 Yeah, we often care about human rights abuses and media. And, um, perhaps a good example of that would be once on the bed. Now, regardless of your views on individual rights and the fact that there's no time for talk there, as it is at all at once, how would you react to your report? Um... People who try to kill me don't have rights. It's just a fact. When you violate somebody else's rights, you lose your own. All of it. You steal an apple. You've lost your rights. Your gun and job is there to take you and figure out what the just punishment is. If you're stealing an apple, the just punishment... You know, there's a slap on the wrist in a couple of days in jail, maybe, or whatever. But if you're trying to kill people, then the just punishment is your own death, in my view. Or at least putting you away for the rest of your life. It is my belief, and I don't want to get into a lot of discussion. I know those of you who are staunch libertarians and there's a difference between a Japanese and a libertarian. Those of you who are staunch libertarians who are really upset about my phone calls you're using. But, you know, we're not here to really discuss phone calls. The people in Guantanamo were trying to kill me. They were out to kill Americans. They were caught on the battlefield with guns in their hands trying to shoot Americans that, you know, that were there to defend me, defend Americans. And were there, in my view, mistakenly, to bring freedom to the Afghans. And they weren't even there to press the Afghans and to tell them to slay them. They were there to free them. And these people shooting at them. That's how freedom-loving these guys are. I don't know what human rights violations happened in Guantanamo. I don't think any did. In fact, if they took the Kuala Lumpur and flushed it down the toilet, I mean, I can think of... I don't view that as a human rights violation. They probably didn't... They probably did the people they're favorite. I'll give that to Mike. So, look, war is hell. War is a bad thing. It's not a good thing. But the only responsibility of a government going to war and assuming it's a just war, that is, it's a war in self-defense. The only justice of war is to defend yourself. When you go to defend yourself, you do whatever is necessary to win. That's the only consideration you should have. And when the West had that approach to fighting wars, they won. And that will evolve, killing a lot of innocent people. I'm the one guy who's not embarrassed to say that. When you go to war, innocent people are going to die. Many innocent people just ask the children in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. They die. They're way innocent. You can talk about their doubts and question how innocent they really were. But the children clearly were innocent, right? They had nothing to do with this war. But they died. It's sad. And it's the fault of the Japanese. It's not the fault of Truman. It's the fault of the Japanese they should have started World War II. Many children tried to dress them. Sad for the children. Tragic, even. Whose fault is it? Hitler's. Not Churchill for approving the bombing of Dresden. And the Churchill and Truman are more ethical heroes for doing that and ending those wars and minimizing the casualties of their own people and ultimately in Japan of the Japanese themselves. But certainly of American troops. They are heroes for having them all backbone to do what was necessary to win. These today don't have them all backbone. And therefore we fight unwinnable wars, endless wars, wars with no end. Many, many, many, many people are still going to die in the war we are fighting because we're not willing to win this. We're not willing to do it in this way. Non-farm-barcy questions.