Global TV calls Atheists ‘Fanatics’?
Discussion, Press February 18th, 2009Last Sunday evening on Global TV’s investigative television show 16:9 The Bigger Picture, Darryl Konynenbelt reported on our world renowned atheist bus campaign. What did he say? Watch the video below to see for yourself:
I wanted to address some of the things said in the broadcast, I’ll do it in a chronological order to make it easier for those of you that want to watch the video clip and skim through to the parts I reference.
The first part I wanted to briefly discuss begins at 2:04 minutes into the clip. Out of the thousand books on the shelf at the Centre For Inquiry building where Justin Trottier was being interviewed, a book titled The trouble with Christmas is zoomed in on by the videographer. Was it deliberate? Were they trying to imply that atheists are the “party poopers” of Christmas? It might have just been coincidental but nonetheless it’s worthy of being addressed. I do not believe in a God and I think Jesus might have existed but certainly not in the sense that most Christians believe. To the point, Atheists can enjoy mythological holidays just as much as anyone else, we do not believe in the supernatural but that doesn’t mean we can’t celebrate certain festivities. We can appreciate the mythological stories behind them. The artwork in St Paul’s cathedral is still beautiful even without a supernatural god, just as Christmas is enjoyed even if the Jesus story is a myth.
During the interview with Justin, Darryl asked:
“That’s a pretty ballsy statement considering that people who are Jewish, Hindu, Christian are going to be at those bus stops, watching those ads go by and say ‘that doesn’t resonate with me, why did they put it on there?’” (referring to our banner as being ballsy)
Really? Ballsy? I guess that asking people to stop worrying and enjoy their lives is ballsy, I didn’t think it was. In my opinion, advertisements that reference or directly quote the text that many of these religions are based on is ballsy, they’re the ones reading from books full of murder, rape, racism, homophobia, and slavery and teaching that these books are true. If you don’t believe the bible contains any of the mentioned atrocities please take a look for yourself, 1 Chronicles 21:9-14, Leviticus 25:44-46, for more visit evilbible.com. For an all knowing, all powerful God that supposedly is beyond time, he/she/it doesn’t really seem like a loving God to me. One-hundred million dollars of tax money being funded to churches that are also registered charities so they can teach our children these things, now that’s ballsy… and not in a good way.
As for the part where Darryl asks “That doesn’t resonate with me, why did they put it on there?” I didn’t think every advertisement was supposed to resonate or appeal to everyone. I do think that asking people not to worry and to enjoy life might resonate with some, after all, who wants to worry? But don’t flatter yourself, people aren’t donating $40k+ just to make the religious “feel good” or to “resonate” with them. We’re spending the money to raise the profile of atheism, provoke thought and discussion, and promote education about secularism, atheism, humanism, and to also open dialog between the religious and secular world. We think that through education and understanding we can create a better world to live in, and if that resonates with you or makes you feel good, that’s great.
At about 3 minutes into the clip, Reverend David Giuliano mentions:
“It’s so sad that there are people in the world who perceive the presence of god as a source of worry and lack of enjoyment.”
If you told me god was the first cause of the universe and that was it, no more religion after that, no more texts, Bibles, Qurans, etc, I wouldn’t be inclined to think that people should worry or not about god if people went around converting people to believe in a first mover’ism. The problem is that there are so many strings attached to mainstream religions. Many of them expect people to submit to their version of god and to take a submissive role under a father/master head. I.e. you have to believe in Jesus and submit yourself to the lord to be “saved” because God wants to save “us” humans. How narcissistic of these people to think that out of the trillions of planets, stars, and galaxies in the universe, hundreds of billions of which are capable of sustaining life, apparently we’re the centre of the universe and the sole purpose of everything. If there truly was a presence of god that Rev. Giuliano is referring to, the world might be a better place, but the problem is that there is no “presence of god” but people keep thinking there is, leaving it up to oneself to create some sort of delusional presence of god in their mind and kidding themselves into thinking it is the supernatural. Obviously it’s not all bad, some just worship, some even feel convictions to help the less fortunate and needy, but some also fly planes into buildings, kill homosexuals for being born gay, and punish women for being raped under Sharia law.
Despite all of what was mentioned on the show, perhaps one of the most troubling parts comes from Lori Patterson of Halifax Metro Transit. It’s hard to make any conclusive statements about what was said because her clip was heavily edited and cut very close, and in her defense, she might have said something after that validated her statement. The press does seem to want to create controversy where there might not be any; some papers have been adamantly trying to get us to say that we will take Ottawa’s OC Transpo to the supreme court of Canada, something that is not in our plans yet. But back to Ms. Patterson, she said:
“I don’t want to see those ads”.
Everyone obviously has the right to their own opinion but if she really doesn’t want to see those ads then she might want to consider the fact that her opinion is not what counts here, Halifax Metro Transit is a public service funded by public tax dollars, as the TTC has justified our ads, very similar rules apply to Metro Transit as Nova Scotia’s charter is not that different from Ontario’s. Ms. Patterson is not part of the Thought Police from George Orwell’s novel 1984, although she may wish she could be.
And finally, someone gets called a fanatic! Darryl says:
“The ads are getting the evil eye from Lori Patterson of Halifax Metro Transit who doesn’t want to see fanatics target her buses.”
It’s hard to say whether they are stating they don’t want to see fanatics target their buses with ads, calling atheists fanatics, or if they mean that they don’t want someone strapping a bomb to a bus because an ad on it goes around refuting their religion. A clip of Ms. Patterson says “We have to worry about our passengers and our operators” so I tend to think that they were implying they didn’t want to attract the bomb strapping lunatics that apparently run rampant in Canada with the sole intention of hitting Halifax of all places. I’m glad I live in Toronto, a free city that doesn’t bow down to the apparent threat of religious fanaticism but maybe in Halifax the crazies run loose. I highly doubt it, I think the people of Halifax are just as civil as my fellow Canadians in Ontario, but when spokes people like Lori Patterson go around in the public eye stating those types of things, one has to wonder if she realizes she is damaging Halifax’s reputation of being a safe and beautiful city.
—-
Discuss this on our forums at http://atheistbus.ca/forum





February 18th, 2009 at 8:27 pm
It’s a pretty slanted piece. The phrase “the good book” alone shows a pro-Christian bias, because I’m sure not all religions view that book as good, and I certainly think it’s a bad influence. How come we get interviews of different flavours of religiosity, but we don’t get interviews from strong and weak atheists, or agnostic theists, or those who believe in a god, but not in organized religion? How come there are no interviews regarding the free-speech aspect of it? No, this is just another old-media show trying to pump up its ratings with anti-atheist hype. I certainly had never heard of the show until today. Apparently there’s no reason to start watching it.
February 18th, 2009 at 9:11 pm
Hello Chris
I watched the video and read your comments. The video is appalling; it is appalling that Global TV can call 16:9 “investigative” and can allow the reporting to be so biased against the ads. When Darryl Konynenbelt says “I wonder what god thinks about all this?” Konynenbelt’s bias is so obvious.
I wrote Lori Patterson and Mayor Kelly to protest against Metro Transit’s refusal to run the atheist bus ads. I didn’t get a reply, but I didn’t ask for a reply; I just gave both of them my opinion.
Re “It’s hard to say whether they are stating they don’t want to see fanatics target their buses with ads, calling atheists fanatics, or if they mean that they don’t want someone strapping a bomb to a bus because an ad on it goes around refuting their religion.”
This article may be an answer to the question
http://thechronicleherald.ca/Columnists/1106553.html
especially these paragraphs from the article
“A pro-life advocate invited to speak on a Halifax university campus was derailed by members of a group opposed to his philosophy and the parallels he was drawing to Nazi genocide. Mob rule prevailed that night in Halifax, and not for the first time.
Two years ago, when controversial American “race-realist” Jared Taylor tried to give a talk, he was shamefully roughed up by a group of masked, foul-mouthed protestors.”
February 18th, 2009 at 9:36 pm
Thanks Vrnonvron, I read that article.. It’s funny to see the author refer to Halifax Metro as the thought police. Oooh Orwell and 1984, thanks a bunch for sharing I’m going to add that bit to my post.
February 18th, 2009 at 9:54 pm
As Atheists without a corpus of tradition or texts to fall back on, it will be an uphill struggle.
I’m not so sure about the ‘myth’ associations though. Pontius Pilate clearly existed…I guess you can call it historical fiction in referencing Jesus, but…would the story still be around 2009 years later without some word of mouth/ability to reproduce beyond whoever was/was not there?
All that aside, I don’t think we should celebrate those holidays at all, it makes us look like hypocrites. I work on those holidays and I denounce them. I have a bust of Darwin in my house as well, and it inspires me to great things.
Religion will end, reason will prevail, Dawkins and Darwin will lead the world to a new age!
February 18th, 2009 at 10:20 pm
What’s wrong with calling the banner “ballsy”? Ballsy means gutsy or brave, last time I heard anyway. I think a banner stating “There’s probably no god….” qualifies as a brave statement to put out there in front of a god-believing majority. Let’s face it, if the majority of Canadians did not believe in god there would be no need for the banner at all. Any time one presents views that are outside the mainstream and flow against the torrent of popular opinion it takes some guts and bravery. This is why we have so much respect for the accomplishments of people like Dr Emily Howard Stowe who bravely insisted women have the right to vote.
February 18th, 2009 at 10:32 pm
RE Greg#4
“Religion will end, reason will prevail, Dawkins and Darwin will lead the world to a new age!”
Christopher Hitchens was assaulted in Lebanon: http://ace.mu.nu/archives/283102.php
February 18th, 2009 at 11:29 pm
I agree with Randy that the piece was sufficient reason not to start watching the show.
> “The ads are getting the evil eye from Lori Patterson of Halifax Metro Transit who doesn’t want to see fanatics target her buses.”
The use of ‘fanatics’ was clearly an editorial comment by the reporter. I firmly believe that Justin should file a formal complaint with Global TV about the use of the word to describe the ABC’s organisers, and/or its supporters.
February 19th, 2009 at 1:29 am
Hi Chris,
Take heart.
I suppose it might serve us to realize that being ridiculed is part of the package.
I watched the video a few times in order to check my reaction to it, but I am afraid that my first impression still stands.
I find the piece abhorrently immature on the part of Global TV.
The sequencing and editing of the images, the sounds chosen to run underneath, the tone of voice, the body language and facial expressions of the reporter….
I dare say that the whole presentation is very unprofessional.
The one and only intention of the producer in charge here was to ridicule and Darryl Konynenbelt did a very good job of it.
For a news department of Global TV to allow such an approach is far more then just disappointing.
It is profoundly unjust and quite troubling.
February 19th, 2009 at 9:38 am
If anyone is a “fanatic” here it’s the Christian, Muslim and Jew who keep killing each other. These Christians etc. who claim to follow the bible have armies, guns and kill people. If they were true followers of the so-called “WORD” of God they would have sold all their belongings and given everything to the poor. Nobody is following the so-called WORD of God. As long as they support “killing”.
I have been converted. I believe. As long as the Christians, Jews and Muslims have armies – there is no God.
February 19th, 2009 at 10:21 am
I don’t know who they are referring to as fanatics…my first impression was that they feared retaliation against buses with our ads on them by religious “fanatics”.
Yes I don’t think she was calling atheists fanatics, she said she has to worry about her passengers and operators… What a joke, so Canada is such a religious hotbed that people will attack buses with our ad on it?
If thats the case, bring the troops home! We got some buses to protect from religious fanatics here!
This seems so backwards, they won’t display our message because they are afraid of retaliation? Freedom of expression be damned?
February 19th, 2009 at 10:35 am
lol @ Gabriel comments… A Christian or Jew who is randomly killing people in the name of ‘God’ is not really a Christian or Jew… those are either extremist groups that have MISinterpreted ‘The WORD’ and taken THEIR understanding into THEIR own hands or just plan ol crazy folk. You say “These Christians etc. who claim to follow the bible have armies, guns and kill people” what does that even mean? There is no ‘Christian Army’ sure there are plenty of Christians who serve in their countries Army, but that has little to do with Christianity. That’s like saying so many Dr’s misdiagnose ailments, I don’t believe in medicine. Not all Dr’s make the right decisions nor do all Christians live perfectly according to God’s will, we are all human and the flesh is WEAK. Plus, Look at all the non-believers who not only serve in the Army, but some of the most brutal killers have been Atheists (serial killers etc.)
February 19th, 2009 at 10:43 am
You cannot be a “Christian” (follower of Christ) and serve in an army. Period.
Thou shalt not Kill.
Show me where Jesus tells his followers to kill tehir enemy. That seems pretty simple to me. What am I missing ?
Show me a single Christian that is following this example. There are none. None.
None !
February 19th, 2009 at 10:58 am
Glorius: (Sorry for posting this here)
Have you read this before ?
Now a man came up to Jesus and asked, “Teacher, what good thing must I do to get eternal life?”
17″Why do you ask me about what is good?” Jesus replied. “There is only One who is good. If you want to enter life, obey the commandments.”
18″Which ones?” the man inquired.
Jesus replied, ” ‘Do not murder, do not commit adultery, do not steal, do not give false testimony, honor your father and mother,’and ‘love your neighbor as yourself.’”
20″All these I have kept,” the young man said. “What do I still lack?”
21Jesus answered, “If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.”
When the young man heard this, he went away sad, because he had great wealth.
Show me someone who is “living” like this ….
There are none.
February 19th, 2009 at 11:21 am
what a disgusting piece of garbage that show is. Honestly…it really wouldn’t have mattered what they were covering, I’m sure the next episode on landfills will be just as biased and suggestive.
That was like watching a tabloid magazine come to life.
And Patterson was obviously taken out of context, they deliberately left the interpretation of the “fanatics” thing open so that you can easily interpret it as her supposedly saying *we* are those fanatics, which is almost 100% certainly not the case.
However…I was very glad to see my streamers on national television.
February 19th, 2009 at 12:51 pm
Chris,
I watched the video three times and had my husband, also an atheist, watch it for his impression. Neither of us thought the Darryl was referring to atheists as fanatics. It was clear when he used the term that he meant Lori Patterson was concerned religious fanatics might target the buses if religious ads were plastered on their sides. As a matter of fact, she used the word “ads”, plural, and I believe she was referring to the ads that Darryl was proposing.(Remember the ads he showed the Toronto Transit executive?)
I think your headline on this post is completely incorrect and perhaps creates a prejudice about the Global 16:9 piece before anyone has the opportunity to judge it for themselves.
My general impression is that Darryl is treating the subject “tongue in cheek” and does not take the whole subject very seriously. I imagine he is a skeptic like most journalists I know.
It is important to note, as well, that Darryl did tell the story from the beginning and told about the religious ads that prompted the British Humanist Association’s response. The head of the association explained why the ads have been placed on buses and her explanation was treated fairly.
I have no problem with the moderator of the United Church thinking that it is sad people in the world associate worry and sadness with god. His understanding of the Christian message is likely based on a better understanding of justification by faith, which provides a great deal of comfort, peace and happiness to many Christians. (By the way, I was one of them for years and did not leave because I felt Christianity made me miserable. I left because I found that concrete evidence no longer supported my belief and stopped believing the message to be true.)
When Justin states that the ads are not “trying to convince anyone to change their world view” I have to think he isn’t being very honest with himself. One does not tell others what to do, i.e. “now stop worrying” “enjoy your life”, without hoping to have some effect on their world view. He says it’s “coming out of the closet”, but when the ads do not offer any web site or link to an organization or association or anyone inparticular no one is coming out of any closet. It doesn’t say who believes this message. It’s just a message.
Anyway, those are my thoughts on the program for what they’re worth. Please try to be more balanced in your reporting. I think Darryl was.
February 19th, 2009 at 12:57 pm
Gabriel,
Please stick to the topic. Your comments have nothing to do with the Global TV program. Did you watch it?
February 19th, 2009 at 1:15 pm
Yes – it has top do with calling atheist’s “fanatics”. I have attempted to show who the real “fanatics” are. The people who blow up buses and kill people in the name of defending their religious “ideas”. Christians or anybody else that would do this (murder/kill) do not follow the WORD of God – “Thou shalt not kill”
OK ?
February 19th, 2009 at 1:30 pm
Chris,
Sorry, strike the last 2 sentences from my comments to you about the Global TV program. Your post is, after all, a commentary, not a “news report” as such. And in retrospect, Darryl could have treated the subject with a little more sensitivity and less humour, as some do find it hard to laugh at themselves.
February 19th, 2009 at 1:57 pm
OK, Gabriel, you established a weak link with the topic at hand in defining “fanatics”, I suppose, but comment #13? That one has nothing to do with the topic. Mind you, Glorius could be seen as responsible for taking you off topic.
All is forgiven.
Glorius, please stick to topic.
February 19th, 2009 at 2:37 pm
Every man sins, as humans we are born in to sin, nobody is perfect, what matters is what’s in your heart. The point is, if you sin – you ask God for forgiveness. “If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness. If we claim we have not sinned, we make him out to be a liar and his word has no place in our lives.”—I John 1:8-10
You’re absolutely correct that there is no Christian in the world that does not sin, it’s impossible. Making a statement that Christians are fanatics is pretty irresponsible given all the good and love MOST Christians bring to this world. Anyone who sins (whether it’s lying, murdering, cheating etc) and has no ‘remorse’ for what they’ve done – who does not repent and ask for forgiveness – they are not truly saved, therefore are not really Christian. The people who blow up buses, mass murder innocent people, and then claim they are doing so in the name of the Lord… they are without a doubt fanatics and should not reflect Christianity. For example, al qaeda – no Muslim out there considers them a respectable holy Muslim group, they are a group of extremists – fanatics!, Mormon Polygamists – again mainstream Mormonism rejects this way of life – they are fanatics! That being said, you are basically saying because no Christian lives perfectly in God’s will, they are fanatics? And therefore no God???? I just don’t see your point. Secondly you are judging entire faiths based on a minority of people who ‘claim’ to be a part of such faiths… it doesn’t make sense.
February 19th, 2009 at 3:07 pm
Glorious: “thou shalt not kill”
If jesus saw how so-called “Christians” are living today, he would convert to atheism (or at least humanism) . Too many people have been confused by the idea that God is in the heavens (outside somewhere) Jesus says: “The Kingdom of God is within you” Luke 17:21
Is this blasphemy ? According to the High priests. Yes – and Jesus was crucified for it. He said before Abraham was – “I AM” (Jesuis). And the Priests and Romans killed him. He taught to turn the other cheek. Love your enemy. Do we love our enemy ? No, we kill them.
Why are the churches not demanding that all armies be disbanded and all guns be destroyed ? Do you know why ? Money, Money and Money.
Today’s “Christians” love MONEY. They worship Mamon and nothing else.
February 19th, 2009 at 4:08 pm
@ skepticalynda:
“but when the ads do not offer any web site or link to an organization or association or anyone inparticular no one is coming out of any closet. It doesn’t say who believes this message. It’s just a message”
what about the big “atheistbus.ca” website link on the ad graphic. This website links directly to the FAC, and FAC itself spent a lot of time deciding on whether or not we wanted to plaster the ads with websites. Ultimately we decided we wanted as little as possible of that, as these ads are not meant to be part of some membership campaign or gain in any other way solely for the organization involved – it’s about the message first and foremost. It’s about atheists “coming out”, not about organizations.
February 19th, 2009 at 4:15 pm
“First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win.” I’d say we’re at stage 3 of Gandhi’s hierarchy, which I suppose is actually good news.
February 19th, 2009 at 5:04 pm
http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?topic=7423&uid=43994941863
We need to change our ad to read “There is no god” If the theists can say for certainty that there is, then we can say there isn’t!
I was really offended to see that sign!
It read:
GOD DOES EXIST
NOT A PROBABLITY
A SURE THING
PROOF HERE
Besides not being able to spell correctly, I didn’t see the proof. Where is it?
Proof that Sarnia Ontario is backwards and needs the bus ads too!
February 19th, 2009 at 5:25 pm
Tulse,
I think we’ve got a real diction problem going here.
“refute” involves proof.
“ridicule” is not “to correct”
“fight” is not “to discuss”
“ignore” is not “I hope they know what a logical fallacy can do — oh crap, they don’t!”
February 19th, 2009 at 6:48 pm
I cannot believe how practiced the author is at blowing a simple statement out of proportion. I was particularly impressed with the section in which the author of this article thought the video was speaking about ‘fanatics’ strapping themselves with bombs and targeting buses in Halifax. I would just like to say I am an apatheist and I do not like to be associated with atheists who skew and distort others comments on the issue. Also I must say something about the following quote. “I guess that asking people to stop worrying and enjoy their lives is ballsy”. Just a quick point; the ad does NOT ASK, BUT TELLS people who practice religion to stop worrying and enjoy life. Maybe not all religious people worry about the existence of god, and are perfectly content to believe in the existence of an all powerful deity. Personally I do not consider it morally correct for such people to have to see this harassing ad in their public transit system. Nor is it correct to advertise religion at all. I believe people should be free to believe in what they choose without being influenced by outside sources. Only in a perfect world I suppose.
February 19th, 2009 at 7:13 pm
@SkepticaLynda – Chris didn’t say that Global called atheists “fanatics”, if you actually took the time to read the article you would have seen that.
Take notice to the fact that he put a question mark on the end of the title… “Global TV calls Atheists ‘Fanatics’?” I think that Chris would agree that no one called atheists fanatics, although it wasn’t entirely clear in the video clip. Chris said that he thinks they were calling the “bomb strapping lunatics” fanatics, read the last few paragraphs of the post.
Before you articulate big long responses Lynda, perhaps read the article first because Chris clarified and justified the title. Many atheists on a bunch of groups thought that they were calling atheist fanatics, the Halifax Atheist Group thought so but it’s not true, just read the post Chris typed up.
February 19th, 2009 at 9:46 pm
What less would you expect from the trash TV that is 16×9? Virtually every sentence out of Konynenbelt’s mouth was some kind of lame pun. The show is mindless drivel. It certainly isn’t news or journalism of any kind. Simply count the number of representatives interviewed on the atheist side versus those on the other side. I wouldn’t worry about the reaction from the kind of viewership that is watching that garbage.
February 19th, 2009 at 11:48 pm
Mitchell D,
“Personally I do not consider it morally correct for such people to have to see this harassing ad in their public transit system. Nor is it correct to advertise religion at all. I believe people should be free to believe in what they choose without being influenced by outside sources.”
Why?
Why is it immoral to try to convince someone of your point of view? Assuming you are not being completely obnoxious about it, of course. You might just give someone a better way to think about X. Or they might counter with some argument that convinces you that your ideas about X are wrong.
Where’s the problem with that? That along the way someone might just have their feelings hurt? That they might have to consider a long held idea of theirs in new way?
(As for your belief that people should be free from “being influenced by outside sources”, you must realize that by posting your ideas to a blog for the world to read, you are opening up the possibility that you might influence someone to your way of thinking. Careful with that! Someone might get hurt.)
February 20th, 2009 at 1:15 pm
M,
I stand corrected. Up until now, all I had seen were pictures of buses with the banner containing no web addresses. That’s great if the address is there.
Only a statement of philosophy coming from an individual or an organization can be rightly considered a “coming out of the closet”. For example, a statement on a bus such as “Homosexuality is natural and normal” doesn’t out anyone. One has to state “I am a homosexual” or be outted by someone else to be out of the closet.
When I wear my t-shirt with “There’s probably no god” written across the front then I will be making a statement for myself and “out of the closet”, as it were.
February 20th, 2009 at 1:51 pm
Moto,
Your assumptions about my having read the article before commenting are incorrect.
Chris did use a question mark in the headline (I noticed that) and I did read his commentary. He wrote: “It’s hard to say whether they are stating they don’t want to see fanatics target their buses with ads, calling atheists fanatics…”. I disagree with Chris on this. It was rather clear to me, and my husband, that Darryl was talking about religious fanatics who might do damage to the buses, NOT atheists.
It is best to avoid using inflammatory suggestions when desiring to keep a discussion on a rational and civil level. Chris did his readers a disservice by implanting uncertainty in the minds of the viewers before they had an opportunity to watch the video for themselves.
I hope this clarifies my response for you, Moto.
February 20th, 2009 at 3:15 pm
Louis wrote: “Simply count the number of representatives interviewed on the atheist side versus those on the other side.”
I think it is interesting that on the theist side, Darryl only interviewed monotheists. How are Hindus handling the ads? Perhaps Darryl should have interviewed an atheist that was not in favor of the ads as well. We have certainly read some of their comments on this web site.
February 22nd, 2009 at 5:38 pm
“He who experiences the unity of life sees his own Self in all beings, and all beings in his own Self, and looks on everything with an impartial eye.”
Buddha