There is something about Christmas time that brings about delusions: innocent ones, such as children who cling to the belief that Santa Claus exists, and the not-so innocent Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad who thinks the Holocaust is a myth.

This week Iran played host to the verbosely titled, "International Conference to Review the Global Vision of the Holocaust," an event vociferously condemned by Muslim groups such as CAIR. The logic of the conference - if one can make sense of it - is that "if the holocaust is questioned officially, then the existence of the Zionist regime will also be questioned," as Iranian Foreign Minister Manuchehr Mottaki claims.

Organizers insist, however, that the conference is not about denying the events of the Holocaust at all. Rasoul Mousavi, the head of the Foreign Ministry's Institute for Political and International Studies, which is hosting the conference, said the conference "seeks neither to deny or prove the Holocaust. It is just to provide an appropriate scientific atmosphere for scholars to offer their opinions in freedom about an historical issue."

But the motley group of speakers suggest the event is anything but scientific. Despite being one of the most documented events in human historythe US Holocaust Museum has 37 million pages of archival material, 74,000 photographs and 1,000 hours of video documentationthe Iran conference has drawn on such "experts" as David Duke, the former Imperial Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan who advocates white separatism and refers to whites as the "genetic elite."

Other speakers include a Toronto based professor Shiraz Dossa who apparently failed to understand the ambiguous title of the conference and noted, " I did not know exactly who was coming to the conference, and frankly, I think these people are hacks and lunatics."

Despite claims of the conference being balanced, no reports indicate if any Holocaust survivors - or credible historians for that matter - were present at the event, although Borat, the unabashedly anti-Semitic star of the eponymous film, claimed his character was in Iran attending the "Holocaust Denial Conference" after he was nominated for a Golden Globe.

Supporters for the conference argue that the conference is not anti-Semitic because of the presence of various Jewish groups, including the ultra-orthodox groups Neturei Karta (who are actually anti-Israel rather than anti-Holocaust), though many in Iran still remain concerned about what the conference will do to Iran's historic Jewish community. The popular blog Iranian Truth suggests Ahmadinejad focus on the lingering human rights abuses within his own country while, in a rare demonstration in Tehran, students expressed their outrage over Ahmadinejad by chanting "death to the dictator."

Soon Iranians will weigh in on Ahmadinejad's tenure in an upcoming vote, though it is unknown how they will assess a man who is simultaneously loathed and admired, often by the same people. But as outsiders attempt to call his bluff (while the American military is too bogged down to do much of anything), Ahmadinejad will someday have to let on as to what he hoped to practically achieve.

Here is an interesting article someone forwarded to me:

World War II casualties and Holocaust
by Shah N. Khan

World War II was one of the most deadliest conflicts in the History of mankind. The total estimated loss of life caused by it, is about 62 million people out of that the military toll was about 25 million. Out of 62 Million dead about 10% i. e. 5,754,000 were Jews and the deaths of all of them attributed as Holocaust or genocide of Jews by Nazis. But among the 8 Million Germans killed in World War 2 only 160, 000 were German Jews. Almost 11% of total German population was wiped out due to bombing . air-raids and attacks by Allied Forces.

The Allies lost around 51 million people, and the German Axis lost 11 Million. Soviets losses were the heaviest and the number of their deaths exceeded 23 Million out of which only one million were Soviet Jews.

After occupying Czechoslavikia, Poland , Hungry and other European countries Germans had adopted ruthless measures to crush resistance. In search operations for they resorted to collective punishment of entire village or communities oftne torturing and killing people and herded many relatives of suspected freedom fighters, their friends regardless of their faith, to concentration camps.

Beisdes the camps for Prisoners of War, Germans had also established camps not only for Jews but also Christians for forced labor in occupied terrotories. Most of the deaths in camps are said to be due to carpet bombing by Allied Forces.

See detailed figures of casualties at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_World_War_II_casualties_by_country

Part 2 of article:

Victims of Japanese war crimes totaling 5.4 million and deaths related to the Soviet annexations in 1939-40. Civilian losses in the postwar era ( 1946-47) due to famine and disease are not included with these losses.

The allegations of organized genocide by Nazis were refuted by many independent observers but Zionist propaganda machinery was set up to gain sympathy of people in Europe and America for a Zionist State as for centuries the Christians hated Jews because of the role played by Jews in crucifying Jesus Christ.

Zionist formed The Holocaust History Project to propagate and to respond to the claims of Holocaust-deniers. Their web site contains archive of documents, photographs, recordings, and essays relating to the Holocaust. Skeptics have continued to allege distortion and exaggeration and fabrications of stories about holocaust.

Last year Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had expressed his skeptism about the Zionist propaganda for Holocaust. This year in December he inaugurated a two-day Holocaust conference in Tehran. The scholars from 30 different countries including several Orthodox Jews attended the conference to discuss how many Jewish people actually died and what it all means for the current state Middle East politics. A scholar belonging to the group "Jews United Against Zionism" Rabbi Yisroel Dovid Weiss said, "the Zionists are taking this terrible, horrific tragedy that happened by [to] Jews" in order to "use it for a political end to build Ö a state, something that is the antithesis, the contradiction to everything that is Godly."

French researcher Robert Faurisson, in a speech to conference guests, insisted more evidence of the Holocaust was needed. "Otherwise, it is no more than a belief," he said. Most of the speakers agreed that most of the historical accounts of the holocaust published in the West are exaggerated, distorted and even fabricated.

Part 3 of article:

Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki has characterized the Conference as a gathering of truth-seekers and said the rejection and disapproval towards it was against the International norms of free expression. Mottaki added that anti-Semitism was purely a western phenomenon. "In the Islamic lands, there has never been such phenomenon as anti-Semitism," he said.

Israel, Germany and the United States a few other Western leaders have condemned the conference.

The journalists in Iran and other Muslim countries have condemned the condemnations of this conference by the Western leaders and said while they provide lip service to freedom of expression and allow publication of blasphemous literature in their countries they do not tolerate even discussions about the veracity of the accounts of holocaust and in Germany and some other European countries they have even outlawed the criticism/denial of holocaust.

Shah N. Khan

Irfan, this article that you've posted in three segments does not do a good job of arguing something, in a purely pedagogical sense. I believe it is trying to argue in favor of the kind of scholarship that was present at the Iranian conference, but it does a horrible job of it. You strike me as doubting several things about the Holocaust, and maybe even that the Holocaust happened. It's a shame that you've let your anger at Zionism completely cloud your judgement, and accept ignorant positions that you otherwise wouldn't dream of.

The essence of the Holocaust is the way in which the 5,754,000 Jews were killed, with the utmost knowledge and involvement of so many German and European industries, bureaucracies, and ordinary citizens, and in such a systematic hands-on fashion. The percentages of populations listed in the article don't include the percentage of the total Jewish population of each country, that was killed by Nazis. That might be revealing to you. The article did show how deadly and terrible WWII was. There were many atrocities committed. However, nothing compares to the Holocaust and the sustained level of institutionalized, commercialized killing of a single religious group.

In my opinion the Holocaust does not justify the Nakba. And the Nakba is not the Holocaust.
Thus, there is no need to deny the holocaust or question it's established truth, to recognize, show solidarity with, or rectify, the Nakba.

In my opinion the Holocaust does not justify the Nakba. And the Nakba is not the Holocaust.
Thus, there is no need to deny the holocaust or question it's established truth, to recognize, show solidarity with, or rectify, the Nakba.

exactly

Looking at the tables in Wikipedia about deaths. Where's Algeria, Morocco, Senegal and all the other African and very muslim countries that were involved in this war? There are many muslims in eastern Europe but no figures about them. There has definitely been some misinformation about the war for propoganda purposes.

Guys, the Holocaust claims do not add up and many academics and highly educated people have questioned the accuracy and impartiality of the claims. Among these people are professors, doctors, historians and other professions. I am not anti-Jews, the fact is the loss of even one life is one too many but we are dealing with a historical event that must be investigated in details to give us the best knowledge and insight of the elements and mechanisms that caused the disaster. They say past is the blue print of the future and the more we know about the past the better we may be able to prevent such events in the future.

There are many valid questions raised by the revisionists that simply have been brushed under carpet by the authorities, the question is why? Why the Jewish organisations can investigate the Holocaust but it is a taboo for non-Jewish organisations and researches? Take a look at some of the revisionist sites (like http://vho.org/Intro/GB/Flyer.html ) and read their arguments for yourself and judge for yourself if their questions are irrational.

Revisionists claim ìNot a single autopsied body has been shown to have been gassedî, well is it true? If not why the authorities do not discuss this with the revisionists face to face and release the result of the autopsies and debunk this claim?

Revisionists also argue that ìThe mainstream book compiles its figures by simply subtracting the number of Jews alive in Europe a few years after the war from those alive in Europe several years before the war. It ignores that the Jewish population in America, Israel, and other countries outside of Europe had increased by almost six million in this period of time, as a result of a new Exodus. Thus, those who had left Europe were simply declared to be Holocaust victimsî, is this true? Why the Holocaust authorities let open discussions on these subjects and present their records and debunk this claim?

These are only a few sample questions if you read the revisionists publications and websites you will see for yourself how rational and reasonable most questions are. I have been educated and taught not to accept anything on the face-value, why am I asked and expected to accept the holocaust on the face-value?

Re: Iran's conference on the Holocaust is an exercise in spite and self-indulgence (not to mention a denial of history) that is so audacious that it's almost funny. Almost.

Funny or not if you look at the delegates you will see that the number of the Jewish delegates out numbered other groups, doesnít that tell you something?

Funny or not if you look at the delegates you will see that the number of the Jewish delegates out numbered other groups, doesnít that tell you something?

The article didn't claim this conference was anti-semitic. It claimed it was pointless.

Re: The article didn't claim this conference was anti-semitic. It claimed it was pointless.

I think my first post clearly demonstrates that I (like many others) do not think Holocaust research is pointless, it is a well overdue job that needed to be done almost 60 years ago right after the war.

By the way, what the article fails to mention is that the conference was to study the grounds for a research on Holocaust (it was a feasibility study, not an actual study of the Holocaust itself at this stage) and it was decided by the delegates that the study is well overdue. Several committees are to be setup soon each studying different issues. Whether Iran is the best place to host these seminars I am not sure, but as other countries impression their nationals for even discussing the subject then Iran may be the only place.

Kiumars2000,
I believe that you are correct when you say that you should not "accept anything on the face-value." I believe everyone should question the facts they know, and the historical narratives they grew up with. But are you really questioning the historical narrative you grew up with? I think not. I think you are going along with a prominent fiction that many people in Iran, and unfortunately many in the Muslim world, believe. Try reading any "conventional" scholarship in addition to claims of the revisionists. I've read both, and I found it to be enlightening.

You are not "expected to accept the holocaust on the face-value," as you claim. This concept of "face-value" doesn't seem to take into account the copious amounts of evidence, much of which is actual Nazi records and documents, all readily available to the public, in both it's original forms and in numerous summations. Today, many European countries (those who were actually involved in perpetrating the Holocaust) have debates about the moral and ethical acceptability of much of the data gathered from forced Nazi medical experiments on live Jewish prisoners in the camps (involving human toleration of heat and cold, pain, drowning, etc.), while you are stuck believing that's it's all just a western hoax to take Palestinian land.

There is legitimate scholarship which questions the uses of the Holocaust in modern politics, and claims of some survivors. I would invite you to read some of Norman Finkelstein's work on this. It is much different than attempting to deny the existence of gas chambers, concentration camps, etc...

I will try to restate the sentiment with which I ended my first post. The Zionist logic which holds that Jews deserve the land of Palestine because of the Holocaust, is a flawed logic. But if you feel that this requires you to deny the Holocaust in order to oppose Israel, than you've unwittingly accepted this flawed Zionist logic. Do you see this? I support free speech unconditionally, and thus I think that you and anyone else should believe and speak as they choose. And you should also bear the consequences of your free speech, and what it makes others think of you.

Here is another interesting article. Note, I am not a Holocaust Denier. Im just forwarding this information which I feel is important for people to get the whole picture. I agree with Jakey that Norman Finkelstein's work is important to know as well.

Holocaust Denial or Smart Move?

By Chris Voidis

Why would a man of obvious intelligence, as President Ahmedinejad of Iran surely is, want to provoke the West by inspiring a conference meant to look at the Holocaust? What is really behind
the 'Review of the Holocaust: Global Vision' conference?

Throughout Western media, from the day this conference was announced until today, and for many more days to come I am sure, nowhere is this question asked: Why is this conference being held? Rather, we see a lot of fingers pointing at Mr. Ahmedinejad's 'obvious' anti-Semitism and Holocaust denial. Furthermore, it is taken for granted that this is the case. President Ahmedinejad cannot be anything else other than an anti-Semite who is bent on exterminating the Jews living in Israel.

Yet, no one has bothered to ask why he doesn't start with the 30 000 or so Jews living in Iran. Why doesn't he start, for example, with Moris Motamed, an Iranian Jew who just happens to sit in Iran's Parliament. How did he get to be a member of the Iranian Parliament, anyway? Was he elected? I thought there was no democracy in Iran. Hmmmm.

Could it be that Mr. Ahmedinejad is not interested in picking up where Hitler left off? After all, it wouldn't be all that difficult to kill 30 000 people. Look at Iraq. Unless of course he is afraid that the whole world would spring into action. After all, we all know that the life of one Jew is worth the life of a thousand Muslims. Right? To kill 30 thousand Iranian Jews would mean killing the equivalent of 30 million people. The world would most certainly not allow that. Right?

What if Mr. Ahmedinejad is doing one of the most sane things in the world? What if he is merely calling the West's bluff? Remember a while back, how the Islamic world was up in arms over the publication of a cartoon depicting the prophet Muhammed? People in the West pointed to Islamic reaction and said "See, these people are backward. Look at how they react to something as self evident as freedom of speech."

part 2 of article:

Well, it seems to me that Mr. Ahmedinejad has made a fool of the West by tricking us into behaving in the same way. Mr. Ahmedinejad pinpointed the one thing that would stir up controversy in the West. Just as it is a sacrilege to depict the prophet for Islam, so it is a sacrilege to question the Holocaust in the west. Being an intelligent man, and knowing full well that the Holocaust happened, Mr. Ahmedinejad has not questioned the Holocaust itself. Rather, he questioned the myth that has grown around it and how it has been used by Israel and the West in order to deny the rights of the
Palestinians. A smart move by the President of Iran.

I don't think that Mr. Ahmedinejad believes that some new evidence will be brought forth that will help the world see that the Holocaust did not happen. He himself knows that it did. What he wanted to achieve with this conference he did: he got the Western media and governments to overreact and by this to show the Islamic world that the West is untrustworthy and carries a
double standard when it comes to Muslims. It can offend them at will, but they will not stand for their 'holy taboos' to be questioned.

Surely the West is now behaving as if a taboo has been broken. Perhaps this is a good opportunity for people in the West to reflect on the necessity of respecting the taboos of other people, and to see that they serve a purpose and are not just there because people are 'backward'. Also, it may help us to question our own taboos. What if the Holocaust has been used as a weapon against the Palestinians? Is that an impossibility? What if a mythology has been built around the death of 6
million Jews? There's no denying, to my mind, that millions of Jews were killed, but how has this fact been used ever since? Has it been used to beat people into submission? Has it been used to intimidate North Americans especially, into an uncritical attitude towards Israel for fear of being called anti-Semites and racists? Perhaps. It may not be such a bad thing for us to think about these thingsÖ

Irfan, though I find its tone off-putting at times, I think that this article is a good one! Thanks for sharing. I disagree with the following excerpt from the middle:

"Mr. Ahmedinejad has not questioned the Holocaust itself. Rather, he questioned the myth that has grown around it... A smart move by the President of Iran. I don't think that Mr. Ahmedinejad believes that some new evidence will be brought forth that will help the world see that the Holocaust did not happen. He himself knows that it did."

Does he know that it did? I'm not convinced that he does. Was this "a smart move by the President of Iran"? I'm convinced that it was not. Though this article astutely points out the contradiction between the Western cries for free speech during the Danish cartoon row, and the Western stance against free speech with regards to the latest conference, I believe Ahmedinajad failed to portray this contradiction as the centerpiece of his actions. Thus the poignancy of the contradiction was largely overlooked in the west.

As for the position of the 30,000 Jews in Iran and the other Iranian minorities (Baha'is, etc...) , things are not always as nice as this article makes them appear.

Jakey (Dec 19, 2006, 7:33 pm), This is going to be a 3 part post I am afraid. Part1.
Re: Questioning the historical values we have grown up with.
History is written by the conquerors and does not reflect the truth most of the time, history books are full of lies and deceptions but we can eliminate lots of the lies by an analytical approach to history, and that is what I am suggesting here. I may not like the outcome but my liking or dislike does not change the facts and I personally prefer to know the facts rather than rapping myself in the deceptions and lies made for me. I think deep down we all know the truth when we see it but we donít want to accept it for the reasons well known to us. (PS: I have learned not to trust the works of ìConventional Scholarsî if their works cannot be openly analysed and questioned by other free-thinking researches.).

Re: I think you are going along with a prominent fiction that many people in Iran, and unfortunately many in the Muslim world, believe.

To prove something is a fiction or fact we have to research it, right? Otherwise how else are we going to find out?

Re: I've read both, and I found it to be enlightening.
I have read both sides too but I am afraid I have not been able to decide which camp is telling the truth. I would like to see them sitting face to face defending their claims & views and debunking the other sideís claims. Is this unreasonable? Isnít this what we do in all other social / cultural/ economical and scientific discussions?

Re: copious amounts of evidence.
If you read the website link I posted before you will see that they actually claim that ìIt is often claimed that there are "tons" of captured German documents proving the Jewish genocide. When challenged on this, however, only a handful of documents are produced, the authenticity or interpretation of which is highly questionable. If pressed for reliable documentation, it is then claim that the Germans destroyed all the relevant documents to hide their evil deeds, or the absurd claim is made that the Germans used code language, whispered verbal orders, or conveyed orders through a meeting of minds. As a matter of fact, all available documentation and material traces indicate that there was no order for a mass murder of Jews, no plan, no budget, no weaponóthat is, no gas chamberóand no victimóthat is, not a single autopsied body has been shown to have been gassed.î

Part 2:
They also claim ìWeíve all seen "The Photographs." Endlessly. Newsreel photos taken by U.S. and British photographers at the liberation of the German camps, and especially the awful scenes at Dachau, Buchenwald, and Bergen-Belsen. For instance, look at the one at the top of this leaflet. These photos and films are usually presented in a way in which it is either stated or implied that the scenes resulted from deliberate German policies. The photographs are real, but their interpretation is false.î. Revisionists claim that close investigation of the photos showed that they died of typhus and cholera!

Well, I am not a doctor and cannot accept these claims on face value and would like these people sit face to face and discuss these issues, what is wrong with that? so far the only explanation I have come across for avoiding open independent investigations into the Holocaust are ìmoral and ethicalî issues and excuses like ìthe survivals and the relatives of the victims get upset by being reminded of the tragedy!î.

Since the Holocaust we have witnessed many acts of genocide and mass murder of people in the world all of which have been openly discussed and investigated. The last three genocides, namely; Balkans, Iraq and Darfur are still under investigation and I am sure we can agree that they are not far less horrific than the Holocaust despite the number of the casualties.

So why only Holocaust is closed to open investigations? Iraqi and Balkansí Muslims are still digging the ground to find the remains of their relatives killed by the tyrants in the most horrific manners. These people not only do not want to forget the murder but trying to put together every piece of evidence to find out what really happened to their beloved ones and prosecute every individuals involved in the crime! Are we going to believe that these people are different to the Jewish survivals and the families of the Jewish victims or is this just an excuse? I am not convinced yet.

Re: while you are stuck believing that's it's all just a western hoax to take Palestinian land.
Did I say anything to indicate that assumption? Did I say anything about the Palestinians? It is you who is linking the Holocaust with Palestine not me! All I am saying is that I want to see Holocaust investigated openly by impartial people.

Part 3:
Re: And you should also bear the consequences of your free speech, and what it makes others think of you.

Freedom of thinking and [removed]within a responsible framework, i.e. expressing yourself without insulting other peopleís views and beliefs) has been the biggest achievement of the mankind. A few centuries ago people were burned to death for saying ìEarth is not flatî. (Even these days there are people who still believe that Earth is flat, and they are free to think anything they want as long as they do not set fire to me! (See the Flat Earth Society http://www.alaska.net/~clund/e_djublonskopf/Flatearthsociety.htm ).

People are free to believe anything they want as long as they do not impose those beliefs on others. The main aim of a true scientist / researcher is to find the truth and he/she do not think about what people may say or think about them, if that was the case we would still believe that earth was flat.

Kiumars2000, thanks for the in-depth response. I'm gonna try to be brief because I agree with you on several things, but I want to emphasize a few points in this, the last comment that I'm going to be posting on this topic.

History is written by the conquerors, as you point out, and the only way to begin to reach any conclusion about a contentious topic is to have research and open debate about it. As such, I will always support free speech unconditionally, and I think that outlawing Holocaust denial or revisionist scholarship infringes on free speech, and is wrong. Everyone should be able to express themselves, as we have here.

I believe that there is ample research to determine any historical questions that could arise about the Holocaust. Most of it is Nazi German records, memoirs, and surviving infrastructure. Nobody had debates about the Holocaust "face to face...debunking the other side's claims" (Part 1) in the years immediately following the war, because there wasn't any concept of there being 'two sides to the issue,' nor was there any debate to be had. I, like you, agree that it would be productive to have debates now. In my opinion, revisionist scholarship in this area is terribly argued and disingenuously researched.

You say, "I think deep down we all know the truth when we see it but we donít want to accept it for the reasons well known to us." (Part 1) If revisionists were correct, I know why I might not want to accept the truth. If "conventional" scholars are correct, do you know why you don't want to accept the truth?
It was I who made the apparently faulty assumption that your views on this topic had a link to Palestine and the Nakba. If they don't, then I'm amazed by your enthusiastic embrace of your intellectual duties... in the face of all the gut feelings and emotional reactions that arise when confronted with such upsetting videos, pictures, and survivor stories, you hold firm to your beliefs in historical debate, and the need to question all that is presented as fact.

Jakey (Dec 20, 2006, 8:34 pm),
I can see that we are making some progress here; can you see how easily we reached a common ground after a brief discussion? The same will apply to the conventional and revisionist camps and if they sit and discuss the issues face to face they can clear lots of the issues off the table. As they say ìyou cannot solve the problem by ignoring itî.

Jakey, as you can see from my previous posts I read your posts carefully line by line and replied to them one by one but you donít seem to have read my posts carefully judging by your replies. You assume that anyone who questions the Holocaust is anti-Jew and you fail to recognise the fact that many of the revisionists are Jews themselves. I am sure there are different interests among the revisionists but my only interest is finding the truth.

The last paragraph of your last post clearly indicates your state of mind and reasoning. As I said before I am a scientist (in so far as I have degrees in Science and Technology and I have worked a relatively long time in an industry that runs purely on science and Engineering). I have learned to ignore the gut feelings and emotional reactions that cannot be backed by logical thinking and reasoning. If I involve or apply my gut feelings and emotions at work I will be sacked immediately as they are not recognised as reliable sources where I work.

Scientist and Historians have two different definitions for fact. A statement like ìWater boils at 100 degree centigrade under one atmosphere pressureî is a scientific fact, a scientific fact can be experimented by anyone anywhere and always have/return the same result. What we know as Historical facts on the other hand are always subject to interpretation of the available information and are not the only answer or interpretation of the event. The more we know about a historical event the closer we get to truth.

Mankind has made many wrong assumptions in the past, ranging from ìEarth being flatî to ìwitches flying on broomsî (Which interestingly enough was backed by eye-witnesses at the time and resulted in slaughter of many innocent people!). Maybe that is why I do not intend to rely on gut feelings and emotional reactions.

I promise, this will be the last post.

Kiumars2000, not only did I read all of your posts carefully, I googled your name and read your posts on other websites too.

These comments that I've copied below (word for word) are the ones that you made for a video on Youtube. Unless there is another Kiumars2000 out there, I would say that the following throws all of your commentary into perspective:


Kiumars2000 (1 week ago)
Fuck! If I knew this was a jewish site I would never join the shit!I am back to Google.
Kiumars2000 (2 weeks ago)
My lost comment about him being a Jew moneky was not published! is this a Jewish site?
Kiumars2000 (2 weeks ago)
He is neither a Turk nor a Kurd; he is a monkey performing for the Jews. He had a concert In Israel for entertaining those who kill his fellow muslim brothers and sisters on daily basis! Shame on you Ibrahim, I spit on you and wish you die in pain, the kind of pain our brothers and sisters suffer in the occupied lands everyday. The worst enemy is the enemy inside.