of some sloppiness as to where small enclaves live. What about Kaliningrad? I also doubt that you think that the rights of the Kurds should be held hostage to the rights of Arab and/or Turkmen minorities. How about finding ways to protect those minorities? I don't see English-speaking Canadians butchering people in Quebec.

In Palestine, the Zionist Movement had that messy inconvenience of Arab populations living in most of the "Promised Land."

There were very few of them and most came after the Zionists madet he desert and swampland productive. If everyone went "back" to where they came from the Great Rift Valley of Africa would be a rather crowded place. The fact is that events transpiring elsewhere often cause huge population shifts.

This is why Israeli pragmatists want to give up most of the Occupied Territories - with a growing Arab population in those territories, Israel would have to choose between being a democratic state or a Jewish state.

That would be a not-bad solution but it takes two to tango. The Palestinians have a habit of moving the goalposts when their demands are met.

[Rue]

By law I can obtain Scotish or British citizenship via my grandparents birthright.

...SO YES.

Also try Japan, both Chinas, Ireland, Norway, Belgium, Moldova, the Czech Rep., Slovakian Rep., Norway, Finland, Ukraine, Estonia, Latvia, India, Bulgaria, Austria, Germany to name but a few. Actually the law of citizenship granted to someone of a particular ethnicity because of who they are related to is quite common and part of this bullshit double standard is that people like Socred pretend only Israel does it.

Then there is Jordan which has a law of return for Palestinians and enshrines in its constitutions that no jew is allowed citizenship.

Then there are all Muslim countries who practice sharia law which forbids anyone but a Muslim from applying for citizenship and does not differentiate the Islamic religion from the state apperatus and promulgates dhimmitude a delberate system of apartheid where Jews and Christians not only are not entitled to the same degree of citizenship as Muslims but have inferior legal status to the point they can't own real estate and have to have a Muslim testify on their behalf in court since they are infidel and do not know how to tell the truth.

The Law of Return in Israel which came into force in 1950 was in direct response to a few things but primarily the holocaust. The State of Israel realized it had a moral responsibility to be a sanctuary for Jews from anywhere in the world fleeing persecution or other hardships. The Law of Return was in direct response to that reality, the reality of the holocaust and the 2000 years leading up to it in Europe where all the nations were at one point Christian and it was precisely because of that Christian connection, Jews could not own land or be equal citizens and caused them to wander and be segregated and like the Romanoes easy targets.

The forced expulsion or extermination of Jews in Christian nations I suppose is something Socred conveniently skips over. Ironically in Spain, there is still a law today that guarantees Sephardic Jews who can show Spanish ancestry Spanish citizenship and jews fleeing Sarajevo during the Bosnian-Serbian war exercised the Spanish option. Spain even with pro-Hitler Franco in charge, ironically allowed that law to prevail and take in certain jews during the holocaust.

In the 50's what Socred also conveniently skips over is more Jews then Palestinians were forcefully removed from the Arab League Nations forcing 700,000 thousand of 900,000 thousand of them to have to flee to Israel and so even had there been no law of return one would have to have been drafted for these people.

The Law of Return to Israel is far from unique and while it does allow fast tracking for citizenship to Jews, those jews once citizens are not given any rights a Muslim or Christian Israeli doesn't also have and the spouse of child or parent of a non jewish Israeli citizen has the exact same right to naturalization as a Jew.

But why let facts and reality get in the way.

As for Socreds comment that Jews brought their problems on themselves because they were bad tenants, you note he provides no examples-he just utters the deliberately anti-semitic cannard suggesting Jews are not victims just evil people who bring bad things onto themselves. Yes Lord knows, Jews are bad people. Wherever we settle we have forced standup comedy, delicatessens and Billy Crystal on people. Its what we do. We force you non Jews to eat smoked meat. We are tyrants.

I also find it completely lacking in any credibility that you Socred would not have known just how many nations out their institutionalize Christianity as their state religion or have the audacity to suggest since it was done in the past we just forget that past and pretend it never had any role in why Israel is what it is today.

I am the first to admit, had Christians not openly persecuted Jews in the past and had there been no holocaust, no you would not see today's Israel-it would have remained a vague religious reference. For me I am the first to admit it came about because of historic events that forced its necessity no different then today it forces the necessity for a second Palestinian state and a need to disarm Muslim fundamentalist terrorists.

This friggin double standard where we ignore any other country with a law of return and ignore the reality of Sharia law, well it depends on you not reading and buying into stereotypes built on false assumptions.

The point is, for me anyways, in an ideal world, none of us would need a nation. We would all leave peacefully without the need of nations. But we all know humans are tribal because are are primates and primates live in troops. So to pretend Jews are the only Baboon pack out their is for me just plain stupid. There are no shortage of baboon troops in many colours and variatons. The true thing we all have in common is our inflammed red buttoxes and the propensity to squawk and show our fangs and prance up and down when another pack comes into our territory.

We are primates and live up to that tradition. Only unlike baboons who accept their inflammed red buttoxes, we think such things are political statements that rationalize our national identities. Bah. Its just red buttoxes thrust in our faces.

I prefer what whales and porpoises do. Their pods are peaceful.

[WIP]

I said nothing about the neo-cons. I don't know much about the Uygurs. The Chechens, like the Bosnians, on their face seem to have some grievances but I'm beginning to suspect some of them are manufactured. After all what about Beslan?

The Uygurs are to the north of Tibet, and were similarly invaded by China, and to consolidate the territory, they moved in many ethnic Chinese to make it harder for separatist movements. Chechnya was previously an autonomous region of Russia, but lost its status after the dissolution of the Soviet Empire. Personally, I don't care whether these independence movements are pro-Western or pro-whatever-the-other-side-is-now, nationalism is an emotional force that imprints tribalism on a larger scale, and it requires a revolution, the path to independence is a messy, bloody affair where the patriots are often guilty of worse barbarism than the oppressive dictators they are trying to overthrow.

Great point. However, I doubt you are arguing that Poland should have remained carved up between Germany and Russia because of some sloppiness as to where small enclaves live. What about Kaliningrad?

The purpose for creating the corridor was so that Poland wouldn't be dependent on German sea ports. My mother's family was evicted from their farm which had the misfortune of being in the way, and they ended up finding their way to America with the clothes on their back. It's just a small example of how someone has to lose so that someone wins their self-determination.

I also doubt that you think that the rights of the Kurds should be held hostage to the rights of Arab and/or Turkmen minorities. How about finding ways to protect those minorities? I don't see English-speaking Canadians butchering people in Quebec.

It doesn't change the picture though! If the Kurds get a nation based on ethnic identity, there will almost certainly be mass ethnic cleansing. Quebec will never be independent! They depend on the federal treasury and there are areas like Hull, the Eastern Townships and the Cree in the North, that will immediate start their own breakaway movements.

There were very few of them and most came after the Zionists madet he desert and swampland productive. If everyone went "back" to where they came from the Great Rift Valley of Africa would be a rather crowded place. The fact is that events transpiring elsewhere often cause huge population shifts.

That would be a not-bad solution but it takes two to tango. The Palestinians have a habit of moving the goalposts when their demands are met.

But, even if many of those Arabs moved in during the last century, once people are settled in an area for a few generations, they should be able to call it home! The ones who were evicted 60 years ago should settle for financial compensation; they've been away too long for all but a few original inhabitants to actually be reclaiming their homes.

[WIP]

The point is, for me anyways, in an ideal world, none of us would need a nation. We would all leave peacefully without the need of nations. But we all know humans are tribal because are are primates and primates live in troops. So to pretend Jews are the only Baboon pack out their is for me just plain stupid. There are no shortage of baboon troops in many colours and variatons. The true thing we all have in common is our inflammed red buttoxes and the propensity to squawk and show our fangs and prance up and down when another pack comes into our territory.

We are primates and live up to that tradition. Only unlike baboons who accept their inflammed red buttoxes, we think such things are political statements that rationalize our national identities. Bah. Its just red buttoxes thrust in our faces.

I prefer what whales and porpoises do. Their pods are peaceful.

Nice work! Obviously we still need nation states, but with a few exceptions such as Israel, they shouldn't be built on religion or ethnic identity.

[M.Dancer]

My mother's family was evicted from their farm which had the misfortune of being in the way, and they ended up finding their way to America with the clothes on their back. It's just a small example of how someone has to lose so that someone wins their self-determination.

A fellow I know whose family fled Poland in 39 and subsequently lost all there property to the Soviets recently won a long battle to be compensated for their land and other assets.

Their estate became farms, their manor became a hotel under Communist rule. They expected they would never get a cent back but 68 years later he received a cheque in the mail. While his family lost their aristicratic title and will never enjoy their estate or the income it generated, he and his sister can now retire very comfortably here.

[jbg]

There have always been people willing to receive the Jews. Turns out that they often don't make good tenants, and are shown the door. If you think Germany was the first country to try to rid itself of its Jewish population, you are sadly mistaken.

The problem is that they make too-good tenants. Their adherence to local rules and laws is often perfect, as is their learning of weaknesses in those laws.

The Jews' relative valuation of education and the learned professions made them useful to their host societies, and also made them the object of envy. I would hardly call that making "bad tenants". How many "Air India" type events are the Jews involved in?

[Moonlight Graham]

That's probably true.

You still not have explained to me what makes these nations "Christian"?

Lets take Canada and the U.S. for example. The majority of their population are Christian, and their state constitutions were devised by Christians using Christian values as a rough basis for their laws. And i do not see any "In Allah We Trust" coins in circulation, or people at hockey games singing "Vishnu keep our land, glorious and free..."

I think both countries, and others like them, have done a decent job of keeping their Christian traditions while also trying to be tolerable to other faiths that have immigrated in greater numbers over the decades.

[Bonam]

I consider Zionism to be an exercise in self-determination,I consider Zionism to be an exercise in self-determination,

Yup, agreed.

As for homelands for other peoples. Yes, they (almost) all have homelands. Homelands are typically based on race or ethnic group, not religion (just as Israel is). One need not be a practicer of Judaism to have the right of return to Israel, one need only be an ethnic Jew. Coming from Russia (once the country holding the largest proportion of the World's Jews), the definition of Jews is very clearly one based on ethnicity, not on their religion. There are atheist Jews, Jews who practice Chrisitianty, Buddhism, and even Islam. They're still Jews, ESPECIALLY in the eyes of antisemites.

Christians are not a race or ethnicity, but a religion. Any particular practicer of Christianity also still has a race or ethnicity. A British Christian has a homeland in Britain. A French Christian has a homeland in France. An American Christian has a homeland in America, etc. So yes, Christians have homelands. The same is true for Muslims (i.e. Arabs have tons of different homelands, Persian Muslims have a homeland in Iran, there are homelands for Asian Muslims in S/E Asia, British Muslims (Muslims that are ethnically British) have a homeland in Britain, American Muslims have a homeland in America, etc).

Whether all these nations have a right of return for members of their ethnicity or race is irrelevant - it is up to the nation itself to implement its own laws. If a nation-state wants to implement a right of return for members of what it considers to be its people, that is up to them, and similarly if they do not want to. For Israel, it was obviously a good idea, and the main reason for its existence. For the rulers of Jordan and Egypt, implementing a right of return doesn't seem like a good idea, they'd rather keep their former citizens and their descendants in the West Bank and Gaza. Again, up to them and their laws, we can't force them to implement a right of return.

[WIP]

A fellow I know whose family fled Poland in 39 and subsequently lost all there property to the Soviets recently won a long battle to be compensated for their land and other assets.

Their estate became farms, their manor became a hotel under Communist rule. They expected they would never get a cent back but 68 years later he received a cheque in the mail. While his family lost their aristicratic title and will never enjoy their estate or the income it generated, he and his sister can now retire very comfortably here.

Interesting! But in my mother's case, this happened around 1920, when she was just an infant. I don't think anyone from her family sought or was even aware that compensation might be available.

As things turned out, they were better off losing the farm, since they ended up in America. If they stayed, they would have gone through the Nazi Era, WWII, and trapped behind the Iron Curtain afterwards. All for the best I suppose!

[M.Dancer]

Interesting! But in my mother's case, this happened around 1920, when she was just an infant. I don't think anyone from her family sought or was even aware that compensation might be available.

As things turned out, they were better off losing the farm, since they ended up in America. If they stayed, they would have gone through the Nazi Era, WWII, and trapped behind the Iron Curtain afterwards. All for the best I suppose!

I would consider appealling to the British Crown for reparations from the enclosures, but given we were most likely landless and penniless (not being aristocratic) I imagine we would only get what we already had...

[Jerry Galinda]

The purpose for creating the corridor was so that Poland wouldn't be dependent on German sea ports. My mother's family was evicted from their farm which had the misfortune of being in the way, and they ended up finding their way to America with the clothes on their back. It's just a small example of how someone has to lose so that someone wins their self-determination.

Interesting! But in my mother's case, this happened around 1920, when she was just an infant. I don't think anyone from her family sought or was even aware that compensation might be available.

As things turned out, they were better off losing the farm, since they ended up in America. If they stayed, they would have gone through the Nazi Era, WWII, and trapped behind the Iron Curtain afterwards. All for the best I suppose!

Interesting -but - I don’t understand - why did Your mother’s family lose their farm ??

Were they evicted ?

When and why ??

[HisSelf]

Focussing the discussion about Palestine on national self-determination ignores the inconvenient fact that many of the Palestinians being displaced in fact have legal deeds to the lands they live on. They bought them at some time in the past and own them in the same manner that you or I might buy a home, and pay a mortgage. The Geneva Conventions stipulate that an occupying power must respect the land registry as it exists at the time of occupation. Instead what Israel has been doing is using bureaucratic thuggery to illegally evict these people from their homes. Not surpisingly, Israel refuses to recognize the Geneva Conventions. Imagine the coverage on CNN were Iran to suddenly announce that it too refuses to accept the Geneva Conventions, LOL.

There was an interesting documentary on the BBC channel not so long ago which showed this happening in real time. First of all you have a small group of Ultra-Orthodox Jews who show up on a piece of land owned by a Palestinian. They set up a couple of shacks - one of which they call a Synagogue complete with a Menorah or some other suitable religious artifact. They make grand statements about God, Moses and the Holocaust, and proceed to expand the settlement, slowly putting up more buildings and bringing in more people. If a Palestinian Arab were to do this on Israeli land, the army would show up and kick him or her off forthwith, since Israel has a law which forbids such things. Palestinians though must go to an Israeli court and seek to have the Jews evicted. This is when things start to get weird. Sometimes the Palestinians win, but the Jews don't leave. In fact what happens is more Jews show up and sooner or later a developer comes along who finds some way to start building a housing development on the settlement. It's illegal, even under Israeli law, but somehow, it continues and nobody says anything. The Palestinian has no recourse because he or she won his or her court case, but nobody is enforcing the judgment.

And before long, presto! We have an Israeli settlement, and another Palestinian family displaced.

So imagine this happening to your home, the homes of your family, your friends, everybody in your town. How long would it take before you started to get really ticked off?

[M.Dancer]

Not surpisingly, Israel refuses to recognize the Geneva Conventions. .

Israel became a signatory to the Geneva conventions in 1949 and were ratified in 1951.

Not sure if her enemies give the same respect to the conventions as Israel does, seeing they violate the rules of war as a matter of policy.

[BC_chick]

The problem is that they make too-good tenants. Their adherence to local rules and laws is often perfect, as is their learning of weaknesses in those laws.

The Jews' relative valuation of education and the learned professions made them useful to their host societies, and also made them the object of envy. I would hardly call that making "bad tenants". How many "Air India" type events are the Jews involved in?

Partially agreed. Like you, I agree that Jews make excellent tenants bringing about a world of success (and inturn jealousy) everywhere they go.

The naysayers would have us believe that Jews migrate to successful countries *in order* to prosper. I think that's putting the chicken before the egg... I firmly believe wherever Jews go *ends up* very prosperous as a result of your contributions to fields like science, humanities and technology. We've seen this time and time again from the Roman Empire to the expulsion of Jews in 20th century from different countries.

The ratio of Jewish under-achievers is statistically very low compared to other groups, and from my personal experiences, I also believe Jews are incredibly warm, family-oriented, hard-working and successful. Some of you may end up with a big head about it, but hey, I can't say it's not well deserved.

However, that's where the similarity between our sentiments ends. Despite the jealousy, brutality and historical misfortune that has been bestowed upon your people, I cannot bring myself to agree with you that "your right to self-determination" should be granted...... on someone else's land.

The Jewish expulsion from different countries seems to be very close to your heart. Yet close to a million Palestinians were met with the same fate in the creation of the state of Israel.

Their right to self-determination doesn't seem to matter though....

[Oleg Bach]

Partially agreed. Like you, I agree that Jews make excellent tenants bringing about a world of success (and inturn jealousy) everywhere they go.

The naysayers would have us believe that Jews migrate to successful countries *in order* to prosper. I think that's putting the chicken before the egg... I firmly believe wherever Jews go *ends up* very prosperous as a result of your contributions to fields like science, humanities and technology. We've seen this time and time again from the Roman Empire to the expulsion of Jews in 20th century from different countries.

The ratio of Jewish under-achievers is statistically very low compared to other groups, and from my personal experiences, I also believe Jews are incredibly warm, family-oriented, hard-working and successful. Some of you may end up with a big head about it, but hey, I can't say it's not well deserved.

However, that's where the similarity between our sentiments ends. Despite the jealousy, brutality and historical misfortune that has been bestowed upon your people, I cannot bring myself to agree with you that "your right to self-determination" should be granted...... on someone else's land.

The Jewish expulsion from different countries seems to be very close to your heart. Yet close to a million Palestinians were met with the same fate in the creation of the state of Israel.

Their right to self-determination doesn't seem to matter though....

Zionism is silly - It started in about 1890...Half the Jews meeting in Austria wanted to wait for goodness to occur via a messiah..the other half were materialistic and wanted to gain security and a "homeland' by controling and having great wealth...this was the great schism that took place that has not closed it's self inflicted wound to this day. In order to have a homeland, the agenda of the materialist came into conflict with the spiritualist jews. The believers stood in the way of the Zionists. BECAUSE - The God believing Jew refused to bow down to money and to the state that formed with that money...hence came the holocaust. You would assume that Jews would not persecute or even destroy fellow Jews. In part the extermination of Jews was orchestrated by Zionist. Those that refused to submit to the materialist were eventually done away with. This may be shocking to some - and a deep dark secret to others that brings about shame...Hitler has Jewish advisors and supporters..go figure...Zionism Shmionism...Zionists are creeps that betrayed their own brothers because that brother would not bow to them as a god.

[BC_chick]

There was an interesting documentary on the BBC channel not so long ago which showed this happening in real time. First of all you have a small group of Ultra-Orthodox Jews who show up on a piece of land owned by a Palestinian. They set up a couple of shacks - one of which they call a Synagogue complete with a Menorah or some other suitable religious artifact. They make grand statements about God, Moses and the Holocaust, and proceed to expand the settlement, slowly putting up more buildings and bringing in more people. If a Palestinian Arab were to do this on Israeli land, the army would show up and kick him or her off forthwith, since Israel has a law which forbids such things. Palestinians though must go to an Israeli court and seek to have the Jews evicted. This is when things start to get weird. Sometimes the Palestinians win, but the Jews don't leave. In fact what happens is more Jews show up and sooner or later a developer comes along who finds some way to start building a housing development on the settlement. It's illegal, even under Israeli law, but somehow, it continues and nobody says anything. The Palestinian has no recourse because he or she won his or her court case, but nobody is enforcing the judgment.

[...]

So imagine this happening to your home, the homes of your family, your friends, everybody in your town. How long would it take before you started to get really ticked off?

According to some folks around here all is fair in war... except, of course, when their side is the victim of all things "fair"...

Edited April 29, 2008 by BC_chick