[Y3a]

So.... BUSH HIMSELF is doing this?

I thought this was already approved under certain circumstances, with some if the legislation going back as the Carter Admin.

Anybody know what the 'real deal' is? If AlGore said it I don't believe it.


http://www.nbc4.com/news/6152312/detail.html


Former Vice President Al Gore asserted Monday that President George W. Bush "repeatedly and persistently" broke the law by eavesdropping on Americans without a court warrant and called for a federal investigation of the practice.

Speaking on Martin Luther King Jr.'s national holiday, the man who lost the 2000 presidential election to Bush only after a ruling by the Supreme Court on a recount in Florida, called Bush's warrantless surveillance program "a threat to the very structure of our government." Gore charged that the program has ignored the checks and balances of the courts and Congress.

Gore said that Bush's actions -- which the president has defended as indispensable in the war against terrorism -- represented a "direct assault" on the special federal court that considers, and decides whether to authorize, administration requests to eavesdrop on Americans.

Gore said the concerns are especially important on King's birthday because the slain civil rights leader was among thousands of Americans whose private communications were intercepted by the U.S. government.

Gore said that there is still much to learn about the National Security Agency's domestic surveillance program: "What we do know about this pervasive wiretapping virtually compels the conclusion that the president of the United States has been breaking the law repeatedly and persistently," he maintained.

Bush has pointed to a congressional resolution passed after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, that authorized him to use force in the fight against terrorism as allowing him to order the program. The program authorized eavesdropping of international phone calls and e-mails of people deemed a terror risk.

Gore was repeatedly interrupted by applause Monday as he spoke to the American Constitution Society for Law and Policy and the Liberty Coalition, two organizations that expressed concern with the legality of the surveillance program.

Gore, also a former member of the Senate from Tennessee, proposed that a special counsel be appointed by Attorney General Alberto Gonzales to investigate whether there have been violations of the law.

Referring to reports that private telecommunications companies have provided the Bush administration with access to private information on Americans, Gore said any company that did so should immediately end its complicity in the program.

[Rolling Bones]

Y3a is a Bush lemming.

Should have been Al Gore... (three dots)

He believes Bush broke the law and is asking for an investigation or commission. What's wrong with that. If Bush didn't break the law he has nothing to worry about....does he?

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by Rolling Bones

Y3a is a Bush lemming.

Should have been Al Gore... (three dots)

He believes Bush broke the law and is asking for an investigation or commission. What's wrong with that. If Bush didn't break the law he has nothing to worry about....does he?

While we're at it, let's have a special council investigate Al Gore's violation of the law with no warrant wire-taps during his administration.

...or the widespread violation of law via illegal foriegn contributions designed to illegally influence elections (on par with Abramhof's current problems).

..or maybe Al is just trying to divert attention from the fact that YET ANOTHER scandal being covered from his administration which a SC has been investigating and is about to release a report showing widespread corruption and obstruction of justice from his administration.

http://www.drudgereport.com/flash.htm

Really..did ALGORE ever know when to quit when he was ahead? Gore giving advice on how an administration can keep from violating the law is kind of like Carter giving advice on how to free hostages. Neither have the credibility to pull it off.

[Kevin]

Gore is still being a sore loser? wow.

He holds a grudge.

[black bear theory]

here's the link if anyone cares to read the speech ...

http://www.libertycoalition.net/gore-speech

some excerpts

On this particular Martin Luther King Day, it is especially important to recall that for the last several years of his life, Dr. King was illegally wiretapped—one of hundreds of thousands of Americans whose private communications were intercepted by the U.S. government during this period.

The FBI privately called King the “most dangerous and effective negro leader in the country” and vowed to “take him off his pedestal.” The government even attempted to destroy his marriage and blackmail him into committing suicide.

This campaign continued until Dr. King’s murder. The discovery that the FBI conducted a long-running and extensive campaign of secret electronic surveillance designed to infiltrate the inner workings of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, and to learn the most intimate details of Dr. King’s life, helped to convince Congress to enact restrictions on wiretapping.

The result was the Foreign Intelligence and Surveillance Act (FISA), which was enacted expressly to ensure that foreign intelligence surveillance would be presented to an impartial judge to verify that there is a sufficient cause for the surveillance. I voted for that law during my first term in Congress and for almost thirty years the system has proven a workable and valued means of according a level of protection for private citizens, while permitting foreign surveillance to continue.

...

The Congress we have today is unrecognizable compared to the one in which my father served. There are many distinguished Senators and Congressmen serving today. I am honored that some of them are here in this hall. But the legislative branch of government under its current leadership now operates as if it is entirely subservient to the Executive Branch.

Moreover, too many Members of the House and Senate now feel compelled to spend a majority of their time not in thoughtful debate of the issues, but raising money to purchase 30 second TV commercials.

There have now been two or three generations of congressmen who don’t really know what an oversight hearing is. In the 70’s and 80’s, the oversight hearings in which my colleagues and I participated held the feet of the Executive Branch to the fire – no matter which party was in power. Yet oversight is almost unknown in the Congress today.

The role of authorization committees has declined into insignificance. The 13 annual appropriation bills are hardly ever actually passed anymore. Everything is lumped into a single giant measure that is not even available for Members of Congress to read before they vote on it.

Members of the minority party are now routinely excluded from conference committees, and amendments are routinely not allowed during floor consideration of legislation.

In the United States Senate, which used to pride itself on being the “greatest deliberative body in the world,” meaningful debate is now a rarity. Even on the eve of the fateful vote to authorize the invasion of Iraq, Senator Robert Byrd famously asked: “Why is this chamber empty?”

In the House of Representatives, the number who face a genuinely competitive election contest every two years is typically less than a dozen out of 435.

...

Look for example at the Congressional role in “overseeing” this massive four year eavesdropping campaign that on its face seemed so clearly to violate the Bill of Rights. The President says he informed Congress, but what he really means is that he talked with the chairman and ranking member of the House and Senate intelligence committees and the top leaders of the House and Senate. This small group, in turn, claimed that they were not given the full facts, though at least one of the intelligence committee leaders handwrote a letter of concern to VP Cheney and placed a copy in his own safe.

Though I sympathize with the awkward position in which these men and women were placed, I cannot disagree with the Liberty Coalition when it says that Democrats as well as Republicans in the Congress must share the blame for not taking action to protest and seek to prevent what they consider a grossly unconstitutional program.

Moreover, in the Congress as a whole—both House and Senate—the enhanced role of money in the re-election process, coupled with the sharply diminished role for reasoned deliberation and debate, has produced an atmosphere conducive to pervasive institutionalized corruption.

The Abramoff scandal is but the tip of a giant iceberg that threatens the integrity of the entire legislative branch of government.

It is the pitiful state of our legislative branch which primarily explains the failure of our vaunted checks and balances to prevent the dangerous overreach by our Executive Branch which now threatens a radical transformation of the American system.

I call upon Democratic and Republican members of Congress today to uphold your oath of office and defend the Constitution. Stop going along to get along. Start acting like the independent and co-equal branch of government you’re supposed to be.

[Kevin]

"Stop going along to get along. Start acting like the independent and co-equal branch of government you’re supposed to be."

Oh puhlease. Nothing gets done because of the latter he is speaking of.

He is attempting to remove blame from teh Democrats. Saying they just voted for it to "get along"

What a load of horseshit.

[black bear theory]

well, actions are the true test of a person. i don't know enough about how things were back then and how they compare with today. still, words, when well spoken, should be heeded.

that being said, i think he makes some good points, ones that i think both republicans and democrats can agree with - and by that i mean non-politicians - getting money out of gov't, having senators and representatives show up for debates, and basically getting them to do their jobs.

it seems to me that politicians (and those inside washington) have created a little world for them to live inside - similar to hollywood maybe - and live with an inflated sense of self-importance.

maybe that is what you were alluding to.

[nredman]

george bush would never do anything wrong - its unamerican to say such things - you are letting the terrorists win.

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by nredman

george bush would never do anything wrong - its unamerican to say such things - you are letting the terrorists win.

It's not wrong. It's HYPOCRITICAL when he was part of one of the more corrupt administrations of 20th century at the same time his people felt that no-warrant searches for AMERICAN CITIZENS was totally appropriate in the matter of national defense.

Either he's just playing politics or he's got a screw or two loose. If he truly felt as he claimed he did, he'd start out by asking for an independent council into himself and his own administration. That didn't happen, and that's my point. Gore has no business criticizing Bush for what he believes are broken laws. It's an example of the pot calling a possible kettle black.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by nredman

george bush would never do anything wrong - its unamerican to say such things - you are letting the terrorists win.

[black bear theory]

Originally Posted by stupendousman

It's not wrong. It's HYPOCRITICAL when he was part of one of the more corrupt administrations of 20th century at the same time his people felt that no-warrant searches for AMERICAN CITIZENS was totally appropriate in the matter of national defense.

Either he's just playing politics or he's got a screw or two loose. If he truly felt as he claimed he did, he'd start out by asking for an independent council into himself and his own administration. That didn't happen, and that's my point. Gore has no business criticizing Bush for what he believes are broken laws. It's an example of the pot calling a possible kettle black.

maybe he aims to redeem himself. having been co-conspirator in these allegations (i'm checking that drudge thing), isn't he most able to expose this for what it is? (and maybe get a reduced sentence)

after all one argument against giving the executive unchecked powers is that the next administration may be one that you don't want to have those powers? losing the 2000 election probably made this painfully clear to him.

are you against these unchecked presidential powers past, present and future? i assume by blaming gore the answer is yes.

[Spliffdaddy]

Who in the hell is Al Gore?

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by black bear theory

are you against these unchecked presidential powers past, present and future? i assume by blaming gore the answer is yes.

Actually, I'm not. If you've got a pretty good idea that someone is engaging in treason, and you need to act fast...I don't think that the Constitution requires the President to sit on his hands. I don't have a problem with what happened with Ames. I don't have a problem with the CIA tapping the phone calls of those known to be linked to terrorism to people in this country.

I don't wish to have it both ways. I'm more than happy to be consistent and not play politics with national security. If only ALGORE had the same ability....

...and again, it's Gore's administration who pretty much broke every law in the book in order to try and illegally influence the 1996 election. So...Gore should pretty much shut up about politicians breaking the law. Maybe George Bush should just explain to Al that there was "no controlling legal authority that says this was in violation of law...". That's the excuse Gore used after caught with his hands in the cookie jar. Of course, there was a legal authority that said that accepting foriegn donations than subverting national security issues for personal gain was illegal...and pretty much treasonous. But...Al was singing a different tune back then. Now, Al will protect the terrorists from this unlawful snooping into their privacy. What an idiot.

[black bear theory]

thanks for your view.

it's a fine line i guess. i still also have yet to hear a convincing argument against FISA, though. at least that is some semblance of oversight and not restrictive - which i am willing to live with.

another objection is that this power has been abused historically. and it doesn't make me feel proud that it was against MLK. maybe different time, different country you could say. the possibility for abuse is there, esp. knowing how much politicians like their power.

[ITMacMan]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

Who in the hell is Al Gore?

He's the guy who created the internet

[Rolling Bones]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

Who in the hell is Al Gore?

A guy who can speak in sentences.

[Jawbone54]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

Who in the hell is Al Gore?

Mother Earth's fiercest delusional ally.
The creator of the Internet.
The king of the lockbox.
The lord of the recount.
or...
A really really really really really boring guy, who we can all be thankful isn't in office as we speak...even liberals.

[Nicko]

ugh stupid internet

[Nicko]

Originally Posted by Jawbone54

Mother Earth's fiercest delusional ally.
The creator of the Internet.
The king of the lockbox.
The lord of the recount.
or...
A really really really really really boring guy, who we can all be thankful isn't in office as we speak...even liberals.

Though he may be boring, he can atleast form complete sentences and is able to articulate his ideas.

And come on, he DID invent the internet after all.

[Y3a]

I suggest you LISTEN to his words and his speeches before assuming he is articulate. He's been brain damaged since 2000. he comes across as a chatty Kathy doll.

[Jawbone54]

It was great the day he spoke in Boston about global warming during the city's coldest day in over 80 years.

[besson3c]

Can't.... stop...... knee......from...... jerking.......


Gore..... bad man..... must... stop..... from........ attacking..... his..... character.... but..... can't....

[Rolling Bones]

Originally Posted by Jawbone54

It was great the day he spoke in Boston about global warming during the city's coldest day in over 80 years.

If you were smart you would know some parts of the Earth would become very cold...Europe for example. But I don'r want to get into the science of it.

[Rolling Bones]

Originally Posted by Y3a

I suggest you LISTEN to his words and his speeches before assuming he is articulate. He's been brain damaged since 2000. he comes across as a chatty Kathy doll.

Better than a stuttering confused Chucky like Bush.

[Y3a]

Actually, AlGore comes off far worse. One minute he's yelling, the next he's in his Lost in Space Robot voice, the next he's speaking in this weird quivering voice, and then whispering. Gore is a nutcase!

[Spliffdaddy]

I think it says a lot that Gore didn't get the support from his home state of Tennessee when he ran for president.

Those who know him best disapprove of his leadership abilities.

[Nicko]

Originally Posted by besson3c

Can't.... stop...... knee......from...... jerking.......


Gore..... bad man..... must... stop..... from........ attacking..... his..... character.... but..... can't....

Well one thing that is wrong is that he is getting fatter and fatter, what? Is he not making it to the gym?

[Jawbone54]

Originally Posted by Rolling Bones

If you were smart you would know some parts of the Earth would become very cold...Europe for example. But I don'r want to get into the science of it.

If you were smart you'd realize that the earth has gone through cyclical climate changes ever since it has existed.

[Rolling Bones]

Originally Posted by Jawbone54

If you were smart you'd realize that the earth has gone through cyclical climate changes ever since it has existed.

And if you were smart you'd see I didn't blame anyone.

[Kevin]

Then what were you referring to when you said what you did?

[Rolling Bones]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Then what were you referring to when you said what you did?

You need rest.

[Kevin]

That's what I thought.

[Rolling Bones]

Originally Posted by Kevin

That's what I thought.

Good.

[black bear theory]

Originally Posted by Jawbone54

If you were smart you'd realize that the earth has gone through cyclical climate changes ever since it has existed.

given natural cyclical changes occur on the order of thousands to millions of years, it should concern you that these changes are now being seen on the order of 10's of years.

true, there are natural causes for the increased CO2 introduced into the atmosphere before humans were on the scene, but those were generally associated with catastrophic flood basalt volcanism (not seen today or in the past +100,000 years). those flood basalt events also contributed to a few mass extinctions, a phenomenon we are seeing once again, in a very short time-frame, but w/o the known natural precursors.

[Y3a]

So these 'sudden' changes never happened before? Funny, most all cyclic changes occur with varying numbers of peaks and valleys in the cycle. You don't have DETAILED INFORMATION going back for hundreds of years! The information that goes back farther has been extrapolated using questionable methods.

because Mars is also going thru such climate changes, it seems that we don't yet understand what the Suns contribution is!!

[black bear theory]

Originally Posted by Y3a

So these 'sudden' changes never happened before? Funny, most all cyclic changes occur with varying numbers of peaks and valleys in the cycle. You don't have DETAILED INFORMATION going back for hundreds of years! The information that goes back farther has been extrapolated using questionable methods.

i never used the term 'never'. btw 'sudden' is a relative term.

Originally Posted by Y3a

because Mars is also going thru such climate changes, it seems that we don't yet understand what the Suns contribution is!!

so is venus? it has a slight CO2 problem as well!

mars warming... is this the same guy that said the temp was increasing because he saw the polar caps melting in the hemisphere that was going from spring -> summer?

i'll look for the link but the suns irradiance has increased .1% in the past 24 years, which is equivalent to 15ppm CO2 (w/o the 'staying power'), the same amount that is added each year to the atmosphere. so sure the sun may play a small part, possibly about 4%. but the other 96% needs to be accounted for somehow. anyway, the sun is becoming less active now on it's 11 year cycle.

[Jawbone54]

Originally Posted by Y3a

So these 'sudden' changes never happened before? Funny, most all cyclic changes occur with varying numbers of peaks and valleys in the cycle. You don't have DETAILED INFORMATION going back for hundreds of years! The information that goes back farther has been extrapolated using questionable methods.

because Mars is also going thru such climate changes, it seems that we don't yet understand what the Suns contribution is!!

[wallinbl]

Uhh, Clinton felt he had the same eavesdropping powers...

[Jawbone54]

Originally Posted by wallinbl

Uhh, Clinton felt he had the same eavesdropping powers...

*DING DING*

They're forgetting...Clinton and his staff was so much more trustworthy and honest. *COUGH*
Monica Lewinsky
Kosovo
Waco, Texas
Ron Brown's funeral
Ignoring 800,000 deaths in Rwanda

And just for the sake of a nostalgiac smile...
"But I want to say one thing to the American people. I want you to listen to me. I'm going to say this again: I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky. I never told anybody to lie, not a single time -- never. These allegations are false."

AND THEY CALL BUSH A LIAR? Bush did not lie. He gave us the best information he had.
Bill Clinton WITHOUT QUESTION lied to the American people. Yet the media gave him a pass on it and offered excuse after excuse for their hero.

This is not to "dig up the past." This is to point out (as if we needed to) liberal hypocrisy once again.

[Y3a]

Originally Posted by black bear theory

anyway, the sun is becoming less active now on it's 11 year cycle.

SUNSPOT Cycle... As the sun gets older it's gonna expand and the wavelengths are going to drop (MORE HEAT). Face it. The Environmentalist wack-o's are not 100 percent sure of ANYTHING. They are guessing, and the ignorant news media is just parroting whatever nonsense will sell. If you have a degree in astrophysics and you write for a newspaper, it means you are generally NOT doing scientific research. You are trying to sell paragraphs of words. The scientists will tell you they don't have all the answers. The political mouthpieces who think they are scientists will tell you that it's set in stone.

[black bear theory]

Originally Posted by Y3a

SUNSPOT Cycle... As the sun gets older it's gonna expand and the wavelengths are going to drop (MORE HEAT). Face it. The Environmentalist wack-o's are not 100 percent sure of ANYTHING.

again, the sun may be getting warmer but that can only account for 4% of the annual temperature increase in the past few decades. this is something we can say with certainty since the measurements are in recent times.

what do you believe accounts for the other 96% of the warming factor? greenhouse gases are a very good candidate - CO2, methane all have undergone a dramatic increase in the past 100 years.

i wish i still had that feynman quote in my sig - essentially nothing is known - it would be ludicrous to say so - but things are known to be true to certain levels of certainty. it may come off as believing otherwise, but that is where i stand on it.

They are guessing, and the ignorant news media is just parroting whatever nonsense will sell. If you have a degree in astrophysics and you write for a newspaper, it means you are generally NOT doing scientific research. You are trying to sell paragraphs of words.

i think it's funny that global warming is considered big money b/c they are trying to sell newspapers. newspapers!? since when has printing newspapers started becoming an extrememly lucrative business again?

this when the counterpoint - doing things that are anti-environmental, mining, oil, timber, etc - will make you a lot more money. one argument against environmentalism is that it destroys communities by taking away jobs, these job losses hurt the economy etc by taking away the money in the community.

if writing fluff pieces in some newspaper were as profitable as it is said to be, shouldn't people be applauding the boosts in the economy?

The scientists will tell you they don't have all the answers. The political mouthpieces who think they are scientists will tell you that it's set in stone.

i agree with you here - the key phrase being "policital mouthpieces".

[Y3a]

The 4% value you refer to may be incorrect. I don't know but I "think" I remember that the solar studies use only select wavelengths, so if the heat is coming from a lower frequency then the measurements could be off.

[olePigeon]

Originally Posted by Kevin

"Stop going along to get along. Start acting like the independent and co-equal branch of government you’re supposed to be."

What a load of horseshit.

No it's not. Even if he's trying to switch blame (political agenda aside,) the statement is still valid. People vote for the sake of voting for their party, they don't give a rats ass about the issues. American politics is f*cking pathetic.

[black bear theory]

Originally Posted by stupendousman

..or maybe Al is just trying to divert attention from the fact that YET ANOTHER scandal being covered from his administration which a SC has been investigating and is about to release a report showing widespread corruption and obstruction of justice from his administration.

http://www.drudgereport.com/flash.htm

there doesn't seem to be any update about this on drudge? the report has been out for several days... $21 million dollars later and the strongest condemnation is that the prosecutor has 'suspicions'?

NEIL YOUNG: Meanwhile, the professionals in the Department of Justice and IRS said there really was not a case to prosecute here. And so he became a symbol of what were some of the complaints about the independent counsel system -- that if you give a prosecutor unlimited money, unlimited time and one target, he or she will go on for as long as it takes to find too something.

And it had a political dimension to it as well because it had been perceived that Mr. Barrett was after something having to do with the idea that the Clinton administration, officials in the Clinton administration, I should say, didn't let him follow up.

And so Republicans in Congress were eager to have him continue. And Democrats said, wait a minute this guy has spent more than ten years on this -- enough.

In the end, the report has -- I should be very clear in this, only Mr. Barrett's suspicions that Mr. Cisneros may have evaded taxes in connection with the payments to his mistress.

And so in essence it's his complaint saying I had reason to investigate but I was stymied. And that's what took me so long.

The other side says, you know, this -- and they say so in the report -- because under the law people who are accused of any kind of wrongdoing are entitled to respond -- and in this report of more than 700 pages, some of the Justice Department officials respond and describe Mr. Barrett as an out-of-control prosecutor who didn't understand the law, who is on an extreme fishing expedition, and of course I would say their strongest case is in the fact that he brought these eighteen felony counts against Mr. Cisneros, ended up getting a guilty plea on one misdemeanor count.

RAY SUAREZ: Well, the final years of the investigation didn't yield any indictments. But what was the Barrett investigation unit spending all that money on in the final years?

NEIL LEWIS: A fine question and there's no clear answer. The General Accountability Office -- which under the law is obliged to audit the independent counsels -- and of course Mr. Barrett is the last one -- the law was repealed or let die in 1999, put the total figure at $21 million and about $2 million a year he was spending. And it did not go into detail as to how he spent the money.

Mr. Barrett has pointed out that the GAO, the General Accountability Office, found no wrongdoing. But they also did point out in the audit or it was pointed out that he was spending in these later years of this investigation which was really just a tussle, the same amount of money that Patrick Fitzgerald the special prosecutor investigating the disclosure of CIA officer's identity. And we all know that was a very vibrant and robust investigation.

So he was going -- this is Mr. Barrett now, was maintaining this office of prosecutors up until recently. And the explanation as to where the money went or precisely how it was spent, according to the GAO, nothing, there was no malfeasance of how it was spent. But it's unclear as to exactly how it was spent.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/white...eros_1-19.html

[black bear theory]

Originally Posted by Y3a

The 4% value you refer to may be incorrect. I don't know but I "think" I remember that the solar studies use only select wavelengths, so if the heat is coming from a lower frequency then the measurements could be off.

iirc, it is higher wavelength solar rays that are the basis of the greenhouse effect. after striking the earth and being absorbed the heat is retransimitted in a lower frequency (infrared) and it is this indirect energy that is stored in the greenhouse gases. if lower frequency were hitting the earth directly, it should just be added to the greenhouse effect.

how much of an increase do you think it causes? 6%? 10%?

[goMac]

Originally Posted by Y3a

because Mars is also going thru such climate changes, it seems that we don't yet understand what the Suns contribution is!!

I would expect so. Mars has no atmosphere.

(You're really funny. Really.)

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by black bear theory

there doesn't seem to be any update about this on drudge? the report has been out for several days... $21 million dollars later and the strongest condemnation is that the prosecutor has 'suspicions'?

The "bodies" have all been long buried and the crooks out of office. There's not much more that he can do. Especially after his report was "cleansed" of naming names.

[black bear theory]

Originally Posted by stupendousman

... There's not much more that he can do. ...

not like he didn't try though...

$21 million dollars, 10 years, and all i got is this one lousy misdemeanor.

okay. wasn't this thread supposed to be about gore anyway?

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by olePigeon

No it's not. Even if he's trying to switch blame (political agenda aside,) the statement is still valid. People vote for the sake of voting for their party, they don't give a rats ass about the issues. American politics is f*cking pathetic.

Oh I agree ole. Just look at the people who voted for Gore and Kerry.

[Y3a]

Originally Posted by goMac

I would expect so. Mars has no atmosphere.

Mars DOES have an atmosphere. It's only about 10-14 percent of what we have here on Earth. It has to have one to cause the winds.