General 'Rudely' Fired by Obama Makes Trump's Short List for Secretary of Defense

John Schindler, formerly with the NSA and currently a national security columnist for the New York Observer, joined Buck Sexton on The Glenn Beck Program to talk about administrative posts currently under review by the Trump transition team. On the topic of national defense, Schindler had glowing comments to make about retired United States Marine Corps General James Mattis.

"Mattis is the real thing. We have a lot of general officers in the military who sort of pose as tough as nails but able to think big thoughts at the same time, and Mattis actually is that. I can vouch for that personally. And he has a fabulous reputation as our boss of Central Command, our Middle Eastern command. He legendarily commanded the first Marine division into Iraq, in 2003," Schindler said.

Gen. Mattis was unceremoniously fired by the Obama administration as the Central Command boss over the issue of Iran. According to Schindler, Gen. Mattis strenuously objected the Iran deal and felt empowering the mullahs in Tehran was a huge mistake. The general has never spoken publicly about the firing.

John Schindler is the author of Fall of the Double Eagle: The Battle for Galicia and the Demise of Austria-Hungary.

Listen to this segment from The Glenn Beck Program:

Below is a rush transcript of this segment, it might contain errors:

BUCK: Buck Sexton here in for Glenn Beck today on the Glenn Beck Program. Thank you so much for joining. 877-727-BECK, on those phone lines.

Got our friend John Schindler joining us now as our guest. He is the national security columnist for the New York Observer. You can read his latest at observer.com.

Also, you can follow him at Twitter @20committee.

Mr. Schindler, good to have you, sir.

JOHN: It is a pleasure as always, Buck.

BUCK: All right. So let's talk about it. This cabinet is coming together.

JOHN: Yeah.

BUCK: Some very -- certainly very interesting and dynamic picks.

Jim Mattis, General Mattis, he is possibly the next Secretary of Defense. You are formerly of the NSA. I'm formerly of the CIA. And we have Mike Flynn, perhaps as the next NSA. We'll talk about that in a second.

JOHN: Yeah.

BUCK: But let's talk about Mattis first. What do you think about this pick, assuming it goes through?

JOHN: Assuming it goes through, and Mr. Trump, our president-elect -- General Mattis -- has him on a short list for Secretary of State. If that goes through, this is the best news we could possibly get from a national security perspective.

Mattis is a -- notice, mad dog -- is a revered figure in national security circles. He's arguably the best general of his generation, a career marine.

I know Mattis slightly personally. And I think the world of him. I think he's a rare mix of a real warrior and a real scholar at the time. He's never married. He's made a little bit of jokes about being a monk. Not literally a monk. But he's devoted himself to his military profession his whole life. And he's a deep thinker. He's a genuinely deep thinker.

And DOD, Pentagon is a bureaucratic mess. It needs to be shaken hard and fixed particularly on the budgeting side and strategy side. And if Jim Mattis can't do it, no one -- no human being can't.

BUCK: He also is attributed with a quote so cool that I think anybody wishes that they had come up with it: Be polite. Be professional, but have a plan to kill everyone you meet.

JOHN: Right.

BUCK: That leaves -- yeah.

JOHN: That's Mattis. Mattis is the real thing. We have a lot of general officers in the military who sort of pose as tough as nails but able to think big thoughts at the same time -- and Mattis actually is that. I can vouch for that personally. And he has a fabulous reputation as our boss of Central Command, our Middle Eastern command. He legendarily commanded the first Marine division into Iraq, in 2003.

And also, he was fired, quite unceremoniously by the Obama administration a couple years back as the Central Command boss over the issue of Iran. And the really revealing thing about Jim Mattis, Jim Mattis has never spoken about this. He's a class act. He doesn't -- unlike Mike Flynn who makes up stories about why he was fired, Mattis was fired over principle. Mattis strenuously objected to the deal with Iran and felt that empowering the mullahs in Tehran was a huge mistake. And he got fired for that. He was fired very unceremoniously, rudely by the White House, and he's never out of the White House for that.

Him coming back to set some of this right would be a great thing for us and our allies.

BUCK: Now, John, you're a veteran. From friends of yours who are either still inside in the Armed Services or who have served, I've never heard from people I know in the Intel community, my side of things, anything but good things about Mattis. The support from inside the military, from the rank-and-file, all the way up to the top, my understanding is pretty strong. Pretty strong to very strong.

JOHN: Honestly, I can't believe I can say this: I don't know that I've ever heard somebody criticize Mattis in a serious way, on a really substantive issue. No -- no general officer makes all correct decisions, but he's a generally, you know, widely universally admired guy who knows how to make the trains run on time.

And as I said, the Pentagon needs someone who can break some China at this point. The budgeting process, the acquisition process, as evidenced by disasters like the F-35, the drone strike fighter, is really seriously broken. And we need someone who understands this, to go in, grab it with both hands, and effect some real change.

BUCK: All right. Now, before we get on to the issue of Flynn, of Mike Flynn as possible national security adviser, let's just -- Romney, meeting with Trump over the weekend. People are saying Secretary of State. Seems like a political move. But on the merits, what do you think of a Romney SecState?

JOHN: I think he would be great. I was never a big fan of Mitt Romney as a presidential candidate, but he has a lot of the skill set you need to be Secretary of State, someone who understands how the world actually works. As we know, to the embarrassment of President Obama, Mitt Romney's instincts on Russia in 2012 were exactly right, and the president was wrong.

I think a Romney appointment would be greeted in DC among professional bureaucrats as a really good thing, because he's a balanced guy. He's a smart guy. And he's not particularly ideological, and he will focus on getting American diplomacy back into earth's orbit and focused on reality. No more James Taylor concerts. No more John Kerry. No more Hillary pay-for-play. We know Romney, whatever his negatives are, he's not corrupt, and he understands how the world actually works. I think he would be a great Secretary of State.

BUCK: Yeah, very honest guy. Very capable guy.

JOHN: Absolutely.

BUCK: And also, I feel like with the Democrats, among their main criticisms of him from the election, including that he would give people cancer -- but we'll put that aside because that was just unfair and insane -- but that he was sort of a vulture capitalist. Maybe it would be a good thing for America to have a guy who understands how to use leverage and squeeze as much as possible.

JOHN: Oh, that's crazy talk. Stop it.

(chuckling)

BUCK: I think he would bring some pretty interesting things to the table, in that regard. He would do it with a smile and a firm handshake. But if you want somebody negotiating for your side in international trade deal, I think Mitt Romney would do a darn good job.

JOHN: Yeah. I don't think any of his negatives as presidential candidate remotely apply, you know, including that he causes cancer, right? Remotely have anything to do with how he would be Secretary of State. And I would welcome his appointment, as would a lot of people in DC, and not just the Republican Party.

BUCK: Speaking to John Schindler. He's the national security columnist for the New York Observer. Observer.com is where you'll find his pieces. I highly recommend you check him out. He's former NSA.

John, now let's talk about -- former NSA John Schindler, let's talk about the possible NSA Mike Flynn.

JOHN: Yeah.

BUCK: You do not hold back on this one. I want you to tell me and everybody else listening -- make the case, please, why is General Flynn, in your estimation, not the guy for this job?

JOHN: Well, let's leave aside his strange ties to Russia, the very pro-Kremlin things he says, that he's taken money from Russia Today, which is the state propaganda network. Let's leave that aside.

The problem is Mike Flynn is a smart guy who is -- doesn't play well with others. He rose to be a three-star general in the army. Was fired as director of the defense administration agency by Obama.

And as a strong critic of Obama and foreign policy, let me say that Obama was absolutely right to fire Mike Flynn as the director of DIA. Mike Flynn wanted to reform DIA, which is all well and good. It's a really stodgy intelligence community bureaucracy. But he did it in a way that was, frankly, you know, abusive of the workforce, and he was quickly hated by the workforce. And you don't change an administration by making everyone hate you.

As a Democrat just found out, you know, in the election, the white working class is not going to vote for you if you hate them. By the same token, the DIA workforce is not going to help you reform, if you make clear they're all fools and idiots and lazy.

Mike Flynn turfed out. And my fear is he will bring that same management style, which is aggressive, where it doesn't need to be, into the National Security Council.

BUCK: Now, let me ask you -- to be fair to the other side of this, which I don't pretend to be on. But I'm assuming that if we had a Trump spokesperson or somebody attached to the transition team here, they would say -- or they could say -- and I wanted to pose this to you, John, but he's going to be in an adviser role to the president, so it's really more about his knowledge, background, and understanding of issues, like dealing with jihadism. Radical Islamic terrorism. And not -- all the things you talked about may well be true. And I've heard similar things.

And my understanding is that bureaucratically there was an ineptitude on display at the top of DIA, in terms of how he handled that.

JOHN: Oh, yeah.

BUCK: Which is also a very difficult job, to manage these enormous Intel bureaucracies.

JOHN: Oh, yeah.

BUCK: But that wouldn't be his role. His role would be to be there, close to Donald Trump, and advising him, as national security adviser. What about on that side of things? When it comes to his judgment, knowledge, and understanding of the threats we face?

JOHN: I think the problem you have there is Trump is a very impulsive, high-strung individual. You want a national security adviser who can moderate that. And Flynn is exactly the same kind of shoot-from-the-hip, say hard things without thinking about them. And when you're in that job, that's going to have real consequences.

And you want someone there who can think big picture about strategy. And Mike Flynn is right about some of the things he says about jihadism. But he also thinks it's the biggest threat we face. And I don't.

I think it's top three. But the reality is -- you know, Russia and China both have several thousand nuclear weapons that can wipe us off the face of the planet. The jihadists, thank God, don't.

And that means, they're a huge threat to our national security. I disagree with Mike Flynn that this is the preeminent threat we face. We face a lot of threats. And jihadism terrorism is one of them.

He also has a way of alienating the entire Muslim world, which given that we're utterly dependent on Muslim allies to fight jihadism, that's not really a good thing.

BUCK: What do you make of this report, by the way, switching gears to the Obama administration for a second -- everyone is talking so much about the Trump transition that I feel like it gets lost sometimes that there's still a White House that's making decisions, they're trying to bolster the Iran deal, as we speak. So they're saying not to make it harder to unravel for Trump. But it seems like, to hit the accelerator at the very end here on that.

JOHN: Of course. Of course.

BUCK: Yeah, had some consequences.

JOHN: They want to make this irreversible, down to the last minute they're in the White House. And, you know -- because this is their signature thing, right? This is Obama's claim to fame. He got this great deal with Iran, which is not really a great deal. And Trump wants to tear it down. I think actually tearing it down will be harder than Trump and his people realize.

But the Iranians are going to have a much harder -- harder team in Washington now than they've had, where Obama and company have accommodated everything they've wanted and let them get away with crazy stuff.

Back to Jim Mattis. Jim Mattis raised holy hell with the White House several years ago when the Iranian Intelligence Service tried to blow up the Saudi ambassador in the United States in a public restaurant in downtown Washington, DC. This was an unambiguous act of war, and Mattis wanted us to seriously diplomatically retaliate.

You know what the White House did? Hardly anything.

And they told Mattis to calm down. Mattis was right. And this kind of appeasement of the mullahs in Tehran has gotten us worse and worse Iranian behavior. And if that stops, I'll be very pleased.

BUCK: There's also this report that -- that Clapper and Carter have told Obama to fire the head of your former base, the NSA.

JOHN: Yeah.

BUCK: What do you think about that? What's that all coming from?

JOHN: It pains me to say -- I think that would be a wise move. And it is, in fact, overdue. Admiral Mike Rogers, a Navy four-star admiral, you know, came to the NSA with a great reputation. Unfortunately, he's sullied that reputation through some pretty bad mistakes.

He's run through a reorganization in a way that really upset the workforce with cause. He's been distant. He hasn't communicated well with the workforce. He's upset some of our close intelligence allies around the world. And most importantly, we've had more security disasters.

He was brought up to clear up the epic mess left behind by the Snowden theft and defection to Russia. And now he's had another case, another -- the Martin case, very similar to -- in the sense that the NSA affiliate, a contractor who stole huge amounts of classified data and brought it home with them -- this has happened again.

NSA security and counterintelligence have not been reformed as I and others have urged for years, as Congress was told was happening. It has not happened. And Mike Rogers is the captain of the ship here, and he has to go down. Unfortunately, I think relieving him of duty is the only choice the Pentagon and the intelligence community has.

BUCK: Right before you go, John, how would you -- if you had to give a grade to Trump's national security picks and considerations because I know there's a lot that's still up in the air, where would you -- what would you grade it right now?

JOHN: Well, if we're going with Mattis, I'd say it's an A-plus. You know, Flynn -- Flynn brings that down a fair amount. But, honestly, I'm encouraged so far. We don't know a lot so far. It's mostly rumor.

But I think we're going to have -- it's going to break out two ways: A lot of the cabinet appointees and senior appointees in the departments like State, Defense, other, you know, Homeland Security, are going to be really solid people who know what they're doing and are not particularly ideological. They're not Trumpers. They're Republicans, but they were not part of the Trump movement.

The folks inside the White House are going to be clearly Trump loyalists, who perhaps their loyalty matters to the president-elect than their knowledge of, say, national security affairs. That means, you're going to, from day one, have some tension from professionals, you know, career generals, diplomats, whatever, successful business people, who are running cabinet appointments and the folks in the White House who maybe don't understand how all that wonderful stew gets made over there across the river in northern Virginia. So I think there could be some tension right out of the starting date.

BUCK: All right. John Schindler is the author of Fall of the Double Eagle. He is also the columnist at the New York Observer for national security. Go to observer.com. John, great to have you, sir. Talk to you soon.

JOHN: Great to be here.

BUCK: 877-727-BECK. Buck in for Glenn. We'll be right back.

Featured Image: (L to R) President-elect Donald Trump welcomes retired United States Marine Corps general James Mattis as they pose for a photo before their meeting at Trump International Golf Club, November 19, 2016 in Bedminster Township, New Jersey. Trump and his transition team are in the process of filling cabinet and other high level positions for the new administration. (Photo by Drew Angerer/Getty Images)

Do aliens... EXIST? Or is it a distraction?

Rastan | Getty Images

Yesterday, whistleblower David Charles Grusch, a decorated Air Force veteran claimed the Department of Defense has a secret team aimed at "retrieving non-human origin technical vehicles, call it spacecraft if you will, non-human exotic origin vehicles that have either landed or crashed."

Talk about UFOs and aliens has typically been siloed to the realm of sci-fi and "conspiracy theories." However, in recent years, publicized evidence of UFOs and whistleblowers, like David Grusch, have brought the once fantastical subjects into the mainstream. Could it be that alien life forms do, in fact, exist? Have they already arrived and been kept secret underneath the government's nose? Or could this all be a ruse to distract us from more pressing stories in the news cycle?

We want to hear from YOU! Do YOU think aliens and UFOs are a distraction tactic, or do you think there's truth behind these whistleblowers?

Do you believe the government has intel about UFOs?

Do you believe the government has intel about alien life?

Do you believe the government is hiding this intel from the general public?

Do you believe alien life exists? 

Do you think the media is using this story to distract us from other issues?

Remembering D-Day: We are called to the same standard

Universal History Archive / Contributor | Getty Images

79 years ago today, my grandfather jumped out of a plane. He was 17 years old when he joined the 101st Airborne Division, and at the ripe age of 18, he boarded a C-47 aircraft with the rest of his company destined for Normandy. On June 6, 1944, he jumped out of that plane onto Utah Beach, becoming a part of what would become the largest amphibious invasion in military history, Operation Overlord, or, as it's more commonly known, D-Day.

Though only 18, my grandfather was one of the oldest soldiers in his company. He recounted how many, like himself, lied about their age in order to have their shot at fighting for their country. As Omaha Beach veteran Frank Devita recounted:

We were all kids. We were too young to drink. We were too young to vote. And we were too young to die.

And many of them did.

On June 6, 1944, almost 160,000 troops from the United States, the British Commonwealth, and their allies began what would become the ultimate demise of the Third Reich, concluding one of the darkest chapters in human history. 2,500 of these soldiers were American boys who gave the ultimate sacrifice in Normandy, where most of them remain, their bodies never making it back home to the country for which they paid the ultimate price.

2,500 of these soldiers were American boys who gave the ultimate sacrifice in Normandy.

Underwood Archives / Contributor | Getty Images

In an age seemingly devoid of courage and virtue, it is natural to picture these soldiers as the greatest of men. And they were. However, we must remember these exemplars of manhood were boys, young boys, who exhibited the courage and virtue that we so seldom see in those twice their age today.

We must remember these exemplars of manhood were boys.

Remembering D-Day is not only sobering regarding the loss of life and innocence; it's sobering to consider how far our country has strayed from the ideals exemplified by the "greatest generation."

79 years ago, Americans knew what they were fighting for. As a Jewish man born in Berlin, witnessing the rise of fascism and socialism at the expense of individual liberty and the sanctity of life, my grandfather was eager to go back to his birthplace as an American soldier to fight for the fundamental principles of life and liberty that he and his family had been denied in Nazi Germany.

They were some of the lucky individuals who were able to escape—and there's a reason why he and his family chose America as their new homeland. The life and liberty they had been denied in Germany were regarded as sacred in the United States.

Yet, do we still regard these things as sacred?

JEAN-FRANCOIS MONIER / Contributor | Getty Images

Most of the United States still hold that the sanctity of life is contingent upon convenience and circumstance. Economic policies continue to morph closer to the socialism adopted by the rest of the world in the 20th century, penalizing the success and merit that was once tantalizing to immigrants like my grandfather. Moreover, 2020 extinguished any doubt that the freedoms we hold dear are expendable at the whims of our ruling class.

This isn't the same America that provided refuge to my grandfather's family nor is it the same country that he and his brothers-in-arms fought for.

On this anniversary of D-Day, it is important that we remember the sacrifice given by the young American boys, who became the greatest of men, on the beaches of Normandy. However, perhaps it is just as important to remember that we are called to the very same standard as they so powerfully exemplified: to love our country and the principles of life and freedom that stand in stark contrast to much of the onlooking world and to have the courage to defend it, even if it requires the level courage that these young men were called to.

5 new AI your children may be using and how to counter them

NurPhoto / Contributor | Getty Images

With the rapid emergence of widely available AI, it's no surprise many parents are concerned about how interacting with AI might affect their children. It feels like we are just barely beginning to understand how the internet and social media affect childhood development. Now, we suddenly have a whole new dimension to unpack, with reports of people developing emotional attachments to AI and students using AI to write entire essays. It's no wonder why some parents are starting to feel overwhelmed.

Here are 5 of the most prevalent AI programs discoverable to children and the options parents have to deal with them.

Snapchat “My AI”

Image of chat with MyAI on Snapchat

Snapchat

What is it?

My AI is an AI chatbot built into Snapchat. It's designed to look just like another human user, though it will always stay on top of the "Chat" page and can be identified by a robot emoji on the right side of the screen. The bot can be given a custom name and avatar, answer questions, chat, and provide recommendations, much like ChatGPT—the software that powers My AI, albeit less powerful.

Like ChatGPT, My AI has many biases—typically left-leaning, and is subject to mistakes and inaccuracies. Unlike ChatGTP however, My AI may claim to be a real person and a friend to the user, which might be misleading to a young person. Perhaps most disturbing, it can access your location—provided you allow Snapchat to know your location.

If you want to protect your children from My AI, you have a few different options.

The first is to disable My AI within Snapchat. Naturally, Snapchat has made disabling the bot a premium feature, only available to Snapchat+ subscribers. Assuming your child does not already have a Snapchat+ subscription, you can purchase a one-month subscription for $3.99, disable My AI from the Snapchat+ management screen, then cancel the subscription. Users are reporting that once the subscription ends the bot remains disabled, though note that your child can easily re-enable the feature at any time and it cannot be password protected.

Your other options are to either block or limit the use of the entire app from within the settings of your children's phones or to educate your child on the dangers and nature of AI.

ChatGPT/OpenAI

What is it?

ChatGPT is one of the most popular AI programs available on the internet. Its sophistication and power make it as formidable as it is fascinating. Glenn had a conversation with ChatGPT, which demonstrated its power and intelligence. It's an AI-powered chatbot and much like other chatbots, it can answer questions, chat, and provide recommendations. It can also write essays, do math worksheets, translate back and forth between many languages, write computer code, and much more. Like My AI, it can be inaccurate at times and has major left-leaning biases. The company responsible for ChatGPT, OpenAI, has other AI tools, such as DALL·E 2, an image creation program that utilizes the same AI as ChatGPT.

If you want to protect your children from ChatGPT, you have a few different options.

The first and most important thing to do is to make sure that your children know that using ChatGPT or any other AI to do homework, write essays or complete tests or quizzes IS CHEATING. There have been multiple stories recently about students using ChatGPT to write papers or do homework and the consequences they faced once they got caught. Long story short, it never ends well for the student. Make sure your children understand that although AIs are not humans, using them to complete school work IS STILL cheating.

If you want to prevent your children from accessing ChatGPT altogether, you can block it along with other websites using your web browser's child settings. Here are instructions on how to block websites for your child on Google Chrome.

Replika

What is it?

Replika is an online companion that custom builds an AI "companion," a chatbot with a customizable name and avatar. Though similar to My AI, Replika creates an avatar whose appearance and function is much more lifelike than My AI, and, consequently, more intimate. Replika advertises itself as "The AI companion who cares" and will remember things that are important to you in order to be the perfect "companion."

The app rewards users for time spent talking with their AI companions with points that can be spent on unlocking more clothes, jewelry, hairstyles, accessories, etc., and gives the user the option to skip the points altogether and purchase the digital items with real money, a common tactic in apps and mobile games.

The major thing that sets Replika apart from other chatbots is its ability to "role play," flirt, and send "hot photos." These features, which play a major role in Replika's advertising, are meant to promote Replika's use as a replacement for a "partner."

If you want to protect your children from Replika, you really only have one option.

You can block the app and website on your children's devices. Replika does not have a child mode or any way to disable explicit content, it is either all or nothing.

AI Dungeon

What is it?

AI Dungeon is a spin-off of the popular role-playing game, "Dungeons and Dragons." It's a text-based game where the player chooses or creates a scenario and plays out the scenario with the AI. For example, the player might be cast in the role of a knight and can type out what the knight says and does, and the AI will give text responses to the players' actions in an attempt to create an interactive story.

The game can be played for free, but players can also purchase access to more powerful AI, which in theory creates better stories. Moreover, you can purchase additional game modes. The major concern is that the AI can generate explicit material as well as violent scenarios, which it can describe quite graphically.

If you want to protect your children from AI Dungeon you really only have one option:

You can turn on "safe mode" from within the app settings, but it can easily be deactivated. Your best bet is to block the app on your children's devices.

YouTube

What is it?

It might surprise you to learn that the algorithm that decides what content gets recommended to you on YouTube is AI-powered. It sorts through millions of videos and decides which ones to recommend to you based on many factors, such as the channels you are subscribed to, your watch history, trending videos, etc. The goal of this AI algorithm is to keep you hooked and watching, which generates ad revenue for YouTube.

YouTube is owned by Google, and both companies have a long track record of left-wing biases, which permeates YouTube's algorithm. This can lead to videos about gun safety being labeled as "promoting violence" and videos of drag queens being promoted to children.

If you want to protect your children from the YouTube algorithm, you have a few different options.

You can set up a YouTube Kids account for your children, which gives you a lot of control over what your child can and can not find and watch on YouTube. Be warned, due to YouTube's left lean, videos such as "Drag Queen Storytime" are still available, though the channels that post them can be blocked.

It might take a while to set up properly, and things may get through the cracks, but you could set up a relatively safe YouTube account for your children. The other option, of course, is to block YouTube on your kids' devices, and web browsers, keeping them from accessing it at all.

It feels like lately hardly a week can go by without some new AI advancement—or warning—making headlines, but unless you have been paying VERY close attention you might believe the power of AI is something relegated to technical institutions or Silicon Valley labs and only accessible by the most highly trained computer wizards. But as Glenn has demonstrated, AI can now be accessed by anyone with internet access and can take many different shapes and forms—not just that of the ominous and awkward ChatBot. In fact, you are probably using AI without even realizing it.

If AI can enter into your life without you realizing it, would you even know if your CHILDREN were interacting with it?

We want to hear from YOU. Do you allow your children to use AI? Do you know if they are? Do you use AI? Are you aware of the many shapes and forms AI can take?

Do you use AI?

Do you allow your children to use AI?

Do you know if your children are using AI?

Did you know that AI is integral to the functions of many social media content recommendation algorithms, including YouTube, TikTok, and Instagram?  

Did you know that many messaging platforms your child may be using, like Discord and Snapchat, now have built-in AI chatbots?

Are you aware that AI such as ChatGPT can be easily accessed from any internet browser?

Are you aware that AI such as ChatGPT can be easily used to CHEAT school assignments?

Are you aware that AI applications exist that are meant to replace intimate human relationships and are available on most smartphones?

Are you teaching your children about AI and its potential dangers and misuses?