NZDF General discussion thread

Todjaeger

Potstirrer
That is very debatable ... i have already changed 4 or 5 peoples stance or view if you will... on defence just by pointing out various issues. they simply didnt fully grasp what how bad it was... or how little we actually spend on defence...

The discussion has to be bought to the forefront else it will get worse... if the public don't get involved it will definitely not change.
However, one must remember that various sitting NZ Gov'ts have for several decades effectively been telling the NZ public/electorate that "NZ is in a benign strategic environment" while telling similar degrees of misinformation regarding what 'real' funding the NZDF does get from Vote Defence.

If (big IF...) one can get people to realize that what gov't has been saying for years regarding Defence is not entirely the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, then one can get others to start looking at the state of the NZDF and have them begin asking questions.


A very good article from our newest member Lucy Craymer. Also I enjoyed reading our other newest member Simon Ewing Jarvie with his article from yesterday linked at post #6228. BZ to both of you. Keep up the good work!
One thing I noticed and felt was missing from the article was more information, pertinent information, on Taiwan's place in the global economy, and what some of the potential and likely impacts upon the global economy if armed conflict broke out between Taiwan and the PRC, and/or if the PRC invaded Taiwan. One significant area which would likely be impacted is global chip production, since the largest Taiwanese chip manufacturer TSMC (Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company) has ~51% of the global chip market. Once the smaller chip makers in Taiwan are factored in, it is likely that Taiwan has ~60% of the global market. With that kind of worldwide market presence, and how ubiquitous chips have become in manufactured goods, anything which could further disrupt Taiwanese chip production would just make the current chip shortage that much worse.
 

Nighthawk.NZ

Well-Known Member
Not saying it going to be easy and or that that is all we have to do... but it is a starting point. You always have your far left wing and greennies...

We all know the saying "if it not broke don't fix it" but if the people don't know it is broken then they are not going to ask to get it fixed.
 
Last edited:

MrConservative

Super Moderator
Staff member
One thing I noticed and felt was missing from the article was more information, pertinent information, on Taiwan's place in the global economy, and what some of the potential and likely impacts upon the global economy if armed conflict broke out between Taiwan and the PRC, and/or if the PRC invaded Taiwan. One significant area which would likely be impacted is global chip production, since the largest Taiwanese chip manufacturer TSMC (Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company) has ~51% of the global chip market. Once the smaller chip makers in Taiwan are factored in, it is likely that Taiwan has ~60% of the global market. With that kind of worldwide market presence, and how ubiquitous chips have become in manufactured goods, anything which could further disrupt Taiwanese chip production would just make the current chip shortage that much worse.
Indeed that is why TSMC has announced it will build its first chip plant in Japan in Kumamoto Prefecture, with mass production slated to start in 2024.


I believe that Sony are in the picture with this. Also Toshiba have finally impressed upon the government the importance making the local chip industry, which has been squeezed over the last 20 years, more resilient. I would guess that "Toyota and Honda boardrooms feeling the supply chain pinch have made their feelings known to the Kantei on the topic. ;)
 

KiwiRob

Well-Known Member
Yep I realise that, but we're already experiencing the big shipping companies bypassing NZ ports because of the current crisis. That's creating all sorts of problems. I believe that a coastal shipping service is a requirement now and also such said shipping service should have the capability of undertaking a trans Tasman run. That way we can use the main Australian ports of Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane as hubs if necessary, with Port Chalmers, Lyttelton, Tauranga and Wellington as the spokes. I have purposely left Auckland out because I think a better geographic spread is required and Auckland container traffic can be railed between Tauranga and Auckland using the current inland port in South Auckland. I see no reason why regular freight trains cannot run between Tauranga and the Auckland inland port multiple times a day 24/7. It's done in the US and Europe and there is no reason why it can't be done here.
NZ flagged coastal shipping line is a nice idea but who is going to pay for it?

All the ports in NZ are linked by rail, there is no need for coastal feeders. If freight trains were to run 24/7 between Auckland and Tauranga the track would need a lot of improvements, ie double tracking or at least passing loops, and while you are it the line should probably be electrified. Those same shipping companies who were bypassing NZ ports were also bypassing Australian ports.
 
Last edited:

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Andrew Little, the Minister responsible for the New Zealand Security Intelligence Service (NZSIS), the Government Communications Security Bureau (the GCSB), and the Lead Coordination Minister for the Government’s Response to the Royal Commission’s Report into the Terrorist Attack on the Christchurch Mosques, gave a speech last night to the Victoria University of Wellington-Te Herenga Waka Centre for Strategic Studies. The speech was titled Intelligence and Security in our Changing World and gave an overview of NZ intelligence and security functions.

There has been some reporting in the media on the speech by Stuff and NZ Herald with both concentrating on the terrorism aspect rather than the wider national security aspect. They glossed over the foreign espionage aspect and didn't really cover the call for greater discussion in national security. Both of them didn't mention the people removed from positions of trust because of contacts with a foreign agent.

The Minister lists four premises for the role of NZ intelligence agencies:
  • New Zealand faces threats to physical and economic security, and social institutions from forces and interests that would do us harm;
  • Those threats are foreign and domestic;
  • We need the means to, as best as possible, identify and evaluate those threats in order to prevent harm;
  • The efforts required must generally be carried out in secret. They also require relationships with trusted partners overseas, as well as with communities at home;
Some of the results obtained by the agencies are:
  • Security intelligence investigations have seen potential terrorists identified and imprisoned or put on a different path.
  • Intelligence collected by our agencies have disrupted terrorist attack planning overseas.
  • International drug smuggling syndicates have been busted for trafficking drugs with the help of signals intelligence.
  • The activities of an individual with links to a foreign intelligence agency and who was covertly attempting to form relationships with New Zealanders holding senior and influential positions were disrupted.
  • People have been removed from trusted positions based on intelligence of the proven insider threat they posed.
  • Serious harm to strategically significant organisations in New Zealand has been averted because of the CORTEX malware detection and disruption service.
  • And we some of New Zealand’s most valuable intellectual property has been protected because of the security best practices the agencies have helped other organisations to implement.
He goes on to say that:
"All of the work the agencies do is in support of the Government’s National Security and Intelligence Priorities, or NSIPs (pronounced en-sips).
The NSIPs extend beyond counter-terrorism to include:
foreign interference and espionage;
protecting the country’s information and information systems from cyber attacks;
providing support to military operations;geostrategic competition, including in our own region; and
the pandemic response.
All of the agencies activities must be lawful, proportionate, appropriately targeted and subject to independent oversight.
The agencies target individual threats, not whole communities."​


WRT the foreign intelligence agency operation and the insider threat whilst the nation involved isn't named, I would suggest that high probability is that it is the PRC. The same can be said for foreign interference and espionage. I have a suspicion that two of the individuals removed from trusted positions were two MPs in 2017, one National MP and one Labour MP who were told not to seek reelection. Both were Chinese. The Minister also said that he's going to make an announcement next week that some commentators will struggle commentating on.

Overall, it's very rare for a Kiwi pollie to give such an informative speech on the secret squirrels. However if it does indeed start a conversation on national security that has to be a good thing. A problem that I can see with such a conversation is the far left nutters hijacking it and screaming blue murder about spies under their beds and in their dunnies etc., with the state watching all their actions and violating their rights. They might be a very small group, but they make a lot of noise. We'll see.
 
Last edited:

Gibbo

Well-Known Member
Andrew Little, the Minister responsible for the New Zealand Security Intelligence Service (NZSIS), the Government Communications Security Bureau (the GCSB), and the Lead Coordination Minister for the Government’s Response to the Royal Commission’s Report into the Terrorist Attack on the Christchurch Mosques, gave a speech last night to the Victoria University of Wellington-Te Herenga Waka Centre for Strategic Studies. The speech was titled Intelligence and Security in our Changing World and gave an overview of NZ intelligence and security functions.

There has been some reporting in the media on the speech by Stuff and NZ Herald with both concentrating on the terrorism aspect rather than the wider national security aspect. They glossed over the foreign espionage aspect and didn't really cover the call for greater discussion in national security. Both of them didn't mention the people removed from positions of trust because of contacts with a foreign agent.

The Minister lists four premises for the role of NZ intelligence agencies:
  • New Zealand faces threats to physical and economic security, and social institutions from forces and interests that would do us harm;
  • Those threats are foreign and domestic;
  • We need the means to, as best as possible, identify and evaluate those threats in order to prevent harm;
  • The efforts required must generally be carried out in secret. They also require relationships with trusted partners overseas, as well as with communities at home;
Some of the results obtained by the agencies are:
  • Security intelligence investigations have seen potential terrorists identified and imprisoned or put on a different path.
  • Intelligence collected by our agencies have disrupted terrorist attack planning overseas.
  • International drug smuggling syndicates have been busted for trafficking drugs with the help of signals intelligence.
  • The activities of an individual with links to a foreign intelligence agency and who was covertly attempting to form relationships with New Zealanders holding senior and influential positions were disrupted.
  • People have been removed from trusted positions based on intelligence of the proven insider threat they posed.
  • Serious harm to strategically significant organisations in New Zealand has been averted because of the CORTEX malware detection and disruption service.
  • And we some of New Zealand’s most valuable intellectual property has been protected because of the security best practices the agencies have helped other organisations to implement.
He goes on to say that:
"All of the work the agencies do is in support of the Government’s National Security and Intelligence Priorities, or NSIPs (pronounced en-sips).
The NSIPs extend beyond counter-terrorism to include:
foreign interference and espionage;
protecting the country’s information and information systems from cyber attacks;
providing support to military operations;geostrategic competition, including in our own region; and
the pandemic response.
All of the agencies activities must be lawful, proportionate, appropriately targeted and subject to independent oversight.
The agencies target individual threats, not whole communities."​


WRT the foreign intelligence agency operation and the insider threat whilst the nation involved isn't named, I would suggest that high probability is that it is the PRC. The same can be said for foreign interference and espionage. I have a suspicion that two of the individuals removed from trusted positions were two MPs in 2017, one National MP and one Labour MP who were told not to seek reelection. Both were Chinese. The Minister also said that he's going to make an annual next week that some commentators will struggle commentating on.

Overall, it's very rare for a Kiwi pollie to give such an informative speech on the secret squirrels. However if it does indeed start a conversation on national security that has to be a good thing. A problem that I can see with such a conversation is the far left nutters hijacking it and screaming blue murder about spies under their beds and in their dunnies etc., with the state watching all their actions and violating their rights. They might be a very small group, but they make a lot of noise. We'll see.

Good post Ngati...agree a debate has to be a good thing... altho the tail does wag the dog these days (referrig to the nutters!)

I don't follow your 'queen's inglush' tho here: The Minister also said that he's going to make an annual next week that some commentators will struggle commentating on. ...eh?
 

Gibbo

Well-Known Member
NZ flagged coastal shipping line is a nice idea but who is going to pay for it?

All the ports in NZ are linked by rail, there is no need for coastal feeders. If freight trains were to run 24/7 between Auckland and Tauranga the track would need a lot of improvements, ie double tracking or at least passing loops, and while you are it the line should probably be electrified. Those same shipping companies who were bypassing NZ ports were also bypassing Australian ports.
NZ Govt has made noises around investment in rebuilding NZ coastal trading but AFIAK to date no-one has any idea of what & how much $$$ that will likely involve... least of all Govt I dare say. The 2 ports that don't have rail are Nelson & NorthPort...the latter is due to get a rail connection sometime in the future unless Govt plans (or Govt itself) changes.

Rail between Akl & Tga is flat-out 24x7x365 and is close to (if not at) capacity due to (1) shortage of wagons (2) shortage of drivers (3) shortage of locos (4) required gaps between diesel locos thru Kaimai tunnel due to need to ventilate fumes. Most are being chipped away at gradually to varying degrees of success. Coastal shipping AKl / Tga to Chch & ports south (Tim, PtCh; Bluff) is arguably a more viable option than rail in many cases at present.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Good post Ngati...agree a debate has to be a good thing... altho the tail does wag the dog these days (referrig to the nutters!)

I don't follow your 'queen's inglush' tho here: The Minister also said that he's going to make an annual next week that some commentators will struggle commentating on. ...eh?
Thanks. Me Queens inglush was a typo. Bloody tapping finger on tablet has mind of its own. I have corrected the typo it now reads: The Minister also said that he's going to make an announcement next week that some commentators will struggle commentating on.
 

Nighthawk.NZ

Well-Known Member
Thanks. Me Queens inglush was a typo. Bloody tapping finger on tablet has mind of its own. I have corrected the typo it now reads: The Minister also said that he's going to make an announcement next week that some commentators will struggle commentating on.
soooooooo it wasn't the rum then...? Just asking... because me most of the time its the rum and while I can spell I can't type... ;-)
 

KiwiRob

Well-Known Member
NZ Govt has made noises around investment in rebuilding NZ coastal trading but AFIAK to date no-one has any idea of what & how much $$$ that will likely involve... least of all Govt I dare say. The 2 ports that don't have rail are Nelson & NorthPort...the latter is due to get a rail connection sometime in the future unless Govt plans (or Govt itself) changes.

Rail between Akl & Tga is flat-out 24x7x365 and is close to (if not at) capacity due to (1) shortage of wagons (2) shortage of drivers (3) shortage of locos (4) required gaps between diesel locos thru Kaimai tunnel due to need to ventilate fumes. Most are being chipped away at gradually to varying degrees of success. Coastal shipping AKl / Tga to Chch & ports south (Tim, PtCh; Bluff) is arguably a more viable option than rail in many cases at present.
As you say North Port will be connected fairly soon, as part of the NZ stimulus package. Nelson probably isn’t worth connecting to the South Island main trunk, the cost would be enormous.

The Auckland Tauranga line should be electrified, it should have been part of the NZ UP package.

With the massive increase in rail capacity with the 2 new rail ferries coming in 2024/25 makes coastal shipping even less viable IMO.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
As you say North Port will be connected fairly soon, as part of the NZ stimulus package. Nelson probably isn’t worth connecting to the South Island main trunk, the cost would be enormous.

The Auckland Tauranga line should be electrified, it should have been part of the NZ UP package.
In theory that would be ideal, however currently electricity generation capability could be problematic because NZ is close to peak generation capacity. There isn't enough alternate generation capacity to keep up with demand, and any further hydro generation capability projects will be heavily opposed by environmental groups. The idiotic move to stop future gas exploration before alternative viable generation capability is online has resulted in the Huntly coal fired power station being used far more frequently and NZ having to import Indonesian coal.
With the massive increase in rail capacity with the 2 new rail ferries coming in 2024/25 makes coastal shipping even less viable IMO.
Yes and no. Wellington is a weak link in the interisland logistics chain. The disruptions to the Cook Strait sailings have increased over time because of weather. The ferries are now limited to a maximum of 6m seas, which are occurring more often.

Secondly, the Wellington port facilities are subject to considerable risk from a reasonably large seismic event, which could render the port inoperable. The 2016 Kaikoura earthquake rendered the container terminal inoperable for a significant period of time. It also caused moderate damage to the Cook Strait ferry terminals. A repeat of the 1855 earthquake would decimate the port and has the potential to make it permanently unusable. The 1855 quake caused 6m of uplift. Prior to that the Miramar Peninsula was an island and the harbour's edge water lapped around the bottom of Parliament and along Lambton Quay.

Thirdly, the 2016 Kaikoura earthquake has shown the fragility of the logistics chain between the lower North Island and Christchurch. It took approximately two years to have the Main Trunk Line and State Highway 1 between Blenheim and Christchurch fully repaired and returned to full service.

Fourthly, the main trunk line between Auckland and Wellington runs across the Volcanic Plateau past three active volcanoes and one super volcano. A good sized eruption from any of the three volcanoes has the potential to close down the line for a while. A lahar caused the Tangiwai Bridge Disaster that Xmas during the 1950s. When Lake Taupo goes bang, that's the middle of the North Island stuffed.

So I believe that these are some of the reasons to seriously consider coastal shipping.
 

swerve

Super Moderator
In theory that would be ideal, however currently electricity generation capability could be problematic because NZ is close to peak generation capacity. There isn't enough alternate generation capacity to keep up with demand, and any further hydro generation capability projects will be heavily opposed by environmental groups.
What about geothermal? AFAIK NZ has considerable potential in addition to what's currently exploited. One estimate I've seen is that with existing technology geothermal can provide over three times as much electricity generation as at present, or about 40% more generating capacity on top of the current national total. There's also a lot of scope to increase direct use of lower trmperature geothermal for industrial, agricultural & domestic use. And that's all base load, without the variability of solar & wind.
 

Gracie1234

Well-Known Member
Once the Tiwai Point aluminium smelter is closed that will free up a lot of electricity capacity, we do not have a way to get this electricity to where it is needed. It would be an opportunity to build a hydrogen fuel plant there which we can use to run the heavy transport fleet.
We have a huge ability to develop our renewable electricity, there will need to be some direct conversations with the environmentalists, but we have to do something. The new Telsa battery is impressive and solid-state batteries will be here soon.
The interesting challenge for NZ is a lot of countries will need to decarbonise by going or increasing their nuclear power capacity.
 
Last edited:

Rob c

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
What about geothermal? AFAIK NZ has considerable potential in addition to what's currently exploited. One estimate I've seen is that with existing technology geothermal can provide over three times as much electricity generation as at present, or about 40% more generating capacity on top of the current national total. There's also a lot of scope to increase direct use of lower trmperature geothermal for industrial, agricultural & domestic use. And that's all base load, without the variability of solar & wind.
The problem with Geothermal is that it often releases large amounts of CO.2 and other green house gasses into the atmosphere, though this is usually less than thermal generation you still have to be very selective in were you source the geothermal energy from. So while geothermal is considered to be renewable energy and is better than thermal generation, it is not necessarily good for the environment. some of the pro's and cons are in the link below.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Once the Tiwai Point aluminium smelter is closed that will free up a lot of electricity capacity, we do not have a way to get this electricity to where it is needed. It would be an opportunity to build a hydrogen fuel plant there which we can use to run the heavy transport fleet.
We have a huge ability to develop our renewable electricity, there will need to be some direct conversations with the environmentalists, but we have to do something. The new Telsa battery is impressive and solid-state batteries will be here soon.
The interesting challenge for NZ is a lot of countries will need to decarbonise by going or increasing their nuclear power capacity.
There are plans afoot to build a large cloud database storage facility in Southland that will require 60 MW of electricity. And yes a hydrogen fuel plant or two could be built with in the region as well. After all there is plenty of water around. The Southland Regional Development Agency is very keen on attracting new business opportunities to the region and they are quite forward thinking. For example they have their Satellite Ground Station Services project up and running at three locations in Southland now.

It maybe in the future that NZ will have to look at the nuclear power generation option. One or two such facilities in or around Auckland would be the best option. Ideally fusion reactors would be the preferred option, but they are but a pipe dream at the moment. Power generation, fuel supply and security of it are resilience issues and as such should be covered by a National Security Strategy. I would regard them as National Strategic Assets.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Anne-Marie Brady has published a paper on CCP / PRC interference in NZ that is well worth reading. For those who have yet to submit their submission to the DPM&C WRT NZ Security and Defence it's a must read.

Magic Weapons and Foreign Interference in New Zealand: how it started, how it’s going. (pdf file).

Abstract: In March 2021, the New Zealand Security Intelligence Service (SIS) launched a remarkable campaign to inform the New Zealand public on the risk of foreign interference. In New Zealand, reference to ‘foreign interference’ almost always relates to the foreign interference activities of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) government. New Zealand has been severely affected by CCP foreign interference. For the Ardern government it was never a matter of ‘whether’ New Zealand would address this issue, but ‘how’. The SIS’s unprecedented public information campaign is part of a significant readjustment in New Zealand–China relations since 2018. This article documents some of those changes. Keywords: New Zealand–China relations, foreign interference, united front work.

Read out of Ardern's telephone call with Xi Jinping yesterday. Apparently the PRC read out claims Xi bought up the BRI but Ardern didn't.


 
Last edited:

swerve

Super Moderator
The problem with Geothermal is that it often releases large amounts of CO.2 and other green house gasses into the atmosphere, though this is usually less than thermal generation you still have to be very selective in were you source the geothermal energy from. So while geothermal is considered to be renewable energy and is better than thermal generation, it is not necessarily good for the environment. some of the pro's and cons are in the link below.
Depends on the type of plant*, & even an open cycle plant releases a lot less than burning coal or the like, so is a net gain if it allows the closure of a fossil fuel plant. A closed cycle plant may release none. If there's a choice between building geothermal & burning imported fossil fuels, geothermal almost always wins on both environmental & economic grounds.

Yes, the initial capital cost can be high, but the running cost is very low, & that makes the return on capital good. Yes, there may be (depends on type of plant & geology) a risk of more earthquakes, but that can be mitigated by how it's run.

Particular locations may have finite lives, but 'finite' is still generally long, compared to the lifetime of the hardware, & new hotspots spring up in geologically active zones, & even after the temperature's dropped too low for electricity generation it can be good for space heating, water heating, etc.

Getting electricity to where it's wanted can be an issue - but very heavy users (e.g. aluminium smelters ;)) may find it worth siting plant next to generators.

In most cases (there are exceptions to every rule) it makes a lot of sense, if you have the geology - & NZ has a hell of a lot of the right geology.

*P.S. And also the local conditions. Underground hot water may or may not have a lot of dissolved CO2 &/or other gases, & pumping surface water into dry hot rocks may or may not dissolve undesirable gases contained in them. And I've heard of a geothermal plant which traps CO2 released from groundwater & supplies it to greenhouses for boosting plant growth
 

Nighthawk.NZ

Well-Known Member
Anne-Marie Brady has published a paper on CCP / PRC interference in NZ that is well worth reading. For those who have yet to submit their submission to the DPM&C WRT NZ Security and Defence it's a must read.

Magic Weapons and Foreign Interference in New Zealand: how it started, how it’s going. (pdf file).

Abstract: In March 2021, the New Zealand Security Intelligence Service (SIS) launched a remarkable campaign to inform the New Zealand public on the risk of foreign interference. In New Zealand, reference to ‘foreign interference’ almost always relates to the foreign interference activities of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) government. New Zealand has been severely affected by CCP foreign interference. For the Ardern government it was never a matter of ‘whether’ New Zealand would address this issue, but ‘how’. The SIS’s unprecedented public information campaign is part of a significant readjustment in New Zealand–China relations since 2018. This article documents some of those changes. Keywords: New Zealand–China relations, foreign interference, united front work.

Read out of Ardern's telephone call with Xi Jinping yesterday. Apparently the PRC read out claims Xi bought up the BRI but Ardern didn't.


So what you are saying is, we are trying to slowly move away from China... if you add in what the Foreign Affairs Minister Nanaia Mahuta said a while back that exporters/Importers need to diversify don't have all your eggs in the one basket... like something is brewing in the background.

That being said our exporters/importers business's won't as they are making too much money... but there are signs the Chinese economy has cracks and not as stable or as strong as thought...

As for the security side of things most people don't get it or really don't care while they are making money and seem to turn the blind eye to all the issues that are building up...
 

Rob c

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
Depends on the type of plant, & even an open cycle plant releases a lot less than burning coal or the like, so is a net gain if it allows the closure of a fossil fuel plant. A closed cycle plant may release none. If there's a choice between building geothermal & burning imported fossil fuels, geothermal almost always wins on both environmental & economic grounds.

Yes, the initial capital cost can be high, but the running cost is very low, & that makes the return on capital good. Yes, there may be (depends on type of plant & geology) a risk of more earthquakes, but that can be mitigated by how it's run.

Particular locations may have finite lives, but 'finite' is still generally long, compared to the lifetime of the hardware, & new hotspots spring up in geologically active zones, & even after the temperature's dropped too low for electricity generation it can be good for space heating, water heating, etc.

Getting electricity to where it's wanted can be an issue - but very heavy users (e.g. aluminium smelters ;)) may find it worth siting plant next to generators.

In most cases (there are exceptions to every rule) it makes a lot of sense, if you have the geology - & NZ has a hell of a lot of the right geology.
I agree with you in regard to this and I think it is more a matter of site and plant selection to make geothermal a good selection. My concern is that while our Government has stated a goal of fully renewable electricidal generation by 2035 there appears to be no actual plan to achieve this. At this time it appears to be just a piece of political waffle to sound good but do nothing.[/QUOTE]
 
Top