Subscriptions, Current Issue & Back Issues

Current Issue | Annual Subscriptions | Back Issues

Tag: Trump

US Sends Warships To North Korean Peninsula

North Korea missiles: US warships deployed to Korean peninsula

  • 3 hours ago
  • From the section Asia
The aircraft carrier USS Carl Vinson (30 January 2017)Image copyright Reuters
Image caption The Carl Vinson is now heading towards the Korean peninsula

The US military has ordered a navy strike group to move towards the Korean peninsula, amid growing concerns about North Korea’s missile programme.

The Carl Vinson Strike Group comprises an aircraft carrier and other warships.

US Pacific Command described the deployment – now heading towards the western Pacific – as a prudent measure to maintain readiness in the region.

President Trump has said the US is prepared to act alone to deal with the nuclear threat from North Korea.

“The number one threat in the region continues to be North Korea, due to its reckless, irresponsible and destabilising programme of missile tests and pursuit of a nuclear weapons capability,” US Pacific Command spokesman Dave Benham said.

The Carl Vinson being escorted by other warshipsImage copyright AFP
Image caption The Carl Vinson (centre) is being escorted by other warships

The strike group comprises the Nimitz-class aircraft carrier USS Carl Vinson, two guided-missile destroyers and a guided-missile cruiser.

As well as massive striking power, the carrier group has the capability to intercept ballistic missiles.

It was originally due to make port calls in Australia but instead has been diverted from Singapore to the west Pacific – where it recently conducted exercises with the South Korean Navy.

North Korea has carried out several nuclear tests and experts predict more could be in the offing as the country moves closer towards developing a nuclear warhead with a big enough range to reach the US.

On Wednesday North Korea test-fired a medium-range ballistic missile from its eastern port of Sinpo into the Sea of Japan.

The test – condemned by Japan and South Korea – came on the eve of a visit by China’s President Xi Jinping to the US to meet President Donald Trump.

The two leaders discussed how to rein in North Korea’s nuclear and missile programmes as the US steps up the pressure on China, a historic ally of Pyongyang, to help reduce tension.

China has however been reluctant to isolate its neighbour, fearing its collapse could spawn a refugee crisis and bring the US military to its doorstep.

Mr Trump said in a recent interview that Washington was ready to act without Beijing’s co-operation: “If China is not going to solve North Korea, we will.”

The North is banned from any missile or nuclear tests by the UN, though it has repeatedly broken those sanctions.

Last month, North Korea fired four ballistic missiles towards the Sea of Japan from the Tongchang-ri region, near the border with China.

Japanese PM Shinzo Abe called it a “new stage of threat”.

The US Treasury recently slapped sanctions on 11 North Korean business representatives and one company, while US politicians overwhelmingly backed a bill relisting the North as a state sponsor of terror.

North Korea responded by warning that it will retaliate if the international community steps up sanctions, saying the US was forcing the situation “to the brink of war”.

NK missile ranges

China has long been North Korea’s closest diplomatic ally and trading partner, but the relationship has become increasingly strained over Pyongyang’s refusal to halt nuclear and missile testing.

There are fears that Pyongyang could eventually develop the ability to launch long-range nuclear missiles capable of striking the mainland US.

And Now They Love Him: Media Reaction To Trump’s Missile Strike.


The cruise missiles struck, and many in the mainstream media fawned.

“I think Donald Trump became president of the United States last night,” declared Fareed Zakaria on CNN, after firing of 59 missiles at a Syrian military airfield late Thursday night. (His words sounded familiar, since CNN’s Van Jones made a nearly identical pronouncement after Trump’s first address to Congress.)

“On Syria attack, Trump’s heart came first,” read a New York Times headline.

“President Trump has done the right thing and I salute him for it,” wrote the Wall Street Journal’s Bret Stephens — a frequent Trump critic and Pulitzer Prize-winning conservative columnist. He added: “Now destroy the Assad regime for good.”

Brian Williams, on MSNBC, seemed mesmerized by the images of the strikes provided by the Pentagon. He used the word “beautiful” three times and alluded to a Leonard Cohen lyric — “I am guided by the beauty of our weapons” — without apparent irony.

MSNBC anchor Brian Williams.© Reuters MSNBC anchor Brian Williams.

Quite the pivot, for some. Assessing Trump’s presidency a few weeks ago, Zakaria wrote that while the Romans recommended keeping people happy with bread and circuses, “so far, all we have gotten is the circus.” And the Times has been so tough on Trump that the president rarely refers to the paper without “failing” or “fake” as a descriptor.

But after the strikes, praise flowed like wedding champagne — especially on cable news.

“Guest after guest is gushing. From MSNBC to CNN, Trump is receiving his best night of press so far,” wrote Sam Sacks, a Washington podcaster and journalist. “And all he had to do was start a war.”

Why do so many in the news media love a show of force?

“There is no faster way to bring public support than to pursue military action,” said Ken Paulson, head of the Newseum Institute’s First Amendment Center.

“It’s a pattern not only in American history, but in world history. We rally around the commander in chief — and that’s understandable.”

Paulson noted that the news media also “seem to get bored with their own narrative” about Trump’s failings, and they welcome a chance to switch it up.

But that’s not good enough, he said: “The watchdog has to have clear vision and not just a sporadic bark.”

Clara Jeffery, editor in chief of Mother Jones, offered a simple explanation: “It’s dramatic. It’s good for TV, reporters get caught up in the moment, or, worse, jingoism.”

She added: “Military action is viewed as inherently nonpartisan, opposition or skepticism as partisan. News organizations that are fearful of looking partisan can fall into the trap of failing to provide context.”

And so, empathy as the president’s clear motivation is accepted, she said — “with no mention of the refugee ban keeping those kids out, no mention of Islamophobia that has informed his campaign and administration. How can you write about motive and not explore that hypocrisy?”

Mocking “the instant elevation of Trump into a serious and respected war leader,” Glenn Greenwald in the Intercept recalled John Jay, one of the Federalist Papers authors, who wrote more than 200 years ago: “However disgraceful it may be to human nature . . . nations in general will make war whenever they have a prospect of getting anything by it.”

In fact, Jay wrote, “absolute monarchs will often make war when their nations are to get nothing by it” — except, of course, to scratch that eternal itch for military glory, revenge or self-aggrandizement.

Groupthink, and a lack of proper skepticism, is something that we’ve seen many times before as the American news media watches an administration step to the brink of war.

Most notoriously, perhaps, that was true in the run-up to the Iraq invasion in 2003, the start of a long disaster there.

Stephen Walt, Harvard professor of international affairs, thinks the press and the public should have learned some things by now.

“Syria remains a tragedy because there are no good options,” he wrote in Foreign Policy, and America’s interventions in the Middle East very seldom end well.

Walt later told me that the news media now must look forward and ask deeper questions.

“What is Trump’s overall strategy for Syria,” given that “the balance of power on the ground is unchanged and we are no closer to a political settlement.”

Missile strikes may seem thrilling, and retaliation righteous.

But journalists and commentators ought to remember the duller virtues, too, like skepticism, depth and context.

And keep their eyes fixed firmly there, not on the spectacular images in the sky

Still running the show, regardless of who the President is.

Trump, The NWO, And The Syria Situation: For What It’s Worth…..

….This Is My Take On The Situation:

America had a choice. That is, unless you believe the “choice” is nothing but a charade. But, charades and hacking accusations aside, the People chose.

Do you choose the same old, same old, in the form of the apparently psychopathic Hillary, who wants to bomb the crap out of Syria, or do you put your money on Trump?

Some voted for him because he’s perceived as having a different focus, concentrating on “Making America Great Again”. Others simply because the former option was too horrible to contemplate.

Either way, America voted for change. They picked the outsider, the showman. Possibly the most controversial president in history. Anything but Hillary, please!

Right now, it looks like maybe they’ve got the same old same old in a different wrapper.

How the hell did it come to this?

I’ve always had a cautious attitude with Trump; “Wait and see”. Call me a fence sitter, but I don’t have a crystal ball, and the phrase “if it seems too good to be true….” springs to mind.

Back in the early 1990’s, George Bush Senior spoke openly about the New World Order. He made it explicitly clear that the arrival of the NWO was inevitable. And now we are seeing it take shape. Whether it be the hordes of refugees, desparate families in their hordes fleeing to the West like pieces on the NWO chessboard, or the less obvious but nevertheless visible movement of the wealthy 1% buying up bolt holes in New Zealand (The Gateway To Antarctica) and other perceived places of safety. Clearly the shit is hitting the fan. And clearly this was expected, because it was planned and orchestrated.

The current situation in Syria was part of the long term plan, set in concrete years, maybe even decades ago. Trump or no Trump, it was going to happen. Hillary would have gone along with the plot gleefully; Trump somewhat less so. I honestly believe Trump would rather focus on building his wall and creating jobs for American workers, but Trump isn’t a dictator, he’s a president, a cog in the machine. And if the cog doesn’t mesh, the Engineers will fix it.

Images and videos of dying children gasping for breath. Corpses piled up. Thanks to the internet there’s no hiding the horror of it. The kind of imagery that stirs up the public like nothing else. As a parent myself I’m not immune to it. Part of you looks for anything that says this might not be real: A false flag. A hoax. But no, I think this really happened.

So whose to blame? We saw the jets, but did they drop sarin gas on those people? Did the rebels have stashes of gas that Assad’s forces unwittingly bombed?

Speculation and finger pointing is off the scale. What evidence do we have of what really happened, who is actually to blame?

Diversion. Smoke and mirrors. The Call them the NWO, the Illuminati, The Elite, whatever. Chaos and deception is their calling card.

You know who is to blame for this. Not Assad, not Putin, not Trump. Not even Hillary or Obama.

Think higher. Look up, wake up.  Somewhere…over the rainbow……

Follow the Yellow Brick Road, but don’t expect to find a real wizard. Just an old man behind a curtain pulling levers.

Et Pluribus Uno: The New World Order is upon us.

Martin Harris

Russia: “The US Can’t Aim For Shit” Suspends Pentagon Agreement

Former Ambassador To Syria, Peter Ford, Tells It As He Sees It

Syria Updates On Airstrike Situation

WASHINGTON – President Trump unleashed airstrikes on Syria on Thursday to punish its strongman, Bashar Assad, after a chemical attack this week that killed dozens of civilians, including children. The barrage amounted to the most significant military operation ordered by Trump, a newcomer to governing who had warned, before taking office, against escalating America’s involvement in the Middle East.

“Tonight, I ordered a targeted military strike on the airfield in Syria from where the chemical attack was launched,” Trump said in Palm Beach, Florida. “It is in this vital national security interest of the United States to prevent and deter the spread and use of deadly chemical weapons.”

The operation — the first known direct American strike on Syrian government assets since the start of the country’s civil war — rained at least 50 cruise missiles from U.S. Navy ships in the Mediterranean on a Syrian airfield thought to be the point of origin for the chemical attack, U.S. officials said. The attack took place at 8:40 p.m. Eastern time.

The decision risked confrontation with Russia, Syria’s patron, which reportedly had troops stationed at the air base, and could mean increased dangers for hundreds of U.S. troops now in Syria to prepare for the assault on Raqqa, the capital of the Islamic State militant group. But it also sent a dramatically different message about Washington’s willingness to use force in Syria after Barack Obama shied away from enforcing his self-imposed “red line.”


President Trump speaks at Mar-a-Lago in Palm Beach, Fla., on April 6, 2017, after the U.S. fired a barrage of cruise missiles into Syria.…”/>
President Trump speaks at Mar-a-Lago in Palm Beach, Fla., on April 6, 2017, after the U.S. fired a barrage of cruise missiles into Syria. (Photo: Alex Brandon/AP)


The decision to dramatically escalate America’s role in a conflict that has left some 500,000 dead, according to human rights groups, was arguably the new president’s biggest decision yet, with many unknown consequences. At home, the early response from Congress suggested strong bipartisan support for the strikes but deep concern about the way forward. Some in Congress, including Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky, said Trump should have sought authorization from Congress for a military operation that was not in response to an attack on the U.S.

Trump explained his decision by describing the horrific images from Tuesday’s chemical weapons strike in a mostly rebel-controlled area near the Turkish border, saying “there can be no dispute” that Assad’s forces were responsible.

“Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad launched a horrible chemical weapons attack on innocent civilians,” he said. “Using a deadly nerve agent, Assad choked out the lives of helpless men, women and children. It was a slow and brutal death for so many. Even beautiful babies were cruelly murdered in this very barbaric attack.”

So “tonight I ordered a targeted military strike on the airfield in Syria from where the chemical attack was launched,” Trump said. “It is in this vital national security interest of the United States to prevent and deter the spread and use of deadly chemical weapons.”

The president also urged “all civilized nations to join us in seeking to end the slaughter and bloodshed in Syria.”

Congressional Democrats offered measured support for the onslaught but warned that lawmakers would need to weigh in on any sustained escalation of the conflict. Some of the lawmakers delivering that message stood idly by while Barack Obama escalated America’s role in Iraq and Syria.

The top Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Ben Cardin of Maryland, said in a statement that “any longer-term or larger military operation in Syria by the Trump administration will need to be done in consultation with the Congress.”

Cardin also pressed Trump “to inform the legislative branch and the American people about his larger policy in Syria, as well as the legal basis for this action and any additional military activities in that country.”

Trump had huddled with top advisers, including Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, Defense Secretary James Mattis and National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster in Palm Beach, Fla., where he was to hold meetings Friday with Chinese President Xi Jinping. In a sign of how quickly events were unfolding, White House officials had said just a day earlier that McMaster would not travel with Trump.

Tillerson told reporters that the president had begun a long, difficult and potentially fruitless effort to push Assad from power.

“The process by which Assad would leave is something that I think requires an international community effort, both to first defeat ISIS within Syria, to stabilize the Syrian country, to avoid further civil war, and then to work collectively with our partners around the world through a political process that would lead to Assad leaving,” he said. Pressed on whether he and Trump were working to assemble an international coalition to achieve that goal, Tillerson replied: “Those steps are underway.”

The secretary of state also had tough words for Moscow, Assad’s patron. “It is very important that the Russian government consider carefully their continued support for the Assad regime,” he said.

And he reaffirmed what senior U.S. officials have said since the world first saw footage and photographs of gasping, dying or dead children in Khan Sheikhoun in Syria’s northwestern Idlib province: Assad is to blame.

“There is no doubt in our minds and the information we have supports that Syria, the Syrian regime under the leadership of President Bashar al-Assad, are responsible for this attack,” Tillerson said.

From The Guardian:

The UN coordinator for humanitarian affairs says it has no sign that U.S. military strikes against a Syrian air base have had “any direct consequence” on overall aid operations in Syria, reports the Associated Press.

Jens Laerke of the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs said such violence “is not a new feature” of Syria’s war, and cited continued UN-led efforts to reach people in besieged and hard-to-reach areas of the country.

The United States launched cruise missile strikes against Shayart air base in Homs province following a chemical attack in a northern village that U.S. officials and others have blamed on President Bashar Assad’s forces.

UN human rights office spokeswoman Ravina Shamdasani said Friday at a UN briefing that use of chemical weapons, if confirmed, would amount to a war crime


Trump’s Condemnation And Response To Syria Attack

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump declared Wednesday the deadly chemical attack in Syria crossed “many, many lines” and abruptly transformed his thinking about Syrian President Bashar Assad. Still, he pointedly refused to say what action the U.S. might take in response.

Facing one of his first global crises, Trump blamed the attack squarely on Assad’s forces, even as the embattled Syrian leader and his Russian backers denied it. He suggested that the attack that killed 72 people had cut into his former reluctance to plunge the U.S. further into the complex and dangerous turmoil in the Middle East.

“When you kill innocent children, innocent babies — babies, little babies — with a chemical gas that is so lethal, people were shocked to hear what gas it was, that crosses many, many lines,” Trump said in the White House Rose Garden. U.S. officials said the gas was likely chlorine, with traces of a nerve agent like sarin.

While continuing to blame predecessor Barack Obama for much of the current situation in Syria, he acknowledged that dealing with the crisis is now his own responsibility and vowed to “carry it very proudly.”

Only days earlier multiple members of Trump’s administration had said Assad’s ouster was no longer a U.S. priority, drawing outrage from Assad critics in the U.S. and abroad. But Trump said Tuesday’s attack “had a big impact on me — big impact.”

“My attitude towards Syria and Assad has changed very much,” he said.

Raw: Storms Hit Texas, Crash Kills 3 Chasers

Yet Trump was adamant that he would not telegraph any potential U.S. military retaliation, even as his U.N. ambassador, Nikki Haley, was promising a strong and perhaps even unilateral American response. Trump said disclosing military action ahead of time was a mistake the Obama administration had repeatedly made.

“I’m not saying I’m doing anything one way or another, but I’m certainly not going to be telling you,” Trump said.

Since the attack Tuesday in rebel-held territory in northern Syria, Trump has been under increasing pressure to explain whether the attack was egregious enough to force a U.S. response. After all, Trump’s first reaction to the attack was to blame Obama’s “weakness” in earlier years for enabling Assad.

President Donald Trump speaks during a news conference with Jordan's King Abdullah II in the Rose Garden at the White House in Washington, Wednesday, April 5, 2017. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik)© The Associated Press President Donald Trump speaks during a news conference with Jordan’s King Abdullah II in the Rose Garden at the White House in Washington, Wednesday, April 5, 2017. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik)

Obama had put Assad on notice that using chemical weapons would cross a “red line” necessitating a U.S. response, but then failed to follow through, pulling back from planned airstrikes on Assad’s forces after Congress wouldn’t vote to approve them. Trump and other critics have cited that as a key moment the U.S. lost much global credibility.

“I now have responsibility,” Trump said. “That responsibility could be made a lot easier if it was handled years ago.”

Standing alongside Jordan’s King Abdullah II at a joint news conference, Trump appeared to adopt the first part of Obama’s stance — that chemical weapons use is intolerable — while stopping short of saying what might come next.

The strongest indication that the U.S. might act actually came at the United Nations, where Trump’s envoy held up photos of the attack’s victims in an emotional plea to the Security Council to intervene.

“When the United Nations consistently fails in its duty to act collectively, there are times in the life of states that we are compelled to take our own action,” Haley declared.

Though Trump has assigned no blame to Russia or Iran — Assad’s two staunchest allies — both Haley and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson have argued adamantly that both must use their influence to prevent Assad from mounting further attacks. As the Security Council weighed a resolution condemning chemical weapons use in Syria, Haley accused Moscow of blocking action and closing its eyes to the “barbarity” of three previous chemical attacks, also blamed on the Syrian government.

The most recent attack in the town of Khan Sheikhoun bore telltale signs of nerve agent exposure such as victims convulsing and foaming from the mouth. Videos showed volunteer medics using firehoses to wash chemicals from victims’ bodies and lifeless children being piled in heaps.

Early U.S. assessments show the attack most likely involved chlorine and traces of the nerve agent sarin, according to two U.S. officials who weren’t authorized to speak publicly about intelligence assessments and demanded anonymity. Use of sarin would be especially troubling because it would suggest Syria may have cheated on its previous deal to give up chemical weapons.

After the 2013 attack, the U.S. and Russia brokered a deal in which Syria declared its chemical weapons arsenal, agreed to destroy it and join the Chemical Weapons Convention. Chlorine, which has legitimate uses as well, isn’t banned under that convention except when used in a weapon. But nerve agents like sarin are banned in all circumstances.

As Trump and other world leaders scrambled for a response, the U.S. was working to lock down details proving Assad’s culpability. Russia’s military, insisting Assad wasn’t responsible, has said the chemicals were dispersed when a Syrian military strike hit a facility where the rebels were manufacturing weapons for use in Iraq.

An American review of radar and other assessments showed Syrian aircraft flying in the area at the time of the attack, a U.S. official said. Russian and U.S. coalition aircraft were not there, the official said.


Associated Press writers Vivian Salama, Ken Thomas, Lolita C. Baldor and Bradley Klapper in Washington, Vladimir Isachenkov in Moscow, and Edith M. Lederer at the United Nations contributed to this report.

Geopolitics: The World Of Grown Ups, By G-Squared.

America will be correctly presenting itself in the upcoming Helsinki Conference with Russia.

Russia is currently America’s greatest ally and partner. Many hidden events took place during the insane Clinton-Obama era. Apart from the US Military, particularly The USN, deciding to run its own race.

It was a worse scenario than the rogue MacArthur, necessarily sacked by Truman. He sent; Eisenhower, Ridgway, and Clark to Korea. They had very specific instructions. MacArthur refused to attend a Pacific meeting  with Truman and had requisitioned twelve devices from The American Nuclear Arsenal, without authority. They were delivered to Darwin Australia. He planned to resolve the disaster he caused in Korea by dropping atomic bombs on Russia and China.

Russia is resilient and understood that The  Clinton-Obama idiocy with which America represented itself would eventually pass. Russia has defended itself at the doors of its homes. Which is very different to a computer game military.

For the first time in many decades, Trump and Putin are the way forward.

America still has nuisance elements in; Belarus, Chechnya, Georgia, and The Ukraine. They need to be shovelled off.

In Yalta 1945, Roosevelt was no match to Stalin. Potsdam was a rubber stamp. In Vienna 1961, Kennedy was no match to Khrushchev. The Cuban Missile Affair was very different to what is commonly believed in The West. In Moscow 1972, Nixon was no match to Brezhnev.

America; has been left militarily incapable of defending itself. Russia is the world’s strongest military power. And the only one with global reach. The American long range missile system has been inoperative for some three years. While political imbeciles in America waffled on, and The US State Department postured its stupid proxy armies, Russia was watching America’s back.

Mattis is the first Defence Secretary to take control of The Pentagon in many decades. Rumsfeld was as useless in his second term as he was in his first. Carlucci was running a business. Cheney was a good little contract organiser. He would later take America and its sucklings into the greatest military contract disaster in history; The FA-35. McNamara admitted he had no idea. A classic interview before he died.

Fortunately at this time in history, Russia is correctly and fully focussed on trade. America now has a common purpose with trade. The way forward for the world.

Occupations, Invasions, Regime Changes, Democratising, Humanitarian Aid, Removing Dictators, and all the rest of the rhetoric couching genocides, resource theft and asset looting are gone. America had become the preeminent terrorist. The way to prevent a consolidation of collective hatred against America, was not to continue and attempt to obliterate all objection, but to stop.

In recent decades, The Eagle has been high pitch screaming and jumping up and down. The Bear rolls over and continues its slumber. From WWII, when Russia drew a line in the sand, America did not cross.

On the two occassions that US State Department proxy forces gathered in Georgia; Russia flew 35 kms. into Georgia and destroyed them. On the two occassions that the same was attempted from The Ukraine, and the forces were allowed to cross. Russia ‘arrested’ them, without a shot fired. When Russia was no longer prepared to accept stupid childish behaviour in The Crimea, Russian forces moved in one sunday night and evicted the squatters; without a shot fired.

Russia quashed three civil wars in Chechnya. It has a 500,000 standing force for any disturbance in Belarus. It maintains a 200,000 force on The Ukrainian Border.

Image result for Russia military and trade

The Kursk incident ramming was definately an act of war. When the message was finally driven home to Bill Clinton, he read the Putin statement as delivered. There have been force downs at Murmansk, The USS Virginia was chased out. The USS Donald Cook was disabled and had to be towed off.

The developed fixation in the minds of the noisy, concerning Russia the great enemy, and channelled back to The Cold War, continues. A study of true history delivers different answers.

Particularly since The 1853 Crimean War. When Russia had to fight Britain to remove The Ottomans from occupied territories including Jerusalem. Quite different to the school text renditions.

On two particular occassions; Russia and China had to chase out American over reach. The 38th. Parallel North was drawn in the sand in Korea. And America was vanquished at The 30/4/1975 Battle of Saigon. From 1961 to 1989 America sat staring at The Berlin Wall. The Eastern Bloc agreed at Yalta, was rubber stamped at Potsdam.

America even lost The Cold War to an internally fragmented Soviet Union. If that is a difficult swallow, search for reparations and concessions.

America has breached every weapons treaty it has ever signed, from long range to medium to threatre. It has breached sailing agreements as The Montreau Accords, and troop movements as The Bucharest Accords.

Image result for America imploding



All in all, American militarism has accomplished nothing beyond destroying its domestic economy.

The Battle of The Coral Sea, used as some cementing of defensive accords between America and Australia, was always meaningless. What happened with Papau and Timor?

Occasionally the children jump behind the wheel and pretend they can drive. And the herds are kept amused by circus performers in The Western MSM Big Top.

The Grown-Ups can now get on with the running of the real world. The toys are being moved into a safe corner where the children can play and shout.