Text 2778, 687 rader
Skriven 2006-06-05 23:34:04 av Whitehouse Press (1:3634/12.0)
Ärende: Press Release (0606053) for Mon, 2006 Jun 5
===================================================
===========================================================================
Press Briefing by Tony Snow
===========================================================================

For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
June 5, 2006

Press Briefing by Tony Snow
James S. Brady Briefing Room

Press Briefing


12:36 P.M. EDT

MR. SNOW: Hello, everybody; a couple of quick notes. President Bush this
morning had a 19-minute conversation with President Putin of Russia. The
topics included Russian accession to the World Trade Organization. They
talked about the upcoming G8 summit in St. Petersburg. Also the President
expressed his concern about four Russian diplomats who were kidnapped over
the weekend in Iraq.

Also in response to questions this morning, you were talking about the
question of interpretations of the marriage amendment. Here is the
amendment in full, that is, the article: "Marriage in the United States
shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman. Neither this
Constitution or the constitution of any state or federal law shall be
construed to require that marital status or the legal incidence there will
be conferred upon unmarried couples or groups." In other words, to answer
your question, it does both things -- it defines marriage as a union
between a man and a woman and also attempts to prevent the forced
interstate recognition of same-sex marriage through judicial fiat in any
place.

As to Victoria's question -- I don't see her here, but she had asked if
there were any gay participants in the meeting with the President and the
answer is, no.

Let's see, anything else? No, no question-and-answer after that event. Also
-- oh, yes, I speculated about whether Condoleezza Rice or anybody here had
spoken with Prime Minister Maliki, and the answer is, no, the people on the
ground, Ambassador Khalilzad and General Casey, have spoken with him.

And with that we begin. Terry.

Q There is some criticism that the President's remarks today are merely
intended to energize conservative supporters since there is little
likelihood this is going to pass in the Senate. What's your response to
that?

MR. SNOW: Well, the response is, the President -- again, and we went
through this last week, this is driven in many ways by the legislative
calendar. The President is making his views known. Whether it passes or
not, as you know, Terry, there have been a number of cases where civil
rights matters have arisen on a number of occasions and they've been
brought up for repeated consideration by the United States Senate and other
legislative bodies. So as far as a SOP, I mean, I've also had people say,
well, wait a minute, you take a look at a constitutional amendments that's
only a 45 percent to 50 percent proposition.

You can cut this both ways when you take a look at polls, but the fact is,
A, the President is restating a long-held position, and, B, he's also made
it clear that he wishes it didn't have to come to this -- this is in
response to a number of states where either through their own constitutions
or through laws or even initiatives or referenda, people have chosen to
define marriage as being between a man and a woman and the courts have
over-ridden them.

Q You present this as something that he's talking about because the
occasion of the Senate vote. Once this week is over, do you expect him to
be silent on this?

MR. SNOW: Don't know. I mean, I don't think -- look, in many ways, again,
the debate is hot right -- the question is, will you be asking about it in
five weeks? And the answer is, probably no. Quite often, a President will
make statements -- and we went through this ripeness criterion the other
day -- when it is, in fact, in the public eye, and there is action that may
be imminent or pending, and that is the time one would expect a President
to speak out on it.

Q You mentioned civil rights. Are you comparing this to various civil
rights measures which have come to the Congress over the years? Is this a
civil right?

MR. SNOW: Marriage? It actually -- what we're really talking about here is
an attempt to try to maintain the traditional meaning of an institution
that has maintained one meaning for a period of centuries, and for --

Q Do you equate that with civil rights?

MR. SNOW: No, I'm just saying, I think -- well, I don't know. How do you
define civil rights?

Q It's not up to me; up to you.

MR. SNOW: Well, no, it's your question. So I need to get a more precise
definition.

Q Can you stand there and say with a straight face that there is not a
political dimension to this?

MR. SNOW: Of course there's a political dimension to it. There's going to
be a Senate vote on it, for heaven's sake. There's naturally -- there are
political dimensions on both sides. This is an issue -- and we talked about
this, this morning -- that I think is of keen interest to a lot of people.
And one of the interesting aspects is that there -- it's still -- the
amendment still permits states to consider arrangements and institutions
for same-sex couples that would not be called marriage. The President feels
strongly that marriage is an institution, has a fixed meaning that ought to
be honored in American law.

David.

Q In January, 2005, the President was asked about his support for this, and
he said, well, there's a kind of a mind set in the Senate right now that
it's unnecessary to push for this amendment because there is something -- a
law that's been passed, the Defense of Marriage Act, and that's, frankly,
good enough. So what's changed?

MR. SNOW: The Defense of Marriage Act now also is, itself, subject to legal
challenge in a number of places. And that changes the dynamics a bit. And
the question, also, ought to be asked of the Senate because the dynamics
apparently have changed in the Senate in the sense that the leadership has
seen fit to bring this up for a vote.

Q In an election year. And of course, the last time this came up for a vote
was in 2004, another election year.

MR. SNOW: Again, I'm not sure that this is a big driver, to tell you the
truth, of voters. This is an issue that is of concern, that the President
is making his views known on. But I think we ought to be clear that the
President is speaking out about a piece of legislation because he believes
in it.

Q Isn't this why people hate politics, this kind of political posturing?

MR. SNOW: I don't think so. I don't think it's posturing. Many of us in
this room are married, and we have strong feelings about the importance of
marriage in our lives. And I think having the ability to define marriage is
something that's important to a great many people in the United States of
America. Whether the proper forum is a constitutional amendment or dealing
with it state by state, that is something that the people are going to have
to decide.

Q One follow up on DOMA. What has changed about the potential legal
challenge since January of last year that makes this riper?

MR. SNOW: Again, David, you're going to have to ask --

Q Something has happened.

MR. SNOW: -- the people who brought it up for a vote in the Senate.

Q The Republican leadership works in concert with the White House, as you
know.

MR. SNOW: But I'm not aware that the White House had any particular hand in
scheduling this. But, you know what, I'll check it out, because I don't
have the answer.

Q Tony, can I follow that up?

MR. SNOW: I'll get to you, Lester.

Q Okay.

MR. SNOW: Go ahead, Helen.

Q Just as the war in Iraq is escalating, and there are so many issues on
the table, the President spent two days on this gay marriage. Isn't that a
bit frivolous?

MR. SNOW: You're assuming, Helen, that he's spent each and every moment.
Today he's met with two heads of state, he's had a half-hour phone
conversation with another head of state, he's meeting with a delegation
from China.

Q Well, there are real issues that affect every American, and that isn't
one of them, but war is. And why isn't the President dealing with this at
all? Who's problem is --

MR. SNOW: Are you assuming that the President is not dealing with -- again,
the President, believe it or not, he can deal with more than one issue at a
time, and I've tried to make it the point --

Q Is he concerned about the escalation of the war in Iraq?

MR. SNOW: The President is concerned about the successful conclusion of
military action in Iraq, so that the people of Iraq, who are right now, as
you know Helen, they're just now going back and unearthing a mass grave
from the time of Saddam Hussein. They're concerned about building a
democracy that is free and stable. So the President is committed to that
task and seeing it through.

Q You don't do it was a barrel of a gun.

Q There are more than 8,000 same-sex couples that have been married in
Massachusetts. What threat do they pose? And what is the President's
message to them?

MR. SNOW: They don't -- this is not a response to a threat. This is merely
a matter of trying to clarify what marriage ought to mean under the law. As
you know, the people of Massachusetts also by referendum define marriage as
being between a man and a woman. And the supreme judicial court decided to
throw it out, and it remains a matter of contention.

I don't think people look at this as a threat. It is trying to clarify what
is an important and contentious cultural and legal issue.

Q Would this -- let me just follow up. Would this to become a
constitutional amendment, what legally then happens to those 8,000-plus
same-sex couples? Are their marriages annulled?

MR. SNOW: That would have to require keener legal expertise than mine. I
don't want to try to --

Q So the President doesn't know what would happen to them?

MR. SNOW: No, the press secretary doesn't know. (Laughter.)

Q You mentioned the President was actually concerned about other issues
besides this one.

MR. SNOW: Yes.

Q Oil prices are continuing to go up on the statements by Ayatollah
Khamenei about cutting off oil supplies if the U.S. made a wrong move. He
wasn't talking about, as you said earlier, a theoretical U.S. intelligence
-- any wrong move is what he's speaking of. What's the reaction to that?

MR. SNOW: The interpretation I saw -- well, let's -- okay, what would
constitute a wrong move. It appears that the United States -- and what's
interesting I think is, as I've said a number of times, and I think as
diplomats recognize, there are going to be any number of statements coming
out of Iran. I would caution against leaping to conclusions until the
leadership in Iran has actually had an opportunity to look over the
packages of incentives and disincentives offered by the EU3 with the
support of the United States. It's easy to make comments into a vacuum. And
my sense is that, again, the Iranians are going to realize that this is a
serious offer. And it's an offer that offers great promise for them, and
offers great promise for the region. But it's going to take some time.

There are also lots of different political undercurrents in Iraq -- in
Iran. We know that any politician is going to have to deal with those, as
well. But I would say what I said at this morning's gaggle, which is
counsel patience, let people look at it. I understand why commodities
markets may be unsettled by a comment like that, but over time if this
succeeds, the commodities markets are going to be very happy, and so should
we all be.

Q Tony, I just want -- on gay marriage again, you are almost portraying the
President as being a passive participant in this, that the Senate is
acting, so he's speaking out.

MR. SNOW: Right.

Q At the gaggle you suggested the media is over-hyping this issue.
Conservatives like Tony Perkins are saying it was the President who brought
this up a lot during the 2004 campaign. Wasn't he hyping it then? Why now
is he so passive?

MR. SNOW: I'm not going to characterize -- I don't think it's passive.
Again, the President has made clear what his views are. But this is one
where -- I'm trying to figure out exactly how one decides when one is
active and one is passive. Here what you're saying is, wait a minute --
Helen just hit me with, he gave a radio address, he's talking to these
people, how can he spend so much time on it. You're saying, how can he
spend so little energy on it.

Q That was her question, not --

MR. SNOW: I mean, the fact is that the President is making a position clear
on an issue of concern.

Q All in a point of view. (Laughter.)

Q But you were saying before, as well, you know, it depends on the public
interest. On Social Security reform he gave speech after speech; he
decided, this is what I'm going to do, I'm using my political capital on
this. In 2004 he let conservatives believe he would use political capital
on this issue. Instead, it looks like he's going to do a radio address on
Saturday, he's going to speak today, and move on.

MR. SNOW: Well, we'll let them draw their appropriate conclusions based on
their interaction with the President.

Q But then why is he not -- bottom line question, why is he not using
political capital on this, then?

MR. SNOW: Why is he not using political --

Q Yes. I mean, if he's made this a big issue in 2004, why is he not using
political capital? Why is it not that important to him? Is he scared?

MR. SNOW: Again --

Q Why isn't he doing more on this?

MR. SNOW: Why is -- exactly. It's a damned-if-you-do, damned-if-you-don't
situation, Ed. (Laughter.)

Q So what are you doing here? (Laughter.)

Q It's not up to us. As the President said over and over -- the President
said over and over, on Social Security --

MR. SNOW: A schwing.

Q Over and over on Social Security, the President said it's not up to the
Democrats, it's not up to the media -- it matters to me.

MR. SNOW: Right.

Q So at what point is -- that's what I'm trying to -- why on gay marriage
is it not that important?

MR. SNOW: You mean, why on traditional marriage?

Q On the issue of gay marriage, yes.

MR. SNOW: It's the issue of traditional marriage. This is the Family
Marriage Amendment. And the President has made clear what his views are. I
think you look at the whip counts, we look at the whip counts. You've got
to find out what you think is possible in this political environment.

Q Following that --

Q My turn.

MR. SNOW: I promise I'll get to you, Lester. I can't wait. But to get -- is
this just going to be one part, or is this like two or three?

Q Tony, on Iraq. Does the President think this horrible factional violence
would abate in Iraq if the U.S. and the foreign forces were asked to leave?
And if so, would the country split into three, and if it does, can the
President accept that?

MR. SNOW: Well, this is a bunch of "ifs." I think you've got the question
turned around. The United States would not leave, one assumes, until the
situation had been taken care of and the Iraqis are able to go ahead and
assume full responsibility for their safety and security.

The President has also made it clear that he's not just going to pack up
and leave.

Q But if the leadership of Iraq asks the foreign forces to leave?

MR. SNOW: Well, this is a big "if," and it's an "if" that's completely
inconsistent with the readout I've gotten of the meeting with Prime
Minister Maliki and Ambassador Khalilzad and General Casey the other day,
where he said he wants them to stay.

Welcome.

Q Thank you. Are you saying that the President believes that marriage is
under attack?

MR. SNOW: No, I think what the President is saying is that courts around
the country have decided to overturn decisions made by voters in their
states based on their viewer interpretation of the Constitution. And if it
comes to the point where you have to figure out what the Constitution says
on such an issue, where there are big and important divides in American
culture, as this proceeds it may be necessary to clarify what the
Constitution says by amending it.

Q Russia and the WTO. Russia is not an easy place to invest, they really
have no rule of law. Some big American investment firms have closed their
offices, and said, the hell with this place -- excuse me.

Q Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

MR. SNOW: That's all right, I'm already getting hammered. Go ahead.

Q What is the President telling --

MR. SNOW: I'm not going to engage in -- because the President and President
Putin are talking about conditions under which it would be appropriate for
the accession to the WTO. I'm not going to get into any further detail than
that.

Q These conditions have -- it sounds like negotiations with Iran, are these
carrots and sticks? Can you generalize it?

MR. SNOW: No, I can't.

Q It sounds pretty serious. Is this a change? Are we --

MR. SNOW: No, no, this is a continuation of prior discussions.

April.

Q Tony, you talked on the issue of civil rights as it relates to this
marriage amendment. Will there be a civil rights violation for gays if the
amendment does go through? Was that reflected --

MR. SNOW: A civil rights violation for gays? No, the President has made it
clear, he wants people to be able to live their private lives as they see
fit.

Q Wouldn't that --

MR. SNOW: What do you mean, a "civil rights violation"? Do you mean that it
would be a violation of civil rights to be gay?

Q No, no, no, but it would -- would gays be able to file civil rights
lawsuits because they are not allowed to marry? Civil rights issues -- you
tried to get into the definition of civil rights, and wrongs against --
knowing wrongs against a group, okay, that group would be, indeed, wronged,
they feel, if they are not allowed to marry in this country.

MR. SNOW: April, as you know, that's a very contentious legal issue which I
cannot decide up here. Obviously, anything that would happen would be
heavily litigated, and we would have to see how the courts came out on it.

Q And also, on immigration -- I tried to bring this up last week -- your
first day, I asked you a question about people of color being pitted
against black Americans in the President's temporary worker program. And
you said something to affect that -- well, you said something to do with --
many of your critics are saying, how could you say that?

MR. SNOW: I'm glad you clarified it, because I didn't know what you were
talking about the other day. A, I don't know who the critics are, but, B,
let me give a response. The temporary worker program is designed in such a
way that employers would have to certify that they were offering to
immigrants jobs that were not being taken by Americans. I don't see how
that pits anybody against anybody. If you have nobody lined up to take
these jobs, it means that there is no necessary conflict between African
Americans and immigrants, or any other group of Americans and immigrants.
In fact, that is supposed to be one of the key points of the temporary
worker program, precisely to avoid such conflicts.

Q But the major issue is also that it drives down wages. And many of the
immigrants are not allowed to negotiate. Those are the standard issues the
critics are throwing at this administration, when you say about the fact
that it drives down wages --

MR. SNOW: I'm not sure it drives down -- you mean it drives down wages?

Q Yes, it drives down wages.

MR. SNOW: Look, there's wage competition throughout the economy. That
typically happens. What you will always find, as a matter of fact, when
people are embarked upon any form of economic enterprise, there are going
to be attempts to hold down costs, to provide services to consumers for
less money. And that's true whether you're talking about an immigrant
population or Microsoft.

Q Tony, two questions.

MR. SNOW: I knew it couldn't just be one. Go ahead.

Q There's a news release on the Internet today from Exodus International,
which is the organization of former homosexuals with 135 member groups. And
they're reporting that they are guests of the President today at the White
House. And my question: You said there are no homosexual groups here today.
Were any invited?

MR. SNOW: Not that I'm aware of, Lester. I don't think so.

Q Second, The New York Times has just reported, "This White House, like all
White Houses, is obsessed with the press." My question, will you admit to
this alleged obsession, or is this just one more New York Times
exaggeration?

MR. SNOW: It's more a love affair than an obsession, Lester. (Laughter.)

Q Very good, Tony. Good. (Laughter.)

Q I salute you. (Laughter.)

Q On the immigration trip tomorrow, has the President got any new tack to
help bridge some differences between the House and the Senate?

MR. SNOW: I think one of the messages the President is going to want to
convey is that when you take a look at sort of the priorities and interests
of members of both parties and in the House and the Senate, you're going to
find that there are quite a few issues on which they agree. And I've ticked
them off before. But I think one of the points of emphasis may be to
highlight some of those. Everybody agrees on the importance of border
security. Everybody agrees on the importance of identifying people who are
here illegally. There is widespread agreement that if you cannot move out
all 11 million or 12 million or 15 million or whatever the number is, how
do you make it so that they pay an appropriate debt to society? There is a
question -- most people agree with a temporary worker program.

In other words, there are vast areas of agreement. And I think quite often
what happens here is many people developed opinions about the President's
program before the President announced his program. And I think this is an
opportunity not only to remind people of what he has said, but also to
remind them that there's a fair amount of common ground, not only between
different factions in the Republican Party, but between both parties.

Q If I could follow up on that, what is the significance of his visit to
the facility in Omaha on Wednesday?

MR. SNOW: It's a Catholic Charities event, and the theme there is going to
be assimilation.

Q Tony, could you describe what he's going to see in Artesia?

MR. SNOW: I probably could, but I have actually not looked at the trip
notes. I know that we're going to be swearing in a new head -- is it the
new head of the Border Patrol -- he'll be swearing a head of the Border
Patrol. And we're also going to be taking a look at Border Patrol
activities in Artesia.

Q One more thing on the immigration trip, if I may. It sounds like you talk
about these vast areas of shared priorities -- this is still a huge, heavy
lift, isn't it, to try to get these two wildly different pieces of
legislation --

MR. SNOW: It's going to be a considerable amount of work, yes.

Q On that topic, Tony?

MR. SNOW: Go ahead.

Q To that end, I'm interested that the President is, in essence, taking his
show on the road, but the real work I think is back here in the Capitol, in
bringing the House and the Senate together. Lawmakers have said the
President will have to take a very active role. What is he planning on
doing specifically to --

MR. SNOW: I'm not going to tell you specifically what he does. Quite often,
a President is most effective when he is working behind the scenes and not
broadcasting through you or me. But I guarantee you that the President is
actively involved. And part of also going around the country, there are a
couple of things, a lot of times immigration is discussed almost in a
vacuum. People have perceptions about immigration. They don't know what
border stations look like. They don't know what a lot of these different
situations may look like. And it gives the President an opportunity to
illustrate and dramatize what is going on. And also, as you know, members
of Congress keep coming back saying, man, I'm getting an earful from the
people back home. Well, this gives the President an opportunity also to
converse with the people back home.

Q Is there a point where the President or the Representatives dealing with
the House and Senate might ask the Speaker to suspend this one time, his
doctrine, as it's called, of moving for a majority of the majority? Because
that in essence now will be the ultimate road block in moving the
President's --

MR. SNOW: I'm not going to prejudge at this point. There are no plans at
this juncture to ask the Speaker to suspend the majority of majority. But I
can't speak for what may happen. Just don't know.

Q Is that recognized as a significant hurdle to preparing this --

MR. SNOW: The Speaker feels very strongly about it. It doesn't seem he's
going to change.

Q Thank you. In Hanoi today, Defense Secretary Rumsfeld is calling for
expanded military exchanges between Vietnam and the U.S. Experts say the
reasons are to establish a key location in the (inaudible) war against
terror and to set up a buffer against China and its expanding military. Is
that true?

MR. SNOW: I'm unfamiliar with the Secretary's comments, so I would refer
you back to DOD, because they know what he said and I just haven't had time
to track that today.

Q An immigration politics question. There's a special election,
congressional election in California tomorrow. Immigration is playing a
huge role. First of all, is the President going to make a -- is he doing a
recorded call, or is he going to have any influence in that race? And also,
the Democrat candidate, Francine Busby, had the statement, "You don't need
papers for voting." Last week, she made that statement. Any reaction to
that?

MR. SNOW: No, it obviously is a huge issue right now because she -- I guess
it was in response to a question somebody was asking about voting, and she
said, "You don't need papers for voting." She later said that what she
really meant was, you don't need papers to help with the campaign. But in
any event, it's obviously been a very hot topic out there in California.

Q Two things on marriage. First, logistical. The remarks are in 450. Where
is the meeting taking place?

MR. SNOW: Roosevelt Room.

Q Second, the President is generally a state's rights kind of guy on
issues. Why not on this issue?

MR. SNOW: He is. I mean, that's exactly what he is, and I'll tell you why.
And I'm glad you asked, Ken, because state's rights -- here you have, in a
number of states, including Massachusetts where the voters said, we want
marriage to be defined as a man and a woman. The courts said, no. The
people you ought to be asking about the sovereign rights of states may be
state and federal courts which had been overturning what the states either
legislatively -- or through ballot initiative -- have gone ahead and tried
to inscribe into their own state laws. So I would argue that the President
is trying to preserve the state's rights in this particular case.

Q But he was trying to prevent -- if there is a state out there where the
people want this, he does want to allow that to happen?

MR. SNOW: Well, that is a hypothetical in this particular case, because I'm
not aware of any state where that has achieved majority status.

Q But why not allow a state to do what it wants? What's different about
this issue, than, say, death penalty? Why not have a federal amendment
dictating how you do death penalty?

MR. SNOW: Because marriage is a unique institution in the history of
American society --

Q The death penalty --

MR. SNOW: You can name a whole lot of issues that are important, but --

Q And he usually does, in supporting letting states make their decisions.

MR. SNOW: And again, I'm telling you that in this particular case -- we're
talking past each other. What you're saying is that by coming up with a
uniform definition of marriage you're getting in the way of states. It
could be -- it is pretty obvious at this point that there are a number of
judges around the country who are reading into the Constitution something
the President does not believe is there. And furthermore, they are doing it
despite the expressed opinions of people living in those states.

So what is he trying to do? He is acknowledging, more in sorrow than
anything else, that this may in fact require a constitutional amendment,
which is the point. As you know, the Court has been all over the place when
it comes to the death penalty. The reason why is the Court has sort of had
its say now on the death penalty, and it has said everybody can decide.

Q What is the U.S. reaction to the foiled Canada terror plot?

MR. SNOW: Relief. We're very happy that there has been successful
cooperation. It's an international effort, and the Canadian government --
not only relief, but we congratulate Canadian authorities on intercepting
such a plot.

Q Does the administration share in the concern of Republican Chairman Peter
King of the House Homeland Security Committee? He said that there's a
disproportionate number of al Qaeda members in Canada because of liberal
immigration and refugee asylum policies. Do you share that concern?

MR. SNOW: I'm not going to get into characterizing al Qaeda penetration and
alleged al Qaeda penetration in Canada. I think it's worth saying that U.S.
and Canadian authorities have been pretty vigorous in working the
intelligence on this. And as you know, this has become a hot political
issue in Canada. But far be it for me to try to get involved in internal
Canadian politics.

Q How much of a role did the FBI play in this foiled --

MR. SNOW: This was primarily a Royal Canadian Mounted Police operation, and
they kept us in the loop.

Q Just a follow up to that, Tony. Was there any communication between
Ottawa and Washington during this? Has the President spoken to the Canadian
authorities at all?

MR. SNOW: I don't believe he has spoken directly to Canadian authorities. I
think that's probably been done through Homeland Security and the Justice
Department.

Q Canadians are also saying that they're going to send down emissaries in
the next couple of weeks to dispel myths in this country about how bad
Canada is. (Laughter.) As far as you know, is anything planned with the
White House, any officials in the White House getting involved in that?

MR. SNOW: As you know, typically we don't get ahead on the schedule, but,
furthermore, let me tell you I know nothing about it. I just don't know.

Yes, Lester.

Q In Michigan, the Lansing State Journal said that U.S. Senators Stabenow
and Levin "voted in favor of illegality, in favor of border insecurity."
And my question, does the President believe that the Lansing --

MR. SNOW: Lester, last time you asked a question like this, there was this
big splashy thing on WorldNetDaily about what I did or did not believe. I'm
not going to bite on an editorial in the Lansing state paper.

Q Thank you.

MR. SNOW: Thank you.

END 1:05 P.M. EDT
===========================================================================
Return to this article at:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/06/20060605-3.html

 * Origin: (1:3634/12)