whilimena | 12 July, 2006 21:48
The United States is a very large ship - powerful and rich.
It is the world's largest facilitator of the needs of mendicants. These Third World beggars with their complaisance, contribute to the suffering of many US citizens and others around the world.
From time to time elements who call themselves ' The Enterprise' try to keep the ship afloat by pulling off a Survival Scam. However, in most of the scams, the beneficiaries are of the same 'families'; and the outcome of the said scam does not necessarily benefit the entire ship.
The United States government is made up of a lot of honorable men and women. But the two tribes 'Republicans and Democrats' have elements within who are bent to making 'fast moves' to succeed.
Most definitely people will 'take exception' to being called 'tribesmen'. But let's face it, don't we'all act that way?
If the Republicans are in power, most Republicans condone anything the Republican party does. If the Democratic party is in power, most Democrats condone anything the democratic party does.
This sort of blindness is uncanny. In fact in most countries today, the populace place their tribal leaders on pedestals like great Gods.
The Middle East is the 'feeding tree' for elements who want bogeymen.
The 1993 bombing of the WTC demonstrate that the FBI had something to do with it.
THE NEW YORK TIMES
Thursday October 28, 1993 Page A1
"Tapes Depict Proposal to Thwart
Bomb Used in Trade Center Blast"
By Ralph Blumenthal
Law-enforcement officials were told that terrorists were building
a bomb that was eventually used to blow up the World Trade Center,
and they planned to thwart the plotters by secretly substituting
harmless powder for the explosives, an informer said after
the blast.
The informer was to have helped the plotters build the bomb
and supply the fake powder, but the plan was called off by
an F.B.I. supervisor who had other ideas about how the informer,
Emad Salem
The account, which is given in the transcript of hundreds of
hours of tape recordings that Mr. Salem secretly made of his
talks with law-enforcement agents, portrays the authorities as
being in a far better position than previously known to foil
the February 26th bombing of New York City's tallest towers.
The explosion left six people dead, more than a thousand people
injured, and damages in excess of half-a-billion dollars.
Four men are now on trial in Manhattan Federal Court
[on charges of involvement] in that attack.
Mr. Salem, a 43-year-old former Egyptian Army officer, was used
by the Government [of the United States] to penetrate a circle
of Muslim extremists who are now charged in two bombing cases:
the World Trade Center attack, and a foiled plot to destroy
the United Nations, the Hudson River tunnels, and other
New York City landmarks. He is the crucial witness in the
second bombing case, but his work for the Government was
erratic, and for months before the World Trade Center blast,
he was feuding with th F.B.I.
Supervisor `Messed It Up'
After the bombing, he resumed his undercover work. In an
undated transcript of a conversation from that period,
Mr. Salem recounts a talk he had had earlier with an agent
about an unnamed F.B.I. supervisor who, he said,
"came and messed it up."
"He requested to meet me in the hotel,"
Mr. Salem says of the supervisor.
"He requested to make me to testify, and if he didn't
push for that, we'll be going building the bomb with
a phony powder, and grabbing the people who was
involved in it. But since you, we didn't do that."
The transcript quotes Mr. Salem as saying that he wanted to
complain to F.B.I. Headquarters in Washington about the
Bureau's failure to stop the bombing, but was dissuaded by
an agent identified as John Anticev.
Mr. Salem said Mr. Anticev had told him,
"He said, I don't think that the New York people would
like the things out of the New York Office to go to
Washington, D.C."
Another agent, identified as Nancy Floyd, does not dispute
Mr. Salem's account, but rather, appears to agree with it,
saying of the `New York people':
"Well, of course not, because they don't want to
get their butts chewed."
______________________
The 1993 World Trade Center Bombing
On February 26, 1993, a car bomb at the World Trade Center in New York City, New York, exploded, killing six people, injurning thousands and causing extensive damage.
The FBI quickly arrested four radical Muslims, who were convicted in 1994. More members of the radical group were tried beginning January 16, 1995, for a wide-ranging plot of terrorist attacks.
One reason the FBI was able to act so quickly is that an FBI informant was the one who built the bomb. The U.S. government paid the informant, Emad Salem, $1 million for his testimony. Salem tape-recorded conversations with the bombing suspects. Unbeknown to the FBI, Salem also recorded his conversations with them.
The FBI benefited greatly from the World Trade Center bombing. In particular, the bombing resulted in the proposal of the 1995 Counterterrorism Bill greatly expanding federal authorities' budgets and powers.
From a December 1993 post by Terry Atwood:
"Tucked away on page A5 of the Washington Times for Wednesday, December 15 is a tiny article about tape transcripts of a conversation between the FBI informant, Emad Salem, and his controller, FBI agent John Anticev. As you may already know, Salem is a former Egyptian army officer hired by the FBI to infiltrate (or organize?) a terrorist group here in the U.S. In April, two months after the bombing, when the taped conversation took place, Anticev asked Selem to justify his expenses. Salem defended his expense report by saying that his usual expenditures were pushed up by the costs of building the trade center bomb. He acknowleged procuring the materials (at government expense) and personally building the bomb."
March 8, 1995, San Francisco Chronicle article, "New York Terror Trial Witness Tells What a Liar He Was," and post by Terry Atwood.
__________________
The 1996 Anti-Terrorism Act
The Effective Death Penalty and Anti-Terrorism Act of 1996 gave extensive new authority to federal law enforcement agencies, one of many steps on the long march to a police state. The 1993 World Trade Center bombing was the initial impetus behind the bill. The Alfred Murrah Federal Building bombing in Oklahoma City created bipartisan support for the bill at a time when it was being stalled by civil liberties advocates. Activists managed to hold the bill off for another year, but it was finally passed in April 1996.
S. 390 was introduced February 10, 1995 by Sen. Joe Biden, D-Delaware, and Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pennsylvania. H.R. 896 was introduced the same day in the House by Rep. Charles Schumer, D-New York, and Rep. Dicks.
The bill passed the Senate in June 1995, but was held up in the House by intense lobbying by what was called "an unusual coalition" of gun rights groups and civil liberties organizations. Such coalitions are unusual in the traditional right-left frame of mind, but not in the libertarian movement.
The bill finally passed the House in March 1996, and was signed into law in April 1996.
The Law
The Center for National Security Studies issued an excellent [WWW]analysis of the bill, along with information on the [WWW]FBI and [WWW]trends.
The National Coalition Against Repressive Legislation summarized the bill in 1995 and the law as finally passed in 1996. NCARL and others raised important criticisms:
Presumed guilty, secret evidence can be used
Permanent resident aliens arrested under this law have to prove they should not be held in jail before trial. Secret evidence can used in the detention hearings and at trial that only the judge could see, not the defendant.
First Amendment protections weakened.
The law lifts a 1994 Crime law restriction prohibiting the FBI from investigations based on speech or beliefs, when restricting humanitarian aid. Foreigners can be barred from speaking in the U.S. using McCarthy era McCarran-Walter Act provisions. An overbroad definition of terrorism virtually requires the Justice Department to select crimes to prosecute based on political beliefs and associations.
Presidential powers expanded.
The President can label organizations -- without any appeal or review -- as "terrorist", and criminalize fundraising for humanitarian aid even remotely related to such groups.
Punishment for lawful actions.
Permanent resident aliens can be deported or indefinitely jailed for their affiliations or political activity, with no judicial review.
Constitutional protections eroded.
The law further restricts the Bill of Rights' habeas corpus protections for state prisoners. Although this is a terrorism law, and death-row inmates were used to justify this provision, this affects all state prisoners, and no one convicted of federal terrorism laws. Prisoners are required to prove the state acted "unreasonably," a tough legal standard that isn't met simply by having credible evidence of innocence or wrongful imprisonment. Prisoners will be limited to one federal appeal within a short time of exhausting state appeals. Federal courts are required to render decisions within six months, and can't overrule state courts' interpretations of constitutional law.
More spending (meaning higher taxes and debt), and more police abuses.
The law authorizes $1 billion in new federal spending over five years. The amount includes an additional $100 million for one of the most terroristic organizations in the United States, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms.
Further restrictions on financial privacy.
The law requires banks to identify any domestic "agents" (undefined) of groups labeled as terrorist, and freeze their funds with no right of appeal.
The original bill contained a provision, supported by the Clinton administration, lifting the historical "Posse Comitatus" restriction on the U.S. military working with domestic police. The provision did not make it into the final version. (That would come years later.)
The law creates an oversight commission for federal police agencies. Even though the commission has no subpoena power and can only make recommendations, then-FBI Director Louis Freeh lobbied against the bill based on this one provision.
The Critics
On April 24, 1995, the American Civil Liberties Union issued a press release quoting their Executive Director Ira Glasser,
In past times of tragedy and fear, the government has harassed, investigated and arrested innocent people solely because of their race, religion, national origin, speech or political beliefs. In the 1920 Palmer raids, thousands were improperly arrested and jailed in 33 cities as a response to a frightening wave of bombings. People were summarily deported based on their national origin and their political association. During World War II, the federal government committed what is now universally seen as an act of racism and war hysteria when it incarcerated Japanese-American citizens. In the 1950s, legitimate fears of Soviet threats were used to convert dissent into disloyalty. People were spied upon and punished on the basis of political beliefs and associations instead of criminal evidence. In the turbulent 1960s, the government again engaged in widespread infiltration and surveillance of organizations opposed to the Vietnam war and those trying to win equality for African-Americans. Again, normal standards of criminal evidence were abandoned; instead, race and political beliefs became a cause for suspicion.
We must now try to avoid that same mistake. The government should certainly investigate vigorously based on criminal evidence. But no one should be targeted because they believe in the Second Amendment, or belong to far right organizations. No matter how much we may disagree with some of those organizations, we must not target people associated with them in the absence of credible evidence of criminal conduct.
Vince Miller, Director of the International Society for Individual Liberty, said the following in an April 26, 1995, message to LiberNet:
The "Counter-Terrorism Bill" however, concentrates enormous police powers in a domestic equivalent of the National Security Council, and gives the President tremendous arbitrary power to declare who is a domestic or overseas "terrorist" -- a decision which this legislation says shall not be subject to appeal! The bill authorizes secret trials for citizens and immigrants who are merely accused of lending support (including humanitarian aid) to domestic or international "terrorist" organizations, and these accusations may be made by anonymous informants.
The bill says that individuals arrested under this act may be declared ineligible for bail, may be detained indefinitely until trial, and will be considered guilty until proven innocent -- the direct opposite of American principles of justice that have protected the freedom of innocent people for over two hundred years.
If the individual cannot somehow prove his or her innocence, than he will be summarily deported if a "green-card" resident, or put in jail for up to 10 years if a citizen -- while still not necessarily having been proven guilty of any real crime.
It is worth noting that if the President has arbitrary standards for declaring individuals or groups "terrorist", standards and targets can change according to short-term political goals. Syria was a "terrorist state" until George Bush needed them to help fight Iraq. Iran has been an alternate ally and enemy, as has Iraq, some Afghan groups, the ANC and numerous others. How is one to know what aid is legal and what may be suddenly not?
The Libertarian Party issued a press release April 27, 1995, on the relationship between the Oklahoma City bombing and the Counterterrorism Bill, saying:
"Law-enforcement agencies should act swiftly to bring the criminals who committed this heinous act to justice, and to punish them to the fullest extent of the law," said Steve Dasbach, Chair of America's third largest political party. "However, we must not dishonor the men, women, and children who died in that brutal and senseless act by linking their tragedy to any effort to undermine fundamental American liberties.
"The freedoms recognized under the Bill of Rights are our strongest bulwark against terrorism," asserted Dasbach. "Security measures that infringe on those freedoms will inevitably lead to abuse, ultimately making us less secure in our lives and property."
...
Under Clinton's proposal, the FBI would have the power to examine financial, travel, and telephone records, conduct wiretapping, and infiltrate "suspect" groups. Clinton said such powers were needed to protect "our way of life."
"An abiding respect for liberty is our way of life," countered Dasbach.
The Libertarian Party issued another news release on April 18, 1996, unsuccesfully urging the President to veto the bill:
"You don't honor the memory of the dead by depriving the living of their basic freedoms," said the party's National Chair Steve Dasbach. "And you don't protect Americans from hypothetical foreign terrorists by giving more power to government agencies with a history of running roughshod over our civil liberties."
...
"The fact that Clinton and Congress are trying to link this bill to the Oklahoma City tragedy is political ghoulishness as its worst," said Dasbach. "It shows that there is no tragedy that politicians won't try to capitalize on to further increase the power of government."
Richard Hartman of Spokane, Washington, reported hearing the following exchange on the radio between a reporter and Attorney General Janet Reno:
REPORTER: If the FBI had already possessed the powers described in President Clinton's anti-terrorism legislation, would you have been able to prevent the Oklahoma disaster?
RENO: No.
The Supporters
U.S. voters should take note that once again, Republicans and Democrats united to take away your rights. The Libertarian Party was the only political party to publicly oppose the passage of the law.
Sources: April 24, 1995, news releases from ACLU; April 26, 1995, news release from NCARL; April 26, 1995, posting to LiberNet by Vince Miller; April 26, 1995, news release from CNSS; April 27, 1995, and April 18, 1996, news releases from the Libertarian Party; April 15, 1996, New York Times News Service article, "Congressional leaders predict passage of counterterrorism bill by Friday."
Combined report by Paul DeRienzo, Frank Morales and Chris Flash
From newspaper The Shadow Oct. 1994/Jan. 1995 Issue
Two cassette tape recordings, obtained by SHADOW reporter Paul DiRienzo
of telephone conversations between FBI informant Emad Salem and his
Bureau contacts reveal secret U.S. Government complicity in the February
26, 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center in New York City in which six
people were killed and more than a thousand were injured.
After careful deliberation, the SHADOW believes the question regarding
the bombing boils down to the following: Did the FBI do the bombing,
utilizing informant Salem as an "agent provocateur" or did it fail to
prevent an independent Salem and his associates from doing it? The
taped conversations obtained by the SHADOW seem to indicate the former:
FBI Informant Edam Salem: "...we was start already building the bomb
which is went off in the World Trade Center. It was built by
supervising supervision from the Bureau and the DA and we was all
informed about it and we know that the bomb start to be built. By who?
By your confidential informant. What a wonderful great case!"
Who is Emad Salem? FBI bomber, Arab double-agent or just greedy?
Possibly a combination of all three. Salem is a former Egyptian Army
officer who is currently the U.S. government's star witness against
Egyptian cleric Dr. Omar Abdel Rahman, whom the FBI says was the
ringleader in several bombing plots, including the World Trade Center.
Shortly after the bombing at the Twin Towers (World Trade Center) the
U.S. government moved to take Salem into the Witness Protection program.
According to the FBI, Salem was aware of the plot ostensibly because he
had infiltrated Sheik Rahman and his associates. He was recruited as a
government informant shortly after the 1991 assassination of of right-
wing militant Rabbi Meir Kahane. As an associate of Rahman, Salem
traveled in the cleric's inner circle, surreptitiously recording
conversations, and selling his information to the Bureau. But unknown
to his FBI handlers, Salem was also secretly recording his conversations
with them, most likely to protect himself.
According to attorney Ron Kuby, after Salem was taken into the Witness
Protection program on June 24, 1993, he told the feds about the more
than 1,000 conversations he had recorded sometime between December, 1991
and June, 1993. Kuby says that while some of these tapes are not
significant, others contain substantive dealings with Salem and his FBI
handlers. Salem was actually bugging the FBI.
The World Trade Center bombing, along with subsequent alleged plots to
bomb prominent targets in New York City, spawned a number of federal
indictments and trials resulting in the conviction of more than a dozen
men, all of Arabic descent. Salem's exposure as a government informant
who had a year earlier infiltrated the group of men later charged in the
bombing conspiracy caused many to wonder why he and the FBI failed to
provide any warning of the pending World Trade Center bombing.
The answer now appears self-evident. According to William Kuntsler,
attorney for Ibrahim El-Gabrowny, one of those accused in the larger
bombing case, the entire conspiracy was the product of Salem, the
government informant. Kuntsler's law partner Ronald Kuby told the
SHADOW that within hours of the World Trade Center blast, Salem checked
into a midtown hospital, complaining of a loud ringing in his ears.
There is a growing belief that some of the four men charged and since
convicted and jailed for the World Trade Center bombing, Mohammed , may be innocent
Aboulihma, Mohammed Salameh, Nidal Ayyad and Ahmad Ajaj
[victims] of a government frame-up.
Attorneys for those convicted have maintained that the government's case
is circumstantial at best, with no evidence or motive linking the
accused with the bombing. The FBI and federal prosecutors have not as
yet responded to questions over the lack of warning of the attack on the
Twin Towers, despite the strategic placement of their informant.
Two possible scenarios emerge. One: Salem is a rogue FBI informant who
created the conspiracy to bomb the World Trade Center for the money his
information about the plot (minus his role) would bring. An attorney
for one of the convicted men told the SHADOW that Salem was an FBI
informant from November of 1991 to the summer of 1992. The attorney
says that the FBI became aware of the World Trade Center bombing plot
through informant Salem during this period, but they refused to believe
his information or pay Salem's exhorbitant fees. In fact, the feds
claimed that they dropped Salem as an informant during the summer of
1992 after he refused or failed a lie detector test. This left Salem
with a bombing plot but no one to sell it to.
According to the attorney, Salem let the plot that he hatched go forward
and the World Trade Center was bombed so that he could get money and
publicity. The attorney says that within 48 hours of the bombing, the
FBI requested Salem to help them solve the case. Salem quickly pointed
the fingers at the defendants, all followers of Sheik Rahman.
So, who did it? From the above point of view, Salem constructed the
bomb plot with those whom he subsequently set up. The U.S. government
and its FBI were innocent bystanders who failed to prevent the carnage
due to their unwillingness to take Salem's claims seriously, despite his
close collaboration with Bureau agents for the better part of a year.
The other scenario looks like this: Informant Salem organized the bomb
plot with the "supervision" of the FBI and the District Attorney as part
of a classic entrapment setup. He befriended certain individuals,
possibly some of the defendants, convinced them that his intentions to
bomb the World Trade Center were sincere, and convinced them to get
involved. The bomb goes off. Greedy Salem, with his ears still , sells out his accomplices while attempting to sell more
ringing
information to the Bureau. In order to protect him and their
relationship, the FBI sequesters Salem and utilizes him against the real
target of the FBI, Sheik Rahman.
In one of the taped conversations between Salem and "Special Agent" John
Anticev, Salem refers to him and the Bureau's involvement in making the
bomb that blew up the World Trade Center. As Salem is pressing for
money while emphasizing his value as a Bureau asset, the conversation
moves in and out of references to the bombing and the FBI's knowledge of
the bomb making:
FBI: But ah basically nothing has changed. I'm just telling you for my
own sake that nothing, that this isn't a salary but you got paid
regularly for good information. I mean the expenses were a little bit
out of the ordinary and it was really questioned. Don't tell Nancy I
told you this. (Nancy Floyd is another FBI agent who worked with Salem
in his informant capacity. The second tape obtained by the SHADOW is of
a telephone conversation between Salem and Floyd -Ed.)
SALEM: Well, I have to tell her of course.
FBI: Well then, if you have to, you have to.
SALEM: Yeah, I mean because the lady was being honest and I was being
honest and everything was submitted with receipts and now it's
questionable.
FBI: It's not questionable, it's like a little out of the' ordinary.
SALEM: Okay. I don't think it was. If that what you think guys, fine,
but I don't think that because we was start already building the bomb
which is went off in the World Trade Center. It was built by supervising
supervision from the Bureau and the DA and we was all informed about it
and we know what the bomb start to be built. By who? By your
confidential informant. What a wonderful great case! And then he put
his head in the sand I said "Oh, no, no, that's not true, he is son of a
bitch." (Deep breath) Okay. It's built with a different way in another
place and that's it.
FBI: No, don't make any rash decisions. I'm just trying to be as honest
with you as I can.
SALEM: Of course, I appreciate that.
-----
Brought to you by - The 'Lectric Law Library
The Net's Finest Legal Resource For Legal Pros & Laypeople Alike.
http://www.lectlaw.com
_________________
FBI on Trial
These indications of Bureau obstinacy in the face of the law-and possible obstruction of justice in the Kennedy case-could not have come at a worse time. The FBI is now under siege on several fronts. The new book Fatal Justice, on the Jeffrey McDonald murder case, has exposed the use of "professional" witnesses, a practice that goes back a very long time with the Bureau. The recent hearings on Capitol Hill concerning the shootings at Ruby Ridge bore a resemblance to the O. J. Simpson trial in a significant aspect. In the latter, LAPD officer and star witness Mark Fuhrman took the fifth amendment and refused to testify upon recall by the defense. In the former case, sniper Lon Horiuchi took the fifth before the Senate Committee investigating the Ruby Ridge shooting. His attorney was Earl Silbert, the original Justice Department lawyer involved in the Watergate investigation. Silbert was later replaced by special prosecutor Archibald Cox. A week later, four more FBI officials took the fifth in front of the same committee. The attorney for the four officials was Brendan Sullivan, the former attorney for Oliver North. In a further parallel, the chairman of the investigating panel was Arlen Specter. Specter allowed the five agents to invoke their privilege against self-incrimination in a closed session. He said there was no intent to "humiliate" them. ___________________________ Whilimena note: Is the following account catching a criminal or is it motivating a criminal to perform criminal acts? Have these security elements been organizing criminal activities under the guise of law enforcement? ___________________________
New York Daily News - http://www.nydailynews.com
Terror crew urged to hit FBI's bldgs.
BY JONATHAN LEMIRE
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER
Thursday, July 6th, 2006
An FBI informant urged seven terror suspects to target FBI offices throughout the country ...the FBI arranged for an undercover informant posing as an Al Qaeda terrorist ...the informant suggested the men widen their aims to attack FBI offices in Miami, ...even taking an Al Qaeda oath at the suggestion of the informant, ... the bureau watched their every move... ...
The terror suspects never performed reconnaissance on the Sears Tower or any other FBI office, including the one in lower Manhattan that was also targeted in a 1993 plot to blow up New York landmarks. They also never acquired any of the explosives to carry out their attacks, authorities said..."
______________________
Whilimena note: Clearly these so-called terrorists were neophites. And, for those who have not read the court transcripts of the 1993 WTC bombings, it'll be very important to do so now!
...
George WashingtonMaking things even worse for the FBI's image are the revelations of former crime lab analyst Frederic Whitehurst. In an AP story carried nationwide and on an ABC "Primetime Live" segment, Whitehurst made the following startling revelations: 1) He was pressured to distort findings about the World Trade Center bombing to favor prosecutors. 2) In a Georgia bombing case investigated by current FBI Director Freeh, two agents slanted evidence by testifying about tests that weren't done and scientific conclusions they could not support. One of the agents, Roger Martz, testified in the Simpson case. 3) During one investigation, he was physically threatened by FBI bomb squad members to make false claims about evidence. 4) On one occasion, an FBI crime lab expert illegally adjusted a forensic testing device in order to alter the results the machine produced.
In a turn that will be familiar to all JFK researchers, when Whitehurst complained about these practices, nothing was done about his memos. Indeed the FBI's only reaction has been to declare Dr. Whitehurst's charges false and then demote him. At the end of the ABC segment, when reporter Brian Ross asked Whitehurst outside his home why he had gone public with the charges, Whitehurst, choking back tears, said that the proudest day of his life was when he became an FBI agent. On that day, he took an oath to uphold the Constitution. That oath did not include a clause to remain silent when other FBI agents broke the law. This genuinely moving moment will remind many readers of the transformation described by Kennedy researcher Bill Turner in his pioneering book Hoover's FBI.
In the face of all this, Director Freeh-while acknowledging the accusations as very serious-rejected suggestions for an outside panel review of the FBI. Even though opinion polls show that, in the face of these violent controversies, favorable opinions of the FBI have declined and negative perceptions have risen. To our knowledge, Freeh has taken no public position on the ARRB dispute with the FBI files. In a Los Angeles Times interview, the Director stated that 1) he regarded any matter that affected the FBI's credibility as serious, 2) that it was essential to acknowledge past mistakes, and 3) that firm action should be taken to correct wrongdoing. If Louis Freeh is serious, a good place to begin on all three is for him to take a public stand for openness on the Kennedy files.
_________________
_________________
, should be used, the informer said.__________________
Batiste and his followers readily agreed,
"Government is not reason, it is not eloquence, it is force; like fire, a troublesome servant and a fearful master. Never for a moment should it be left to irresponsible action."
| « | July 2006 | » | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mo | Tu | We | Th | Fr | Sa | Su |
| 1 | 2 | |||||
| 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 |
| 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 |
| 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 |
| 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 |
| 31 | ||||||
