0
   

The UN, US and Iraq IV

 
 
Gelisgesti
 
  1  
Reply Sat 27 Sep, 2003 02:48 pm
As goes Haliburton .... so goes Cheney.

No one knows what went on behind closed doors in the energy meeting Cheney held when he first took office. Why would he fight so hard to keep the people's business a secret from the people. He ..... I've wasted enough time on this .... unless you can find a reference.
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Sat 27 Sep, 2003 03:14 pm
Nah, I'll agree the issue is a time-waster. There's real stuff to be discussed.
0 Replies
 
PDiddie
 
  1  
Reply Sat 27 Sep, 2003 03:44 pm
timberlandko wrote:
Cheney stands to make no gain, nor, to be fair, to suffer no loss, from Halliburton's participation in Iraq's reconstruction. The benefit acruing to his sizeable stock options has been assigned to several charities, while Cheney has further eschewed any personal tax benefit from the resultant charitable contributions. Additionally, at his own expense, Cheney provided private insurance to guarantee the continuation of his deferred compensation (the delayed payment of monies already earned - in Cheney's case, earnings dating to 1999 and earlier) regardless of Halliburton's performance ... he has no stake whatsoever in the fortunes of the firm, win or lose. (emphasis mine)


Well, timber, it's too bad that the Congressional Research branch of the Library of Congress disagrees with you...and Dick:

Quote:


Dick's take:

Quote:
Catherine Martin, Cheney's public affairs director, said: "The vice president has no financial interest in Halliburton. He has no stake in the company. He will in no way benefit from the rise or fall of Halliburton's stock price or the success or failure of the company."

Cheney said on NBC's "Meet the Press" on Sept. 14 that he has "no financial interest in Halliburton of any kind and haven't had now for over three years." His assertion came during a discussion of Halliburton's contracts in Iraq. Cheney said he had "severed all my ties with the company, gotten rid of all my financial interests."


Washington Post via msnbc.com

Dick Cheney's got the biggest problem with the truth in a Cabinet full of liars and prevaricators.

Nothing illegal 'bout lyin', though. Right?
Twisted Evil
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Sat 27 Sep, 2003 04:56 pm
No law against not seeing what is and is not "there". PDiddie.
Quote:
" ...may represent a continuing financial interest ... "

is an opinion, not a juridical finding, and in fact is an opinion disputed by many in both the legislative and judicial branches of government, as well as by legal scholars.

The simple facts are:
1) Cheney resigned from Halliburton and liquidated and/or placed in legal blind trust all assets of that firm of which he had possession prior to his association with The Current Administration. This was done pursuant to existant, applicable law, and accordingly fulfills the legal definions of divestiture and disinterest.

2) Proceeds from Cheney's stock options are directed to charity, by irrevocable written agreement. Cheney has neither legal nor financial interest or option in the matter. Legally, he is a disinterested party.

3) Chaney has declined to benefit from any tax advantage pertinent thereto, further validating the preceeding argument. Cheney has no interest in the matter, financial or otherwise, as a matter of law.

4) The associations among and between Halliburton, its subsidiaries, associates, affilliates, and partners, and The US Federal Government (and foreign governments as well) predate not only the Current Administration, but predate Cheney's involvement with either Halliburton or The Current Admistration. Subject of course, to conflict-of-interest legislation, with which Cheney is in compliance, there is no law preventing one from serving with the government who once served industry, or vice-versa.

5) Deferred Compensation is a matter of contractual obligation, commonplace, and is strictly regulated by both corporate and tax law.

6) That Cheney, at his own expense, obtained insurance to guarantee he would be paid (and taxed on) money rightfully earned by and owed to him is not a "fine point", ethically and legally it is a key point; Cheney will be paid only what he is due, neither more nor less, regardless the success or failure of the entity indebted to him. Strong, abundantly precedented legal argument may be, and is, made that such an insurance arrangement fully satisfies the principle of disinterest. It is not an uncommon arrangement, due entirely to the fact it shields the owed party from any related necessity or advantage of interest in the affairs of the entity indebted to that owed party. Legally, that severs the link.

I submit that Cheney is further divorced from Halliburton than was, for example, Robert McNamara from Ford Motor Company.

Legally, and in my own estimation, there simply is no "There" there, as the facts and evidence stand. I will not categorically state that evidence to the contrary may not develop, but I will state I doubt very much that it might. Opinion is opinion. Law is law. We are a nation of laws, not of opinions. Fortunately, and for the foreseeable future, that is a matter of law.

Unless requested, in the interest of wasting less time, I will forego similar assessment of LOGPAC. I could get really energetic there.
0 Replies
 
BillW
 
  1  
Reply Sat 27 Sep, 2003 05:17 pm
I don't believe that Cheney would be so stupid as to leave a collusive adventure in the open, I'm also not so naive as to believe that Halliburton just own the luck of the draw.

BTW, wasn't McNamara a Republican Question
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Sat 27 Sep, 2003 05:58 pm
McNamara was a Kennedy appointee, Bill, retained by Johnson. He proffessed to be a Republican, and had some contemporary standing of note within the party, despite association with a Democratic Administration and support for such entities as the ACLU and the NAACP. The more rightist of the Repunlican Party, then and now, question his true ideology. The John Birch Society hates him ... calls him a "com-symp traitor", if I recall correctly Laughing
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Sat 27 Sep, 2003 07:24 pm
timberlandko wrote:
nimh, I pointed out the Werewolves came to naught. The comparison is [..].


That wasnt me, Timber, that was Walter. Us Europeans just all sound the same.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Sat 27 Sep, 2003 07:38 pm
timberlandko wrote:
Sleep inducing? No. Inconvenient to those committed to denigrating the US? Certainly.


No, actually I found the Bush speech especially convenient when it comes to denigrating the US Twisted Evil . (You meant "the US administration" of course, not "the US", per se).

Not because it was sleep-inducing - only read the transcript, dont have a TV, and it wasnt sleep-inducing.

Not because he was begging and pleading in his speech, either - if only. It was more the contrary (agree with Sofia there).

Its more that the contrary is hardly better in this context. To just quote those newspaper headlines from around this continent here again, it was a "harnassed account" offering an "uncompromising point of view", containing the very opposite of the "conciliatory tone" that "many countries had [..] hoped" for and not a hint of an admission that he might have "underestimated the task of creating a democratic and prosperous Iraq"; no, instead, there was an "uncompromising defence of his war", apparently intended to "def[y the] world leaders" - and therewith reconfirming both our worst prejudices and our worst fears about this US President.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Sat 27 Sep, 2003 07:46 pm
Moving a post I made on the Wesley Clark thread here because it was off-topic there ... it was a response to this post by Sofia.

Sofia wrote:
I don't think Bush is perfect, but I think he has done a very good job with what fell into his lap.
I think a furtherance of Clinton's Saddam policies would have been a huge mistake. Bush's choices weren't pretty, but I think they were necessary.

So do 70% of Iraqis. They are the ones who did the majority of the suffering. I think their opinions should hold the most weight re: Was the War Worth It?


Remains a good point. Despite everything thats going wrong, I'm sure that at this point in time, most Iraqis are still glad to have Saddam be replaced with US control. Relative freedom is better than no freedom. No reason to doubt that Gallup poll.*

But there's something amiss with the pre-supposition - however moral and ethical it sounds - that "its their opinions that should hold the most weight". This is much more difficult than it seems. The war in Iraq did not take place in a vacuum. It didnt just change the face of Iraq - it changed the world. So any end reckoning of whether it was worth it or not will have to weigh out the benefits/costs to the Iraqis against those to the rest of the world (however cynical that may perhaps sound).

I noted on another thread that there are people that believe the building of the Berlin Wall could have been stopped. Uncovered Soviet files are said to have shown that the GDR and USSR were basically trying out how far they could go, with orders to stop the construction as soon as the Western powers in Berlin would try to intervene. They didnt, and thus the GDR finished building the Wall as it had planned. Would the citizens of East-Berlin have been glad if the Western powers had intervened? Probably. Is that the only thing to take into account? No, obviously - we dont know what other developments such intervention would have provoked.

This was the reason I opposed the war. I did think it would improve the lives of those Iraqis who were still under Saddam's control. I did not think it would improve half as much as what the Bush admin was conjuring up. All the dilemmas that are now avenging themselves had already been described and warned against beforehand. Yet still, even relative anarchy is better than absolute dictatorship, and thats how I estimated the benefit, even if the dictatorship had lost its genocidal quality. That relative benefit needs to be balanced out against the benefits/costs outside Iraq. The impact on the region. The influence on international terrorism. The impact on international institutions and the concepts of legitimate warfare.

These questions have turned out differently than I thought: the war does not seem to have radicalised and infuriated the Arab masses around the region; but it does seem to have merely fuelled terrorist activity; not to mention the heavoc wreaked by the concept of "pre-emptive war" on the world's future security and the international legal order.

You will draw different conclusions there, but - and I'm probably sounding a tiny bit like georgeob1 here, I'm afraid, talking "realpolitik" instead of my usual idealism - the sad thing is that in any case, whichever country of the world we're talking about, its not just "their opinions" that hold the most weight, in the end. Not even for you, either.

Its relatively easy to extoll the virtues of letting the Iraqis tell us whether the war was worth it or not when their approval concerns a war that also happened to safeguard a list of all too realpolitik US national interests. But you opposed (more than a symbolic) military intervention in Liberia. Yet the Liberians, "the ones who did the majority of the suffering" in West-Africa, would have had a very clear opinion to weigh in with on the topic: they would have easily considered such a War to have been Worth It, by all accounts.

So there seems to be something a little odd (dare I say even sanctimonious) about your assertion that its really only the Iraqi's own welfare that determines the 'worth' of fighting a war like this to you - its all to convenient, considering (many like) you wouldnt use the same criterium in other situations.

*(On a footnote, one should never underestimate the - let's call it, temptation of totalitarian nostalgia. Within a few years after the '89 revolution, the percentage of people who in polls said that "it was better under Communism" shot up to 25-50%, depending which country. The number of those who answered that "there were good sides to Communism, too" went up even higher. (I'm paraphrasing by heart here, obviously).

I was always a bit confounded by that - had the latter-day Communism of Brezhnevite stagnation perhaps really not been all that bad? The scales fell from my eyes when I saw an article that recounted how, in West-Germany, polls in 1946, 1949 (or around that time) had shown similar numbers of Germans assert that 'the previous regime had been better in some ways'.

Apparently, there is a deeply ingrained human instinct for nostalgia for the past even when looking back at the most horrendous systems - a nostalgia evoked proportionally to the amount of hardship faced in the present. Now post-communist economic were disastrous, of course, but there's no reason to assume that post-totalitarian reconstruction in Iraq will be any more supple. So keep your eyes out on those Gallup polls.)
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Sat 27 Sep, 2003 08:30 pm
nimh wrote:
That wasnt me, Timber, that was Walter. Us Europeans just all sound the same.

OOPS ... yer right. Yeah, it's hard to tell you Yur-Peen folks apart sometimes. Yer accents on the internet can be a little hard fer me to differentiate, but I oughtta pay better attention to avatars, anyway Embarrassed Rolling Eyes Embarrassed
0 Replies
 
Sofia
 
  1  
Reply Sat 27 Sep, 2003 09:15 pm
Sanctimonious Sofia here.

I said Iraqi's opinions should carry the most weight, regarding whether the war was worth it.

I stand by that opinion.
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Sat 27 Sep, 2003 09:21 pm
The Iraqis? C'mon, now ... just whatinhell have they got to do with any of this? Rolling Eyes
0 Replies
 
Gelisgesti
 
  1  
Reply Sat 27 Sep, 2003 10:17 pm
Sofia wrote:
Sanctimonious Sofia here.

I said Iraqi's opinions should carry the most weight, regarding whether the war was worth it.

I stand by that opinion.


Which one are you going to ask?
0 Replies
 
Sofia
 
  1  
Reply Sat 27 Sep, 2003 10:21 pm
The ones the pollsters ask is good enough for me.
0 Replies
 
Gelisgesti
 
  1  
Reply Sat 27 Sep, 2003 10:55 pm
But the administration would have us believe that Iraqi's are afraid that if they talk to an American there will be retaliation.
I wonder if this family has been polled ..........

For an Iraqi Family, 'No Other Choice'
Father and Brother Are Forced by Villagers to Execute Suspected U.S. Informant

By Anthony Shadid
Washington Post Foreign Service
Friday, August 1, 2003; Page A01

THULUYA, Iraq -- Two hours before the dawn call to prayer, in a village still shrouded in silence, Sabah Kerbul's executioners arrived. His father carried an AK-47 assault rifle, as did his brother. And with barely a word spoken, they led the man accused by the village of working as an informer for the Americans behind a house girded with fig trees, vineyards and orange groves.


His father raised his rifle and aimed it at his oldest son.

"Sabah didn't try to escape," said Abdullah Ali, a village resident. "He knew he was facing his fate."

The story of what followed is based on interviews with Kerbul's father, brother and five other villagers who said witnesses told them about the events. One shot tore through Kerbul's leg, another his torso, the villagers said. He fell to the ground still breathing, his blood soaking the parched land near the banks of the Tigris River, they said. His father could go no further, and according to some accounts, he collapsed. His other son then fired three times, the villagers said, at least once at his brother's head.

Kerbul, a tall, husky 28-year-old, died.

"It wasn't an easy thing to kill him," his brother Salah said.

In his simple home of cement and cinder blocks, the father, Salem, nervously thumbed black prayer beads this week as he recalled a warning from village residents earlier this month. He insisted his son was not an informer, but he said his protests meant little to a village seething with anger. He recalled their threat was clear: Either he kill his son, or villagers would resort to tribal justice and kill the rest of his family in retaliation for Kerbul's role in a U.S. military operation in the village in June, in which four people were killed.

"I have the heart of a father, and he's my son," Salem said. "Even the prophet Abraham didn't have to kill his son." He dragged on a cigarette. His eyes glimmered with the faint trace of tears. "There was no other choice," he whispered.

In the simmering guerrilla war fought along the Tigris, U.S. officials say they have received a deluge of tips from informants, the intelligence growing since U.S. forces killed former president Saddam Hussein's two sons last week. Acting on the intelligence, soldiers have uncovered surface-to-air missiles, 45,000 sticks of dynamite and caches of small arms and explosives. They have shut down safe houses that sheltered senior Baath Party operatives in the Sunni Muslim region north of Baghdad and ferreted out lieutenants and bodyguards of the fallen Iraqi president, who has eluded a relentless, four-month manhunt.

But a shadowy response has followed, a less-publicized but no less deadly theater of violence in the U.S. occupation. U.S. officials and residents say informers have been killed, shot and attacked with grenades. U.S. officials say they have no numbers on deaths, but anecdotal evidence suggests that the campaign is widespread in a region long a source of support for Hussein's government. The U.S. officials declined to discuss specifics about individual informers and would not say whether Kerbul was one.

Lists of informers have circulated in at least two northern cities, and remnants of the Saddam's Fedayeen militia have vowed in videotaped warnings broadcast on Arab satellite networks that they will fight informers "before we fight the Americans."

No Protection From U.S. Troops

The surge of informants has also provoked anger in Sunni Muslim towns along the Tigris. Some residents say informants are drawn to U.S. field commanders' rewards of as little as $20 and as much as $2,500. The informants are occasionally interested in settling their own feuds and grudges with the help of soldiers, the residents said. Others contend that the informers are exploiting access with U.S. officials to emerge as power-brokers in the vacuum that has followed the fall of the government on April 9.

"Time's running out. Something will happen to them very soon," said Maher Saab, 30, in the village of Saniya.

The U.S. military says bluntly it does not have the means to safeguard those providing intelligence. "We're not providing any kind of protection at the local level," said Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez, the U.S. military commander in Iraq.

In Saniya, where slogans still declare "Long Live Saddam Hussein," Abdel-Hamid Ahmed sat in a well-to-do house along dirt roads and arid fields of rolling hills where sheep graze. He proudly described himself as the first person to greet the invading Americans and ticked off the help he has offered since they arrived, most notably information on saboteurs of electricity wires.

Since then, he said, he has met U.S. soldiers at his house at least once a week, usually for no more than 15 minutes.

"I'm not an informer, but I help explain to the Americans the situation here," he said in a well-kept living room, adorned with a new Toshiba television, a stereo, karaoke machine and 15 vases of plastic flowers.

Ahmed, who works in the mayor's office, was on two lists of informers circulated in the village and in the nearby city of Baiji, 120 miles northwest of Baghdad. Under the heading, "In the name of God, the most merciful and compassionate," each list had about 20 names, and, over the past month, the leaflets were left before dawn on doorsteps and utility posts. On the first list, he was ranked 10th; on the second, he said, he was fourth. He said he told the Americans about two men who distributed the list, and they were arrested.

In the street, some people have heckled him as an agent -- "a grave word," he said. He has not been physically threatened, but a grenade was thrown at another person on the list, Kamil Hatroush, although neither he nor his family was hurt. Ahmed said he carries only a 9mm pistol, eschewing the almost standard AK-47s wielded by most Iraqis in the countryside.

"I'm not scared," Ahmed said, flicking his hand lazily and insisting that only a minority resent those working with the Americans. "If someone wants to kill you, why would they give you a warning first? They would just kill you right away."

Ahmed was kicked out of Baghdad's National Security College in 1983, the training ground for the government's sprawling apparatus of intelligence services. He said the disappointment led him to alcoholism, then part-time work, most recently at the mayor's office, where he earned the equivalent of about $2 a month.

"If the Americans offered me a job in security, I would work with them," he said. "Every person has to plan for the future."

U.S. military officials attribute most of their tips to good will, either out of an informant's desire to eliminate the vestiges of Hussein's rule that are unpopular even in the Sunni Muslim-dominated north, or to end attacks that have unsettled a region still reeling from the government's fall. Maj. Josslyn Aberle, a spokeswoman for the 4th Infantry Division, which is based in Hussein's home town of Tikrit, said only a "very small percentage receive money" and that the U.S. military vets intelligence before acting on it. Ahmed denied seeking money, saying he cooperates for the good of his town.

In Hussein's government, informers were encouraged, paid and protected by the intelligence services, a crucial but despised means of control in 35 years of Baath Party rule. Some residents contend today that at least some people in the new batch of informers -- those willing to defy mounting threats -- have charged protection fees or sold their services as perceived intermediaries with U.S. forces.

Outside Ahmed's house, a group of men sat in a battered white Toyota, as relatives sought an audience with Ahmed for help in getting back a car that was seized by the Americans.

Over the weekend, the family of five men arrested by U.S. forces near their base in Baiji said they gave Ahmed a sheep, worth about $30, to help secure the men's release. He denied it.

In Samarra, about 65 miles north of Baghdad, Abdel-Razzaq Shakr, the brother of the town's mayor, was on another list distributed in the town two weeks ago, with at least six names of suspected informers. Residents said people in the town had gone to Shakr for help with U.S. forces in getting their guns back and to deflect suspicion from friends and relatives.

Shakr acknowledged providing the Americans information on Baathists, but he denied taking money from residents.

"I haven't taken even a cent," said Shakr, 45, who is unemployed. "On the contrary, I want to leave a mark on our town so that our children will thank their fathers for what they did."

A grenade was thrown at his house on July 18. It landed in the courtyard near a tangerine tree, shattering windows but hurting no one. Another person on the list, Mustafa Sadeq Abboudi, was shot in the arm with an AK-47. Shakr said he has a pistol and a rifle, but his brother, Mayor Mahmoud Shakr, has urged him not to seek help from U.S. forces.

"The Americans cannot offer protection," the mayor said. "If the Americans stood outside the door, it would only cause more trouble because it would mean he is definitely working with them."

Sitting in a chair and holding a cup of sweet tea, the mayor expressed frustration. Suspicions have become so common that more than 100 Muslim clerics met last week and issued a statement that not all Iraqis working with U.S. forces should be considered informers. "When ever somebody talks to the Americans," he said, shaking his head, "they think he's an agent."

Calls for Revenge

Residents of Thuluya said they had no doubt about Kerbul. After the operation in the village, dubbed Peninsula Strike, a force of 4,000 soldiers rounded up 400 residents and detained them at an air base seven miles north. An informer dressed in desert camouflage with a bag over his head had fingered at least 15 prisoners as they sat under a sweltering sun, their hands bound with plastic. Villagers said they soon recognized his yellow sandals and right thumb, which had been severed above the joint in an accident.

"We started yelling and shouting, 'That's Sabah! That's Sabah!' " said Mohammed Abu Dhua, who was held at the base for seven days and whose brother died of a heart attack during the operation. "We asked his father, 'Why is Sabah doing these things?' "

In the raid, three men and a 15-year-old boy were killed, all believed by villagers to have been innocent. Within days, many focused their ire on Kerbul, who had served a year in prison for impersonating a government official and was believed to have worked as an informer after he was released. Young children in the street recited a rhyme about him: "Masked man, your face is the face of the devil." Calls for revenge -- tempered by the fear of tribal bloodletting getting out of hand -- were heard in many conversations.

Kerbul's family said U.S. forces took him to Tikrit, then three weeks later, he went to stay with relatives across the Tigris in the village of Alim. As soon as word of his release spread, his brother Salah and uncle Suleiman went there to bring him back.

"We sent a message to his family," said Ali, a retired colonel whose brother was among those killed during the operation. "You have to kill your son. If you don't kill him, we will act against your family."

His father appealed, Ali recalled, saying he needed permission from U.S. forces.

"We told him we're not responsible for this," Ali said. "We told him you must kill your son."

Kerbul's body was buried hours after the shooting, his father said, carried to the cemetery in a white Toyota pickup. He said he and Kerbul's brother accompanied the corpse. Salah, his son who fired the fatal shots, said he stayed home.

Neither U.S. military officials in Thuluya nor Tikrit said they were aware of the killing.

"It's justice," said Abu Dhua, sitting at his home near a bend in the Tigris. "In my opinion, he deserves worse than death."

© 2003 The Washington Post Company


Read me
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Sep, 2003 12:58 am
I read that when it was first put on line. Truly a horror story. I recall the case of Susan Smith ... the North Carolina mother who strapped her two young sons into their carseats, pushed her car into a lake, then feigned grief and disbelief at their putative disappearance, cynically begging for their safe return from every TV set in the nation. Another horrifying tale, without dispute, and sadly very true. Is either story indicative of its society in general, or are both tragic abberations, no more or less horrific for their atypicality?
0 Replies
 
Craven de Kere
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Sep, 2003 01:01 am
Sofia wrote:
Please tell me you made that up.
If I hear Bush's adage about 'looking into putin's eyes' again, I'll hurl.


Hobit didn't make it up but he did get the name wrong. Bush's name for Putin was Put-put or something.

Since the Iraq dispute I haven't heard much of it though.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Sep, 2003 01:56 am
nimh wrote:
Us Europeans just all sound the same.


Especially we Dutch and Germans (see: Pennsylvania "Dutch")
But we don't look like. :wink:

edit: saw your remark on this later, Timber :wink:
0 Replies
 
Joe Nation
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Sep, 2003 05:21 am
Some insight here on Iraqi families and why it may be a very long time before outside forces have much influence.

New York Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/09/28/international/middleeast/28CLAN.html?th
0 Replies
 
PDiddie
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Sep, 2003 06:51 am
Craven de Kere wrote:
Sofia wrote:
Please tell me you made that up.
If I hear Bush's adage about 'looking into putin's eyes' again, I'll hurl.


Hobit didn't make it up but he did get the name wrong. Bush's name for Putin was Put-put or something.


It's "Pooty-poot".

Here's your Googleon the subject.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 07/18/2025 at 06:43:00