12 September 2006

Back to 9/12

Yesterday, the fifth anniversary of the 9/11/01 attacks saw retrospective and introspection on the part of many, and review of what has happened in the intervening time. Much that would have been accredited to fantasy on 9/10 has happened since then including the removal of the Taliban regime and of Saddam Hussein from power and the attempt to help up those people who had suffered under totalitarian and authoritarian rule into being self-guiding People. To even *attempt* such a thing on 9/10 would have been seen as sheer and misguided folly that only far-looking thinkers could even dream of happening.

Also from that 9/10 was the viewpoint that no matter how bad terrorists were, they were killing and threatening, by and large, *other people*. Attacks upon Sovereign soil of the United States had gone unaddressed in 1979, 1983-1984 and 1988 in Tehran, Iran, Beirut, Lebanon, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania and Nairobi, Kenya. Further attacks upon the US Armed Forces had been left unaddressed in 1983, 1996 and 2000 in Beirut, Lebanon, Khobar, Saudi Arabia, and the U.S.S Cole attack in Yemen, but that was seen as OK by many people and 'just desserts' by some few. Those same individuals are often the ones upholding this notion that there is something called 'International Law', while, instead, there are actually agreements amongst Nations on how to behave and act with each other.

In either situation, Embassies are Extra-Territorial Sovereign Enclaves of the Nation they represent until such time as the host Nation wishes them to leave and informs them via diplomacy. Attacks upon those ARE attacks upon the Sovereign soil of that Nation which has that Embassy. Further, attacks upon the military personnel of a Nation is a direct cause to go to war, unless proof and substantiation of totally civilian causes are given. The United States has taken all of this and more for over 20 years, but the belief of 9/10 is that such things are NOT a cause to respond. Those beliefs and trusting to non-existent 'International Law' gave us those attacks and, finally, the direct attack upon the Continental United States in 9/11.

To this day there are those who do not see 9/11 as part of this larger framework of opposition and wish that it would 'go away' by 'understanding why they hate us'. We, as a Nation, have done that since 1979. And it has not worked. Where are the great victories for wishing things to 'go away' and for actually coming to terms with the fact that the hatred of the West is that it IS the West and puts foundational roots on the rights of Individuals? Some would point to the Philippines and 'People Power'. But that was due to understanding that liberty is borne by the People and, while using American Ideals, found a wholly non-American means and method to express it and that is *still* having problems rooting out corruption and facing Islamic Fundamentalists that use terror as a weapon. And they understand *those* terrorists and that understanding is mutual. Perhaps point to South Africa and the end of Apartheid, and demonstrate how the West won there, too. This is, on the face of it, a strong case, but what is forgotten is that those pushing *for* the end of Apartheid wanted Western companies to *leave* South Africa thus impoverishing the Nation and cutting it from external trade. That engendered resentment, in the long run, towards the West and has brought corruption and tribal strife to South Africa. Thus, to get change, we had to *stop* trying to work with and understand the People of South Africa... to turn away from them and tell them to figure out freedom on their own.

Everywhere else the United States has *tried* this formulation of accepting any slight against it, to not fight when attacked and to not stand *with* Friends and Allies things have gotten WORSE. By retreating and not facing up to and against totalitarian regimes to despots and to those that oppress the Liberty and Freedom of Individuals, the Rights of those Individuals to be Free has diminished or disappeared in violence. The litany is long: Cuba, South Viet Nam, Cambodia, Laos, Iran, Afghanistan, Lebanon, Angola, Mozambique, Somalia, Ethiopia, Iraq, Kosovo. During the Cold War standing up to Communism in many of these places required involvement in one way or another, but after the withdrawal from South Viet Nam the US was no longer seen as a reliable ally and needed to fight hard to ensure that even when the fight was between authoritarian concepts, that there would remain a door through one of them to Individual Liberty and Freedom. A despot that one can deal with and coerce through economics is better than a despot in which no available counters are available. While many decry that as 'compromising ideals' those same people then turn around and give ideals that offer NO long term path to Liberty and Freedom.

The retreat of the United States into a cocoon of 'understanding' and 'holding to ideals and let folks rot' is one of isolationism at BEST. Two World Wars should have shaken that notion just a bit, one would think, but it has not. At its worse, these conceptions are put forth to demean the United States, Western ideals of States, Liberty and Freedom, and allowing the Individual to chart their own course through history. Those who wish this nebulous 'understanding' then chide those who actually do try to understand and dislike what they see. Such attempts are labeled as 'racist' or 'imperialist' because those doing the looking do NOT see an espousal of human freedom, liberty and individualism. This is due to the comparison of cultures and results and disliking those results and seeing a cultural basis for them. Those that wish 'understanding' want acceptance of such things as tyrannical rule, despotism, authoritarianism and warlords on a Global scale. 'Accept their differences' and 'all cultures are equal' is the rallying cry TO Empire, not away from it. In understanding human liberty comparisons MUST be made as to outcomes of cultures and those that leave NO pathway to freedom must be fought and changed. This is not done to impose the will of the United States or the West upon them, but to rid these cultures of those things which lead to human impoverishment, violence and, finally, Empires. Individuals with no conception of the self as valid are ruled OVER by Government instead of coming together to make Government that simply Governs, not Rules.

President George W. Bush came to office ill-equipped for this struggle, both in terms of temperament and ideology. Coming from industry and a large, well-connected family, most fundamental problems in his life before coming to the Presidency meant dealing with them on a personal scale or in terms of a single State of the Union. Texas, while being one of the strongest States for individualism also distrusts Governors and Legislatures and gives them scant time or capability to deal with issues. While not wholly ceremonial, the good People of Texas prefer as little government as possible with as little oversight as possible and thus get many corrupt individuals that are hard to root out of Government due to personal ties and influence. Coming from that sort of Governmental background is one not easily suited to dealing with despots on a global scale. And the more personal struggles of this President have left him with the understanding of the trials and tribulations of individualism, but, because of his family, insulated against many of its effects and repercussions. 9/11 dealt him a hard blow and a hand that was one that could not be played out save by noting that a new deck had been put in place and it was time discard the losing hand and work towards a better one while raising the ante. No doubt that is a reason that poker is now so wildly popular is that this commonality on a global scale strikes home. The President got a nasty hand, but knew the other players had weak ones and were likely to stand pat, so discard the hand and raise the stakes to forth others to see that or fold. And the enemies believed that the new hand would be weaker than theirs and so raised the stakes while only taking a new card or two.

The initial response to 9/11 was a mild raise, on the new table of opponents, still very effective, but while concentrating on the hand the President was only beginning to note the players and the setting. He used the finely tuned capabilities honed by the 20th century, which was all the organs of the United States from the Military to Law Enforcement to Treasury to Diplomacy. In each of those realms he took new cards and raised the stakes, and they have performed admirably for the late 20th century. Two despotic regimes are gone into history, 50 million people have been given a chance to understand individual liberty and work out a form of democracy that fits their culture, but has removed the most vehement and nasty forms of totalitarian concepts. Law enforcement, Intelligence, Treasury and Diplomacy play hard hands together and in co-operation for the first time EVER. This is the most capable 20th century government that has ever existed anywhere on the planet.

And it is not enough.

Not only is the Nation hampered by concepts of 'cultural equality' in which all despotism is equal to individualism, but it is also hampered with the fact that the 20th century made large governments palatable and as something 'good'. Cultures looking at the West today see the Aristocrat replaced with the Bureaucrat and see no good in *that*. Socialism, by not coming to terms with human liberty, individualism, exceptionalism and the concept that rewards can be honorably disproportionate, have leveraged in a system to undo these things to ensure that not only is everyone born equally but finish equal with respect to their person. The huge, bureaucratic structure of government born of necessity to fight Total War in the 20th century was changed into something that decreased respect for individuals and their accomplishments. So much so that the culture tries to make every tiny accomplishment something of great glory and to boost the ego of individuals, while ignoring the fact that the accomplishments are minor. It is no wonder that many in far off parts of the globe see *that* and the over-inflated egos of those doing the pushing of 'cultural equality' and wonder just what sort of suicidal path the West is on. True, it may be a much SLOWER form of suicide than Imperialism, but, at least the latter has some glory attached to it. The former, made to stress equality of achievement and force a system of 'fairness' on everything so that NO accomplishment cannot be praised, save when it attacks the culture itself, is rightly seen as self-destructive because that is its effect.

This wholly 20th century conception of multiculturalism, despotism being just the same as individualism, and no achievement being worth more than any other achievement is, indeed, suicidal. By having NO bias, one cannot properly judge where one stands in relation to anything and then stick fingers in ones ears because the train whistle is too loud... ignoring the fact that one is standing on the train tracks and that locomotive will not be able to stop.

As in mathematics so it is with the post-9/11 world: these State based organs are necessary to a solution but not sufficient in and of themselves for a solution. The Hamiltonian path of building 'arsenals for democracy' actually requires the building of actual arsenals and then USING THEM. Further the idea that globalized free trade will 'uplift' people has been clearly demonstrated to, instead, give enemies of liberty cheaply available means and methods to bring down the conceptions of liberty. The Wilsonian path of intercourse between Nation States by a global talk-fest has proven worse than fruitless: it has demeaned human existence and those sent to protect people have, instead, abused and enslaved them. And the Jeffersonian path of Western liberty, while fine in its advisory, still requires that old notion of being able to judge someone based on something, and that something being the standards of human liberty and freedom. By removing the judgment and sticking fingers in ones ears, death on the train tracks of life is a certainty before the oncoming train.

Each of these have proven destructive in forceful advocacy of a single pathway to liberty and freedom using that means only. There is, indeed, an economic portion of it, but it is not the whole nor entirety of it, nor does a good economic plan put a guarantee of success in place. Witness the steady non-progress of China towards liberty and freedom and you can see an argument to be made that economic freedom is not coupled with political freedom, no matter *how* inexpensive the goods. Or look at the low cost of buying automatic weapons and RPGs and how quickly a terrorist cell can spin-up to deadliness at low cost but with high efficiency. No, economics alone and 'free trade with everyone' has not worked in advancing liberty and has, contrarily, entrenched authoritarian regimes and given rise to terrorism on the cheap. While a Hamiltonian method against a large and cumbersome Nation like the USSR may prove fruitful, it does nothing against a distributed, transnational organization willing to use any means of procurement and finds suppliers willing to not only meet those needs, but do so at low cost and with a profit. Economics, while important, is not the sole path to liberty and freedom.

The UN has proved itself to be absolutely incapable of 'keeping peace' and, in so many of its missions, allow 'peace keepers' to rape, brutalize and enslave those that they are protecting. Further it gives legitimacy to totalitarian regimes and gives them a chance to be heard at a forum that will legitimize their cruelty by letting them band with others of their same stripe AGAINST liberty and freedom. This, for a freedom loving Nation, is a reckless forum and makes matters far worse globally than any better. The very few successes of the UN on public health could have been achieved at lower cost through private and charitable foundations and groups than through the UN itself and its bureaucracy. An 'early warning system' against diseases which quickly spread could be set up as the cooperative Tsunami Warning Center for the Pacific Ocean basin was set up: via cooperative groups, universities and non-partisan governmental agencies looking for common protection against the rampages of nature. Wilsonian dreams of global freedom, sadly, cannot be achieved by a global forum that has no sieve or bias AGAINST those that wish to diminish freedom and liberty. Every Nation has a right to speak, as individuals do, but being HEARD and LISTENED TO is something else again. The UN, by giving those latter two credence gives legitimacy to totalitarianism and despotism.

Jeffersonian ideals, indeed the ideals that form the very basis for Western liberty, have proved to be a hard sell against dictators, despots and warlords the world over. Be it Communist, Fascist, Islamic , Capitalist, or just plain self-aggrandizement and seeking worship of self, the leaders of Nations tend to have this conception that 'the strong leader' is more important than the People. Even in Nations where some forms of civil liberty have taken hold, there is no guarantee of their remaining unless advocated for constantly against all those that would attack it. Civil liberty without accountability and responsibility leads to deficient States in which authoritarian rule is necessary over the resultant chaos. Turned around too *much* order stifles liberty and freedom and needs be changed or addressed. Here the responsibility of those that govern is to be held accountable by free, fair, open, multi-party elections in which a fair representation of the will of the People can be expressed.

Once that linkage is *broken* then the descent into despotism or other autocratic ruling situations is inevitable unless that linkage is remade and amended. Even though majoritarian rule has its problems, they can be redressed through grievances and open freedoms of the people to peaceably assemble and give air to those grievances. Seeking to do otherwise is an abdication of personal responsibility to the entire Nation when legitimate means for redress are available and open. Jeffersonian ideals, then, do not work when they are reduced via lack of accountability and responsibility or when they are degraded by Government itself. It is a tightrope to walk, but without the bias of seeing this as *better* than authoritarian rule, it cannot be done. Thus, while 'all men are created equal' all societies are NOT equal in their enaction. By removing the bias upon judging societies, liberty and freedom are lost into the miasma of tyranny.

There are other, corollary, modes of thought to these given and each has their advocates, and there is a panoply between them, however their restriction to these realms is basic and apparent. There is, however, on other conception that has been embraced by the United States is one that is older than the idea of democracy as given down through Greek lineage. It is the attitude of being personally responsible for ones actions, judging others by their actions and making friendships with those that would be friendly and accommodate such between individuals. This, too is idealistic individualism, but with harsh recourse added in. Many cultures have given rise to a code of duelling to help address grievances between individuals for things that besmirch them that cannot be allowed to stand in the way of personal honor and integrity. The era of modern civilization only slowly wore away at this until mere remnant in bar fights remains and 'crimes of passion'. Some would call duels uncivilized, but civilization survived, thrived and prospered and even gave birth to democracy with it in place. The mental embrace of this concept led to also embracing the Nation as representative of the goals and aspirations of the People it represented and making National honor a part of one's own honor. Many early radicals could not believe that individuals would do this, and fought it by demeaning this conception and belittling those who thought that way in a discriminatory manner. While this may drive this conception from the spoken realm, it did *not* drive it from the culture of those that embraced it.

Contrary to portrayal by those media that attacked such things, this ideal of personal honor was one of high degrees of moderation and understood that civility meant keeping to civil discourse and not giving reason for disagreement through personal attacks. And the reason for that civility was the aforementioned duel. Impinging upon the personal honor of another person could wind you up in lethal conflict with them unless one moderated their speech and kept it civil in tone and temper. Many a duel were fought between those with loose tongues due to inebriation, but as Samuel Johnson pointed out: 'They had not the art of getting drunk.' A century or so without that harsh and heavy recourse has led to an uncivil society, that sees the rise of those impugning National dignity and personal honor and *laughing* at it.

While the 'pen is mightier than the sword' one used to need take up the sword to defend what their pen had written especially when it attacked the character and personal traits of an individual. This ancient schema led to social democracy, too, even in eras when Kings and Divine Right was rampant. Local democracy done at yearly festivals to settle scores were done by assent to one who would judge and final acceptance or NOT by the polity. Once accepted they stood together and the harshest recourse, to them, was *not* death, but expulsion from society upon pain of death for return. Being uncivil and unreasonable let to being seen as uncivilized and without the capability to reason. Kings could rule, but in lands where this was in place, even THEY were held to account by the gathering of the People who had the Law.

This started in the Nordic and Germanic cultures and wove its way outwards through Great Britain, Scotland, Ireland, Iceland and other territories they controlled. This bonding of personal honor with the Sovereign honor of the Nation took hold and was transplanted to America. The Founders of this Nation had to adapt to it and with it as it led to personal liberty and freedom, but with a high degree of personal responsibility and accountability. In fact the opening line of the Constitution is just this thing, to show that We agree to all of these things in which Government is just one means or method to achieve them. The People, however, are thoroughly responsible for the actions of their Nation. Holding those elected is only the *start* of that process and ends when the People come to new arrangement and agreement amongst themselves on how to be governed.

This, too, must be added into the mix of the solution against those that seek Empire. This President is not overly familiar with this and seeks more civilized niceties and the 20th century means and methods to address something that is a direct and sustained attack on freedom and liberty. It is a slow learning by someone who has been taught and trained that civilization should not be harsh and that full accountability need be held without allowing for moderating factors in the original judgment of actions. The law process establishes this in finding guilt or innocence of the actual act FIRST and then punishment ameliorated by circumstances SECOND. Today, those that deride Western civilization from the inside put the ameliorating factors first and then wish to ignore the actions. Add this to lack of bias and then any *excuse* is allowable for any action. Without that basic bias civilization falls.

By his religious upbringing this President recognizes a need for addressing crimes, but in trying to forgive the sinner he can let monsters loose. Turning the other cheek *once* to try and come to other means to air disagreements is fine... once slapped a *second* time, the duel has been declared. Those who wish to see civilization die have told us to offer other cheeks and then just 'take what is coming' once so exposed. They blame the Nation for acting like 'imperialists' but then complain when fair redress is sought because those that did harm 'did not like us'. Once slapped a second time they still counsel not to redress it... and again and again. Thus, standing up for what is right an honorable is attacked as 'having a bias' or 'being racist' or 'acting like an empire', from those who have no bias, use race as a means of division and wish to put thought control out upon their opponents so that there can be no opposition to them. Complain of being abused and these 'enlightened' individuals say that you are the cause of the abuse.

For five long and tedious years the actual enemy to the Nation has not been named. To the effect that those wishing the downfall of civilization are given more than fair airing about how bad the United States and its President. They see no wrong elsewhere worth addressing that cannot be blamed on the United States. Thus, even naming centuries old antagonists to freedom and liberty that have taken up arms in a way that cannot be countered by the Nation or even the entirety of the Nation State system is seen as the fault of the United States. Even if this is what has been practiced for centuries before the Nation was founded.

And while many of these people espouse Jefferson, they forget that Thomas Jefferson, himself, REFUSED to pay tribute to the followers of this religion and ATTACKED them. For the United States, this battle, too, hits so close to its founding that not seeing it for what it is can only be the moral blindness of not being able to weigh civilization against barbarism. Thomas Jefferson was more than ready to use bias in that decision and decide that Western ideals were worth protecting and fighting for. When pirates half a world away attacked US commerce, Andrew Jackson sent the first US frigate in the fleet to hand out reprisal, and thus the first US ship would circumnavigate the globe on a mission to uphold the rights of commerce upon the high seas for the Nation. In quelling the Philippines Theodore Roosevelt had General Pershing do what was necessary, and the fight against barbarians took a horrific and barbaric turn because the enemy allowed no quarter and did not fight with honor nor accept defeat with honor.

Terrorists globally seek to diminish the capability of Nations to govern themselves so that they may be weakened and, finally, dissolved by the chaos inflicted upon them. Terror means have been used before the modern era, but it is only with the cheap availability of arms and explosives that terrorism has flourished. The Islamic Caliphate version which seeks global rule and dominance of their religion is the worse set of heads on this hydra. This thing is fed by personal donations, extortion, bank fraud, cheating, murder, intimidation, torture and rogue Nations seeking hegemony or destruction of Western values. These worse heads are the snapping ones and killing the most, but others in the form of Internationalist Communism, Capitalist criminal and narcotics gangs, Feudalistic drug king pins and crime bosses, racist National separatist groups and other minority religious and ethnic groups each seek downfall of one or more Nations to meet their ends.

The actors from each of these interplay with each other and while the Islamic groups are the worse, they are sustained by the larger network that takes in money, information, contacts and transportation and then makes that available via their interconnectivity. Cooperation amongst these groups goes beyond mere terrorism and spans the black and gray worlds of smuggling, illegal drugs and counterfeit money and goods. And mind you, this is after decades and more of the Federal Government going after ORGANIZED CRIME. It has *not* succeeded because it is ill-equipped to handle the threat of non-Nation based organizations. The Government has had success against a number of organized crime syndicates and mafias, but those organizations have a limitation of being heavily attached to *places* in which they need to settle and organize as the shipment of goods needs be done and made accountable via such things. Transnational Terrorism does *not* need permanent base and, indeed, flourishes in the very movement and non-accountability of its individuals to achieve its goals and ends. So, while naming the enemy, in part, we are faced to face with the fact that the Government cannot attack it properly with all the might State based organs it has that have grown so robust against Nations. Mighty armor and weapons don't help much against the flu.

That is why the United States was founded as it was: the People were made responsible for everything that ALL our Governments could not handle. This was done of necessity for the young Republic so it could *survive* against mighty Nations. That conception withered over time as the Nation grew and grew stronger. Other peoples formed Nations, expanded, and conflicted and the US got drawn into those conflicts which were wholly Nation to Nation based. The Cold War epitomized a World War that could not go *hot* but must come to some end. Through Hamiltonian fortitude and the help of those who conceived of themselves as being free, Communism finally disintegrated until only a somewhat reformed China remains the largest espouser of it. Mighty battles have been fought and much of the sacrifice was done by the People for it so the Nation could survive other Nations. Unfortunately the next round is *not* Nation to Nation, although Nations will be involved in the struggle. The world has caught the terrorist flu, and it is spreading even when a might Nation goes against it. It isn't helped that those who would also join such a fight have been so weakened by their lack of bias that they are laid out flat by the flu and may succumb to it. Other people who have been resisting it for decades and centuries can aid us, but their National aid is limited. Their aid to the *spirit*, however, is immense.

For fighting the small and niggly battles for which Nations are not made, We the People not only agree to such things as foundational, but we have enshrined it so that the Government may direct what needs to be fought and how to fight it, and only give meager aid as that battle is wholly outside of its realm and scope. The influenza of barbarism and terrorism was seen as deadly to the young Republic, just as deadly, if not more so, to one of limited size, capability and government. The People recognized then and it still holds today, that We are responsible for taking up honorable fights that Our Governments cannot fight for Us. There is no good way to formulate a total government response to such a distributed threat and still retain the liberties and freedoms We have as a People. So we either take to the fight or give up our freedoms. Simple international criminality has thwarted all means to properly counter it on a National scale, because it does not operate at that scale. The effectiveness of limited Government to serve and protect the Nation and actually counter terrorism and put an end to the practitioners of it is likewise doubtful. Because any Government that can do *all* of that, endangers We the People. To call for that requires the moral and ethical courage to say when a fight is beyond your scope and call for help.

As the President has scoped this fight, he has added in that lethal weapons, due to the rapid pace of technological change, are not only more available but, by the magic of 'free trade', coming DOWN in price to manufacture. Thus smaller and smaller players with less resources than Nations can start to produce them and make them available through their preexisting network of contacts. The skills and plans, once promulgated into the network, increases the capability of the entire network. Hamiltonianism will kill us through that formulation. The United States and the world cannot afford anything like the current timeline for organized crime against Transnational Terrorism. Yes, great strides have been made in 5 years and millions given the ability to start working their own way towards ensuring their freedom. For Afghanistan and Iraq that may take decades so long as other groups and organizations counter them via means not amenable to State accountability. And that is if everything goes well.

It is time and well past for a bit of humility to seep into Washington, D. C. both in the Executive and Legislative branches. Socialistic formulations have not worked for health care, retirement, education, industrial policy and farm policy. Indeed, these things are weakening the Nation in absence of these two branches actually doing their jobs to protect the Nation from illegal immigrants. And since asymmetrical warfare is waged by coordinated individuals, a few slipping in amongst this mass here illegally can go unnoticed. And spread their flu until it gives us another body blow. That will be addressed, but does nothing to address the problem. That lovely 9/10 world of the all-powerful and beneficent Federal Government must also end and the jobs taken seriously by those that take office. And as each and every part of the Government that has a role to play in the fighting of terrorism has given account of themselves, and each recognize that they are necessary to this fight, but not sufficient to win it, and both Congress and the President admit that, it is time for them to look to the actual document they swear to uphold and ask for help.

It is not dishonorable to ask the Common Man for help, nor to provide legitimate and honorable means for the People to join the fight in their own ways. The Government can define the problem and say: this is what we cannot handle, we will give fair reward for anyone seeking warrant to handle it. Ancient is that way of warfare, down to times of Kingdoms besieged and the King humbling himself to ask the serfs for help and give freedom for those who did heed the call. Thus were Nations formed and Kings held accountable. It recognizes the power of the individuals to fight each in their own way and capability and to handle themselves and take deep risks for the precious gift of freedom. Now that We have that gift, it is time to seek other payment so it can be honored to those we elect to represent us. A bit of humility can go a long way in this era towards setting up something that will fight this flu: the immune system of the Nation are its Citizens who agree the Nation is worth having, worth protecting, worth dying for honorably to save it. Monetary reward can help, but the greatest prize is being able to spend it *freely*, as an individual. The cost of liberty is just that and is paid so long as there are those seeking to end it. Perhaps this President can look to his religion and find some humility and honor his Oath and all that goes with it and ask his fellow Citizens to join the fight. As individuals but stated in that agreement between Us as a Nation that lays out those Letters so that we may have Warrant to do so as is Our capability.

We the People *must* respond when asked for help through those means we give Government.

Or the Constitution be lost for lack of will to have it.

And Our freedoms soon thereafter.

Because when fighting a duel, it is best to be armed for it.

No comments: