Jeff's April Fool was excellent! I hope it doesn't suck too much of the air out of the other two sections of today's daily dose of truth.
The piece on eliminating two physical standards in DOD is more important than most people realize - if you are at all concerned with DOD's ability to defend the country. Most of you know I served 34 yea…
Jeff's April Fool was excellent! I hope it doesn't suck too much of the air out of the other two sections of today's daily dose of truth.
The piece on eliminating two physical standards in DOD is more important than most people realize - if you are at all concerned with DOD's ability to defend the country. Most of you know I served 34 years in Army. The two physical standards has ALWAYS been a tremendous issue for people whose concern is whether we have a combat force, which can be deployed and dominant in any condition, anywhere in the world and against forces which might be all male. So, first to the ladies who will read this, I think you have a much higher calling than to be fooled into believing serving in the military gives you equality. It does not. But it does degrade you, and the force's ability to close with and kill the enemy. The idea that lower standards gives women equality is bullshit, it simply makes them easier to kill or be captured, brutalized, raped by enemy forces. I am also certain the hidden agenda of those pushing women in to this space was to weaken the DOD and reduce men from doing what they MUST for their women. It's just a fact, I saw it in units I led which had men and women in them. The women slowed the unit down in all phases of physical readiness. Physical readiness is a key fact of combat readiness - if you have reduced fitness you have a unit less capable of bringing destruction on the bad guys. Combat is hardly a place for men, it is no place for women. If Sec Hegseth's order keeps women out of combat branches, then we will have a tougher, more ready combat force. Period. Full Stop.
On tariffs, Jeff did a magnificent job explaining the real purposes. Access to our massive market and our equal access to theirs. The other is bringing manufacturing, stolen from the US by the globalists, back to the US and in key industries vital to our country's well being and to good, high paying jobs for Americans. Yes, there will be a small adjustment period, and the cretins will, inevitably, howl and carry on, you see it in all the other chats where they are already whining about "why prices haven't come down and won't come down". Forever divisive, one must realize this is their purpose.
Don't take their nonsense, let POTUS cook!
We will all be in a much healthier country in all aspects, living in our country's golden age. Fire back at the haters whenever or wherever you read or hear their divisive lies.
Thank you for this spectacularly informed and articulate comment. I salute you for your service and for your courage to speak truth in love! I feel protected and valued by your statement, not undervalued or disrespected! I hope other women (and men) will receive this wisdom.
As a man, I will always put women on the pedestal they deserve to be on, always ready to love and protect. I am glad you saw my comments for what I intended them to be and for the experience I can share.
I can’t send a big enough ‘heart’ (like) for your spelling out, without degrading women, the need for readiness in the face of combat without the idiotic DEI standards. Those came from the pit of hell. Designed to destroy America. Thank you, now, and for your service sir.
Thank you for stating this so well. I am curious to know if any other country on Earth allows women in their combat units. I believe the Israeli army does. But what about China and Russia? As a woman, I have always considered the idea of women in combat as insane. The so-called Women's movement has done much damage to our Society. It was definitely satanic inspiration that was at it's core. We may be able to recover from the damage, but it will require much introspection and a willingness to admit our Society took the wrong path.
Thank you, Quiltlady! Sorry, for some reason my message got posted without my complete thoughts. And then I got distracted.
So here it is in full:
The idea that women should be in combat is indeed, insane!
Proof of the satanical connection in the Chinese Communist Party, they put women in combat roles - and remember - this is a country under tyrannical dictatorship of over 1.2 Billion people.
Proof that we have been lied to for decades about Russia, they do NOT put women in combat roles. Hopefully, every one is waking up and realizing that Russia (not the previous USSR) is a threat to the NWO global communists, not us.
You are right, spot on, about the introspection and willingness it will take to admit we took the wrong path. And there will be 30%, who are in the legion of evil who will continue to fight every step of the way.
Thank you for your service Dan! I agree, as a woman, I recognize I am not physically equal to a man in strength but God made our bodies for specific reasons. If one wants equality, the rules have to be the same for all.
I think the people that would disagree are essentially evil, unbelieving in the perfect roles and goals God worked out for us, in order to work in harmony, love and respect for each other. I think men are starting to realize how they have failed women... women in turn should give men the opportunity - and support - to reach the heights expected of them... and they should not fall into the trap evil has laid for both men and women.
Those who can think that the battlefield is a place for women have to be evil. To think that is somewhere a woman wants or needs to be goes against everything inside us that makes us feminine.
Absolutely 100%! As a woman, I have been arguing your points about women in combat for a long time. My husband is a Vietnam vet and he can’t imagine women having been in the combat situations he was in. It would have been a distraction from the standpoint that men are generally protective of women, and having to worry about a woman in combat in war would have been very bad for their mission. There are many positions within the military that women can do and do well, but combat is not one of them. Physical standards are physical standards, and there should be only one standard. There are men who don’t meet the standard as well. Your points about trade and tariffs are well stated and a great explanation that I’m going to borrow when I next talk to my lefty brother.
Even the women back in world war 2 were keeping the home, praying for their men, for their safe return. Helping other women. Some, probably ones without kids, we’re helping to make ammo, and other supplies that were needed and being sent to our men. Much to learn from history, so to not repeat the bad.
Hmm, God recording HIS-Story, to guide us, encourage us, protect us and send proof of His Ultimate Love. His Son, also laying down His life.
Even ‘cultural’ Christianity was evident back then, as when the constitution was written. A moral compass, code. Back when sense was common. More people had it, and our country thrived.
Your points are spot on CMCM. Thank you. And to your husband, I say I honor you Brother, I know you won't accept your title of Hero, but, you having seen combat in Vietnam, I guarantee you earned it.
The thing that makes me really happy is that Trump, by the GRACE of God, is there and has picked the Cabinet we need, instead of the deep state that infiltrated via Pence, Barr, Comey, etc.
Lutnick is great! Thanks for sharing. I saw Bessent interviewed by Hannity, it was very good.
We are blessed to have leaders like Lutnick, Bessent, Patel, Hegseth, Bondi and so many more, working for Trump and therefore us and the USA.
Thanks, Dan, for articulating just some of the reasons women don’t belong in our military. This is yet another example of something that was once common sense.
I agree. No matter what, a woman’s body will never be like a man’s. A man’s body is made for stamina and strength and can do the things that need to get done and not think about it and just do it. They are made for battle and protection when needed.
A woman’s body is graceful and made to hold and nurture life. Our strength is mentally: in enduring and loving and seeing and creating beauty where we are. I know all women are not going to agree, nor are we all exactly this, but we feel it inside even if it isn’t outside. I can see where women slow down the men in battle. We just were not made for it, no matter how much we try to convince ourselves.
The standards for men, 34 push-ups in two minutes, seem low. I am a 59-year-old woman who works out, and I can do that. (I can't do a pull-up!) Am I wrong? Should the requirements be more rigorous?
In terms of standards, if you are in the field in combat, like my husband was in Vietnam, on more than one occasion he had to be able to carry a man who was fallen or injured out of danger. I don’t care what kind of shape women might be in physically, I doubt many if any could do something like that. Women have less upper body strength than men do, and that’s a physical thing.
No, you are not wrong. That's excellent you are able to do 34! Don't worry most women are incapable of pull-ups, they simply do not have the muscle strength necessary.
Each service has their own Physical Readiness requirements. I can speak for the Army - when I was in the Army. Back then, there were three events, the Pushup, the Situp, and the Two Mile Run. IN order to score the max you needed 69 pushups in 2 minutes. I would do the max back then. There was also a 2 mile run with a max of 11:30. My best time in the 2 mile run was 12:08 - which is about 6 minute miles, not fast but not slow either. There was also a sit-up requirement with essentially the same requirements of the pushup event which I also maxed (70 max if I remember correctly.) Minimum scores for a man 17 to 21 years of age was 40 push-ups and 40 sit-ups and run the two miles in 17 minutes 55 seconds to pass. A woman the same age must do 16 push-ups, 27 sit-ups and run the course in 22 minutes 14 seconds. Back then there was no such idea as DEI - it was meritocracy, period. If you maxed all three events, you scored 300, men in superb physical condition could exceed 300 - there was always 2 or 3 capable of greater than 300 - the gym rats. If you did the minimum, you scored 60 on all three events and a minimum passing score of 180. You had to score 60 pts in each event in order to pass the APRT but you would also be branded as a "pogue" or "Rear Echelon Mother F'er" or "REMF". As an officer, it was a potential "career-ender" if you didn't score at least 250. Meeting the "minimums" meant you were not "Officer material". I will caveat that by saying I served in Combat and Combat Support units, never in Combat Service Support units.
But you must understand, the physical readiness standards have been lowered by those who want DEI requirements to falsely "equalize" men and women. And they have changed the APRT many times. The current iteration is now called the "Army Combat Fitness Test". You can read about it here if you are interested as I can offer you no insights: https://www.army.mil/acft/
There are a lot of fat boys (and girls) in the Army now thanks to at least 4 years of poor leadership. Sec Hegseth needs to return real fitness standards and get them all on the fat boys/girls program, they either need to get fit or "chaptered" which is to say get removed from the Army or barred from re-enlistment. Physical and Mental Fitness is too damned important to mission success in the Army.
Dan, I was on an Air Force base today, and every time I go there, I am appalled how out of shape, and I mean way out of shape, the airman are. This is a SpecOps base and you would expect them to be in the best shape. I noticed in the Navy when we changed the working uniform to the current one, it left a lot of room to carry added weight. With the addition of changing physical standards, it has been a down hill spiral. When I was still on active duty, I took pride in maxing out my PRT, and I would challenging my troops to compete with me. I retired at 46 so if I could do it, my 25 years olds would do it too.
Yeah, I see the same on the Army post near by. That's what 4 years of no standards has created. Sec Hegseth has his work cut out for him. I'd start with taping every Soldier, Marine, Sailor and Airmen. Everyone not in standard immediately goes on the fat boys/girls program with a limited, predetermined time to get fit. If they don't meet the standard, barred to re-enlistment and remove from the military. Same goes for all the crazy hairdo's and beards. Let's be clear, you don't get to wear a beard, why? Because you cannot seal your gas mask, period, full stop. Discipline starts with uniform standards established and maintained. The two criminals, Austin and Milley and the woke sob's, did much destruction, it will not get fixed overnight but it must get fixed.
Nonsense. It's time for women to woman-up and do their fair share. For years the military has been comprised of a tiny 10 percent share of women and an embarrassingly large 90 percent men. That's enough freeloading from the distaff side to last for a few centuries.
Women have been granted all the rights and privileges of men, such as voting, working in the office, etc. while being protected from the military draft, harsh criticism, and pretty much anything that disturbs their emotions. That time needs to end, and since women have demonstrated superior ability to men in pretty much all physical and intellectual endeavors its time for us to move to an ALL FEMALE MILTARY!
May the Russians and Chinese quail in fear before the ROAR of American women!!!
Oh, you are sharp! Is that a compliment or an insult? Are you saying the Bee folks don't regularly oxygenate their brains?
The truth is that you can considerably shorten the debate over women in the military with a couple of key facts: If you look at the Presidential Fitness test full data tables (the test given in PE class to all American students for many years), you'll see that the average performance of an adult (17+ year old woman) is slightly below that of a 12 year old boy in virtually all fitness tasks (except perhaps the flexibility tests). The test has included at various times situps, pushups, pullups, shuttle run, 50 yard sprint, mile run, 600 yard run, and broad jump. Over time it has moved away from strength/explosiveness and more toward the endurance tests.
It makes as much sense to put women in the military as it does to fill the trenches with 12 year old boys.
And not just the physical aspect. The idea of killing something, and unimaginably humans, is usually incredibly abhorrent to a woman. We are life-bringers, not takers. I can’t even squash a bug without feeling sorrow for snuffing it’s life shorter than it would have been.
Jeff's April Fool was excellent! I hope it doesn't suck too much of the air out of the other two sections of today's daily dose of truth.
The piece on eliminating two physical standards in DOD is more important than most people realize - if you are at all concerned with DOD's ability to defend the country. Most of you know I served 34 years in Army. The two physical standards has ALWAYS been a tremendous issue for people whose concern is whether we have a combat force, which can be deployed and dominant in any condition, anywhere in the world and against forces which might be all male. So, first to the ladies who will read this, I think you have a much higher calling than to be fooled into believing serving in the military gives you equality. It does not. But it does degrade you, and the force's ability to close with and kill the enemy. The idea that lower standards gives women equality is bullshit, it simply makes them easier to kill or be captured, brutalized, raped by enemy forces. I am also certain the hidden agenda of those pushing women in to this space was to weaken the DOD and reduce men from doing what they MUST for their women. It's just a fact, I saw it in units I led which had men and women in them. The women slowed the unit down in all phases of physical readiness. Physical readiness is a key fact of combat readiness - if you have reduced fitness you have a unit less capable of bringing destruction on the bad guys. Combat is hardly a place for men, it is no place for women. If Sec Hegseth's order keeps women out of combat branches, then we will have a tougher, more ready combat force. Period. Full Stop.
On tariffs, Jeff did a magnificent job explaining the real purposes. Access to our massive market and our equal access to theirs. The other is bringing manufacturing, stolen from the US by the globalists, back to the US and in key industries vital to our country's well being and to good, high paying jobs for Americans. Yes, there will be a small adjustment period, and the cretins will, inevitably, howl and carry on, you see it in all the other chats where they are already whining about "why prices haven't come down and won't come down". Forever divisive, one must realize this is their purpose.
Don't take their nonsense, let POTUS cook!
We will all be in a much healthier country in all aspects, living in our country's golden age. Fire back at the haters whenever or wherever you read or hear their divisive lies.
Thank you for this spectacularly informed and articulate comment. I salute you for your service and for your courage to speak truth in love! I feel protected and valued by your statement, not undervalued or disrespected! I hope other women (and men) will receive this wisdom.
As a man, I will always put women on the pedestal they deserve to be on, always ready to love and protect. I am glad you saw my comments for what I intended them to be and for the experience I can share.
Thank you Allison.
I can’t send a big enough ‘heart’ (like) for your spelling out, without degrading women, the need for readiness in the face of combat without the idiotic DEI standards. Those came from the pit of hell. Designed to destroy America. Thank you, now, and for your service sir.
Thank you Debi, for getting it!
Thank you for stating this so well. I am curious to know if any other country on Earth allows women in their combat units. I believe the Israeli army does. But what about China and Russia? As a woman, I have always considered the idea of women in combat as insane. The so-called Women's movement has done much damage to our Society. It was definitely satanic inspiration that was at it's core. We may be able to recover from the damage, but it will require much introspection and a willingness to admit our Society took the wrong path.
Thank you, Quiltlady! Sorry, for some reason my message got posted without my complete thoughts. And then I got distracted.
So here it is in full:
The idea that women should be in combat is indeed, insane!
Proof of the satanical connection in the Chinese Communist Party, they put women in combat roles - and remember - this is a country under tyrannical dictatorship of over 1.2 Billion people.
Proof that we have been lied to for decades about Russia, they do NOT put women in combat roles. Hopefully, every one is waking up and realizing that Russia (not the previous USSR) is a threat to the NWO global communists, not us.
You are right, spot on, about the introspection and willingness it will take to admit we took the wrong path. And there will be 30%, who are in the legion of evil who will continue to fight every step of the way.
Amazing comments, Dan. All of them! Thank you for enlightening us.
Thank you for your service Dan! I agree, as a woman, I recognize I am not physically equal to a man in strength but God made our bodies for specific reasons. If one wants equality, the rules have to be the same for all.
Thank you Karmy.
I think the people that would disagree are essentially evil, unbelieving in the perfect roles and goals God worked out for us, in order to work in harmony, love and respect for each other. I think men are starting to realize how they have failed women... women in turn should give men the opportunity - and support - to reach the heights expected of them... and they should not fall into the trap evil has laid for both men and women.
Absolutely agree with this sentiment and the lengthier one you posted above. Lots of wisdom and true masculinity on display - God bless you.
I bless you Julie, for understanding the awesome role women, in their beautiful femininity, bring to the long term health and well-being of humanity.
Those who can think that the battlefield is a place for women have to be evil. To think that is somewhere a woman wants or needs to be goes against everything inside us that makes us feminine.
Absolutely 100%! As a woman, I have been arguing your points about women in combat for a long time. My husband is a Vietnam vet and he can’t imagine women having been in the combat situations he was in. It would have been a distraction from the standpoint that men are generally protective of women, and having to worry about a woman in combat in war would have been very bad for their mission. There are many positions within the military that women can do and do well, but combat is not one of them. Physical standards are physical standards, and there should be only one standard. There are men who don’t meet the standard as well. Your points about trade and tariffs are well stated and a great explanation that I’m going to borrow when I next talk to my lefty brother.
Even the women back in world war 2 were keeping the home, praying for their men, for their safe return. Helping other women. Some, probably ones without kids, we’re helping to make ammo, and other supplies that were needed and being sent to our men. Much to learn from history, so to not repeat the bad.
Hmm, God recording HIS-Story, to guide us, encourage us, protect us and send proof of His Ultimate Love. His Son, also laying down His life.
Even ‘cultural’ Christianity was evident back then, as when the constitution was written. A moral compass, code. Back when sense was common. More people had it, and our country thrived.
And knitting! Don’t forget all the knitting that went on for the troops! 🧶
Yes they did!! And we’re soo good at it. My mother could darn a hole in a sock and you barely could see it, and didn’t feel it. Lost talent.
Excellent, Thank you Debi.
Your points are spot on CMCM. Thank you. And to your husband, I say I honor you Brother, I know you won't accept your title of Hero, but, you having seen combat in Vietnam, I guarantee you earned it.
Dan (LS&D), Thank you for that explanation! I completely agree!
Dan: Excellent post from start to finish. Women in combat never made sense to me. It seemed to be a set up for failure.
I stumbled on an All In in DC interview of Howard Lutnick. He explains the tarriffs, among many other aspects of Trump’s admin. Very entertaining!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=182ckTL2KBAM
There is another All In interview with Scott Bessent. His info is more ‘economically technical’ but still a good interview.
Thank you MaryAnn.
The thing that makes me really happy is that Trump, by the GRACE of God, is there and has picked the Cabinet we need, instead of the deep state that infiltrated via Pence, Barr, Comey, etc.
Lutnick is great! Thanks for sharing. I saw Bessent interviewed by Hannity, it was very good.
We are blessed to have leaders like Lutnick, Bessent, Patel, Hegseth, Bondi and so many more, working for Trump and therefore us and the USA.
Thanks, Dan, for articulating just some of the reasons women don’t belong in our military. This is yet another example of something that was once common sense.
Well stated and summarized, Dan.
Thanks for your service 🫡 and for your excellent opinion piece. You da man, Dan!
Dan, I'm with you all the way...until your last sentence. No need to hate - it is so much better to simply laugh!
Its okay Leo, I run to the sound of gunfire. Whether that sound is actual gunfire or hateful people doing destruction.
I agree. No matter what, a woman’s body will never be like a man’s. A man’s body is made for stamina and strength and can do the things that need to get done and not think about it and just do it. They are made for battle and protection when needed.
A woman’s body is graceful and made to hold and nurture life. Our strength is mentally: in enduring and loving and seeing and creating beauty where we are. I know all women are not going to agree, nor are we all exactly this, but we feel it inside even if it isn’t outside. I can see where women slow down the men in battle. We just were not made for it, no matter how much we try to convince ourselves.
100%. I could not say it better. Thank you.
The standards for men, 34 push-ups in two minutes, seem low. I am a 59-year-old woman who works out, and I can do that. (I can't do a pull-up!) Am I wrong? Should the requirements be more rigorous?
In terms of standards, if you are in the field in combat, like my husband was in Vietnam, on more than one occasion he had to be able to carry a man who was fallen or injured out of danger. I don’t care what kind of shape women might be in physically, I doubt many if any could do something like that. Women have less upper body strength than men do, and that’s a physical thing.
Hi K,
No, you are not wrong. That's excellent you are able to do 34! Don't worry most women are incapable of pull-ups, they simply do not have the muscle strength necessary.
Each service has their own Physical Readiness requirements. I can speak for the Army - when I was in the Army. Back then, there were three events, the Pushup, the Situp, and the Two Mile Run. IN order to score the max you needed 69 pushups in 2 minutes. I would do the max back then. There was also a 2 mile run with a max of 11:30. My best time in the 2 mile run was 12:08 - which is about 6 minute miles, not fast but not slow either. There was also a sit-up requirement with essentially the same requirements of the pushup event which I also maxed (70 max if I remember correctly.) Minimum scores for a man 17 to 21 years of age was 40 push-ups and 40 sit-ups and run the two miles in 17 minutes 55 seconds to pass. A woman the same age must do 16 push-ups, 27 sit-ups and run the course in 22 minutes 14 seconds. Back then there was no such idea as DEI - it was meritocracy, period. If you maxed all three events, you scored 300, men in superb physical condition could exceed 300 - there was always 2 or 3 capable of greater than 300 - the gym rats. If you did the minimum, you scored 60 on all three events and a minimum passing score of 180. You had to score 60 pts in each event in order to pass the APRT but you would also be branded as a "pogue" or "Rear Echelon Mother F'er" or "REMF". As an officer, it was a potential "career-ender" if you didn't score at least 250. Meeting the "minimums" meant you were not "Officer material". I will caveat that by saying I served in Combat and Combat Support units, never in Combat Service Support units.
But you must understand, the physical readiness standards have been lowered by those who want DEI requirements to falsely "equalize" men and women. And they have changed the APRT many times. The current iteration is now called the "Army Combat Fitness Test". You can read about it here if you are interested as I can offer you no insights: https://www.army.mil/acft/
There are a lot of fat boys (and girls) in the Army now thanks to at least 4 years of poor leadership. Sec Hegseth needs to return real fitness standards and get them all on the fat boys/girls program, they either need to get fit or "chaptered" which is to say get removed from the Army or barred from re-enlistment. Physical and Mental Fitness is too damned important to mission success in the Army.
I hope that helps.
Dan, I was on an Air Force base today, and every time I go there, I am appalled how out of shape, and I mean way out of shape, the airman are. This is a SpecOps base and you would expect them to be in the best shape. I noticed in the Navy when we changed the working uniform to the current one, it left a lot of room to carry added weight. With the addition of changing physical standards, it has been a down hill spiral. When I was still on active duty, I took pride in maxing out my PRT, and I would challenging my troops to compete with me. I retired at 46 so if I could do it, my 25 years olds would do it too.
Yeah, I see the same on the Army post near by. That's what 4 years of no standards has created. Sec Hegseth has his work cut out for him. I'd start with taping every Soldier, Marine, Sailor and Airmen. Everyone not in standard immediately goes on the fat boys/girls program with a limited, predetermined time to get fit. If they don't meet the standard, barred to re-enlistment and remove from the military. Same goes for all the crazy hairdo's and beards. Let's be clear, you don't get to wear a beard, why? Because you cannot seal your gas mask, period, full stop. Discipline starts with uniform standards established and maintained. The two criminals, Austin and Milley and the woke sob's, did much destruction, it will not get fixed overnight but it must get fixed.
Biological realities are real. Time folks stopped pretending.
Nonsense. It's time for women to woman-up and do their fair share. For years the military has been comprised of a tiny 10 percent share of women and an embarrassingly large 90 percent men. That's enough freeloading from the distaff side to last for a few centuries.
Women have been granted all the rights and privileges of men, such as voting, working in the office, etc. while being protected from the military draft, harsh criticism, and pretty much anything that disturbs their emotions. That time needs to end, and since women have demonstrated superior ability to men in pretty much all physical and intellectual endeavors its time for us to move to an ALL FEMALE MILTARY!
May the Russians and Chinese quail in fear before the ROAR of American women!!!
I'm going to go with the idea that your ridiculous post is Babylon Bee style sarcasm.
It has to be, as any person who is regularly oxygenating their brain could never come up with this and expect anyone to take it seriously.
Oh, you are sharp! Is that a compliment or an insult? Are you saying the Bee folks don't regularly oxygenate their brains?
The truth is that you can considerably shorten the debate over women in the military with a couple of key facts: If you look at the Presidential Fitness test full data tables (the test given in PE class to all American students for many years), you'll see that the average performance of an adult (17+ year old woman) is slightly below that of a 12 year old boy in virtually all fitness tasks (except perhaps the flexibility tests). The test has included at various times situps, pushups, pullups, shuttle run, 50 yard sprint, mile run, 600 yard run, and broad jump. Over time it has moved away from strength/explosiveness and more toward the endurance tests.
It makes as much sense to put women in the military as it does to fill the trenches with 12 year old boys.
And not just the physical aspect. The idea of killing something, and unimaginably humans, is usually incredibly abhorrent to a woman. We are life-bringers, not takers. I can’t even squash a bug without feeling sorrow for snuffing it’s life shorter than it would have been.
Agree. When I see videos of the Chinese Army marching in perfect unison I never see a woman in their ranks.