Mini storage

NY1 featured a story August 14 on a controversial billboard advertisement by Manhattan Mini Storage:

closet.jpg

Tacky? I'd say here's another counterproductive move by pro-aborts. Americans, even if "pro-choice," don't find abortion cute or funny. Most commenters to NY1 agreed....

Bear in mind New York is hard-core pro-abortion. Ten percent of all U.S. abortions - 100,000 - are committed there annually. On the other hand, perhaps that's exactly the reason why they by and large didn't care for the reminder:

"I think it's a little bit over the top, a little bit shocking, a little bit unacceptable and I think they should take it down," said New Yorker Gerry Creamer.

"I've always felt that their ads were just a little risque, just a little unsettling, but I think that takes it too far," added New Yorker Kirsten Carlson.

"I think it's kind of crazy that they put it up there like that," added New Yorker Dalton Adams. "I think it's a little disrespectful. I think it's a little inconsiderate and it's big! I mean, it's not hidden, people can see it."

But others said they don't have a problem with the ad's message, or its imagery.

"I think a woman's right to choose is definitely shrinking and it's making a statement and definitely makes people think. It's interesting how they put the two together," said Laura Hollin.

Vanessa Valenti works for a reproductive rights organization and posted a picture of the billboard on her blog.

"This is fantastic. We love Manhattan Mini Storage," said Valenti. "It was really refreshing to see a private company take a stand on such an important issue."

[Hat tip: Feministing; photo courtesy of Feministing]

UPDATE, 9:35a: Here's a press release from the Catholic League yesterday with good quotes by Bill Donohue.

UPDATE, 8/17, 9:25a: CBS News, NY, "Storage co.'s pro-choice billboard causes uproar" [HT: #2 son]


Comments:

I thought the side of choice was winning. Why would they need a billboard like this?

Posted by: Heather4life at August 16, 2007 9:17 AM


You can kill your baby in America anytime, at any stage, for any reason. What's the problem?

Posted by: Heather4life at August 16, 2007 9:19 AM


I can't really figure out what I think about this. On one hand, it's daring, and it's witty. But I don't think a billboard is really the approprate place for it. I think that the company was going for the shock value. It is an advertisement- their point is to try and come off as 'liberal' and 'progressive'- they're appealing to an audience. I would laugh if I saw it somewhere online, in one of my groups. But I'm just not sure if billboards are the appropriate places for political statements. Of course, I don't really care for the big "GOD IS PRO-LIFE" ones either.

Lol, I saw one here last week that said in big black letters, "You think it's hot now? Keep taking my name in vain. -God" I giggled.

Posted by: Erin at August 16, 2007 9:36 AM


I just sent them an e-mail.

Posted by: Heather4life at August 16, 2007 10:02 AM


Tacky indeed.

Posted by: Rosie at August 16, 2007 10:18 AM


From an advertising standpoint this is great. It is certainly getting people talking. I mean, who knew about manhatan mini storage until now? The problem is that it is offensive and demeaning.

Posted by: lauren at August 16, 2007 10:19 AM


You can kill your baby in America anytime, at any stage, for any reason. What's the problem?

No, Heather, you cannot.

Posted by: Leah at August 16, 2007 10:24 AM


I find this disgusting. This company is using the murder of innocent life as a springboard for making more money - pretty scummy in my mind. They are not making a stand it is a marketing strategy. New York is mainly pro-abortion and lots of people will now see going to this company as another way to make a stand for their right to kill.

Posted by: SH at August 16, 2007 10:31 AM


"'You can kill your baby in America anytime, at any stage, for any reason. What's the problem?'

No, Heather, you cannot."

Leah is right. You can't kill your baby after it is born.

Posted by: Bobby Bambino at August 16, 2007 10:36 AM


Bobby, I was talking about abortion. What about infanticide? It's happening a lot.

Posted by: Heather4life at August 16, 2007 10:38 AM


You can't kill your baby after it's born? HA! Talk to Amy Grossberg and Melissa Drexler about that one!

Posted by: Heather4life at August 16, 2007 10:39 AM


Hi Heather. Yes, I know, I was being facetious. God love you.

Posted by: Bobby Bambino at August 16, 2007 10:46 AM


Score.

I was wondering how long it would take for this to show up on here.

Posted by: Rae at August 16, 2007 10:47 AM


Bobby, I'm sorry. I thought you were disagreeing. Hi Rae!

Posted by: Heather4life at August 16, 2007 10:49 AM


Of course Manhattan would be the place you would find this.....there's no disagreeing that the majority of the island's population is supportive of abortion as a choice - its the MOST EXPENSIVE PLACE TO LIVE in the US. We just finished the main part of our coast to coast summer tour, and we could always count on great support while in poorer neighborhoods, and detraction when in more well-off areas.

Posted by: Phil at August 16, 2007 12:52 PM


Rae, tsk, tsk. You knew about this and didn't tell me?

Posted by: Jill Stanek at August 16, 2007 1:22 PM


I thought I'd just speak up on the side of Pro-Choice who was disturbed by this billboard but NOT because its some big secret that many abortions take place here.

I posted this picture on my Choice forum some time ago, finding the entire ad campaign to be rather distasteful. You all may find it hard to believe, but we're not all rabidly trying to keep as many abortions going as possible, but are trying to reduce the number that take place (encouraging a growing trend in already declining abortion rates). The billboard bothered me because it makes light of a rather serious issue, much in the same way that other ads by this particular company make light of other things, including Dick Cheney ("Your closet's so narrow it makes Dick Cheney look liberal.") and Paris Hilton ("Your closet's so shallow it makes Paris look deep."). The former depicted a wide man in a suit from the neck to the waist, the latter depicted a chiuaua with a tiara. The company obviously was going for the new trend in advertising - viral advertising by depicting shocking pop culture references. Its NOT some big pro-choice liberal "send a message to the peoples!" company, they're just looking to make people go "That was funny, I'll go buy their product!" I resent those that feel its some big combat against the pro-life ads (And FYI, coming into the Lincoln Tunnel here in NYC, you can see a very large billboard that says "Kill her today and its infanticide, kill her a few months ago and its abortion" with a picture of a small baby girl on it. Its rather prominent, you can't miss it, so back off with the "ZOMG NYC LOVES ABORSHUNS!!"
We're made up of many many different people with many different views. Ask all those who set up the abortion booths in Bryant and Battery parks, and Grand Central Station just how "pro-abort" they are.

Finally, I most hated this billboard because of the wire hanger. I could almost let the wording slide, but it disturbed me the most that anyone would try and use that kind of shock value (as in a method, used illegally in this country's past, that lead to at least several documented deaths of women). That's about as tasteful to me as using pictures of dead bodies in Darfur to advertise for a storage unit.

So knock it off with your generalizations already.

PS - NYC is pretty damn expensive to live in, but its not the most expensive city. That title, I'm pretty sure, goes to San Francisco.

Posted by: Jen at August 16, 2007 1:40 PM


Jen, thanks for commenting. What is your web/blog address... Choice Forum?

I didn't generalize. NYC is hard-core pro-abortion. 10% of all abortions in the country are indeed committed there. Granted, it has a large population (the largest metropolitan? or is that LA?). But that only means abortion is concentrated. More post-abortive women - and the men who enabled/coerced them - see that sign than likely anywhere else.

Posted by: Jill Stanek at August 16, 2007 1:56 PM


NYC (the entire city, not just Manhattan) is ranked 6th internationally on the list of cities with the highest cost of living. According to the Mercer Human Resources Consulting firm, only NYC and Los Angeles rank in the Top 50 internationally.

Posted by: Phil at August 16, 2007 1:56 PM


Hi Jen,
Question for you. In Minnesota the abortion rate went up by I believe 700-750 last year amongst teens. Jill recently had a post on this.

Planned Parenthood opened two new feeder clinics in more upscale suburban shopping malls. PP accounted for the vast majority of the abortion increase. If the pro-choice folks are so bent on trying to keep the abortion rate down, why did the abortion rates go up after these two clinics were built.

The same thing happend when they built a clinic in a smaller community north of Minneapolis/St. Paul.

Now of course PP denies that their new sites had anything to do with the rates going up, but businesses franchise and open new locations all the time for the sole purpose of gaining new business. What are your thoughts on this??


Posted by: Sandy at August 16, 2007 2:02 PM


Hey Jill, sorry, I didn't mean to direct that whole post at you, it was meant to be a response to everyone whose posted in the discussion, including you.
I run the forum that Rae is from, its on Facebook.

I was pretty sure SF was more expensive than NYC, and that was certainly my experience when I was there. LA I've not been to but it wouldn't surprise me if it was equally expensive. Then again I've heard stories of people being able to afford better housing there than here.

I'm curious as to why a previous poster would make mention of NYC being expensive in regards to this blog post. What does the expense of the cities have to do with abortion numbers?

I don't doubt we have a lot of abortions taking place here. A good friend of mine who interned at Planned Parenthood shared with my group that she met many girls who came from out of state to have their abortion there. One she counseled even asked her about any good Broadway shows she could see while visiting.

Posted by: Jen at August 16, 2007 2:04 PM


I don't know what state to state rates for abortion are. I do know that the national rates have dropped by several thousand every year, for the last decade or so. Do you know if the new PPs that opened up provided abortions? Generally, its about 1 to 3 that do actually provide the service, the others just make referrals. Also, what is the rate of women who have been giving birth from an unexpected pregnancy? (is that even measurable?) what about the overall pregnancy rate for your area? Have those been going up as well? Or is it just abortion?

Posted by: Jen at August 16, 2007 2:11 PM


In Minnesota the abortion rate went up by I believe 700-750 last year amongst teens.

Did they have abstinence-only teaching?

Posted by: Doug at August 16, 2007 3:00 PM


I think that abortions are increasing because of one reason. Women KNOW it's there. How many women use the abortion clinic as BC? I could give you about 5 names. [ However, I can't here.] Abortion has turned men and women into reproductive SLOBS! You would be surprised @ how many women have had more than 1 abortion.

Posted by: Heather4life at August 16, 2007 3:17 PM


Jen-

My comment was relating the wealth of an area to its general support for abortion, not the numbers of abortions committed there. Ask any pro-life group, and they'll confirm that poorer communities are more likely to respond in a positive way to pro-life outreach than wealthier ones.

Posted by: Phil at August 16, 2007 3:25 PM


Rae,

I've been thinking about you. How have things been going for you since you changed your course of treatment? Well I hope.

Posted by: Mary at August 16, 2007 4:05 PM


Phil -
I find that bizarre if its true, because the number of women who are poor who abort is 4 times higher than the number of women who are middle to upper class and abort. Do you have a citation for that, though? I'd be interested to see it.

Heather - I doubt I'd be surprised, the sources I've read put the number at around 50% of women who abort have aborted before.

Posted by: Anonymous at August 16, 2007 4:24 PM


Jen,
I tried to find updated stats to answer your question and didn't find anything as current as last last year. The stats are available yet.

I would have to say however, that if you are in business to make money what would be your incentive to want the abortion rates to drop.

The PP clinics I spoke of are referral clinics stocked with scented candles, body oils and jewelry.

The abortion rate went up 16% overall in MN, but again PP being the largest provider had an increase of 21% in their clinics alone. I believe they accounted for about 700 of the additional 739 abortions performed. How can they deny they are responsible for the increase????

I went to http://www.abortionfacts.com/providers/providers.asp and read an interview with an abortionist, Eric Hara who after 10 years operating one of the largest abortion chains in the US got out and gave it all up. He confirmed that abortion is a big business and it's all about the money. Abortionists make money from women by killing their unborn children. Bottom line. Abortion lobbying groups such as NOW, NARAL, NAF care about the money. This is a business to make money, not to help women.

Can any pro-choicer read this interview and contradict the experiences of this man?

How can you continue to support an industry that has lied to women and kill the unborn all in the name of money??

Just a few highlights of the interview:
Among many interesting facts, he refers to a well-known doctor who pushed women into later term abortions so he could make more money.

He readily admits that their "counseling" techniques were all about psychologically playing on women to make them feel abortion is the best option.

He talks about the reality of PAS, which the abortion industry still continues to deny. All cover-ups and lies.

This is an industry with no regulations. Women are used and spit out of the system.

Hummmmm I could go on an on, but I would hate to ruin your read.

Doug,
I know there is teen abstinence programs being taught in MN, but it is not required. There is no stats on how many schools include it with their educational programs, so there is no way to validate your insinuation that this played any role in the abortion rate increase.


Posted by: Sandy at August 16, 2007 4:35 PM


I know there is teen abstinence programs being taught in MN, but it is not required. There is no stats on how many schools include it with their educational programs, so there is no way to validate your insinuation that this played any role in the abortion rate increase.

I hear you Sandy and was really just joking, since the abstinence programs have been shown to be neutral or slightly counter-productive. No biggie.

Doug

Posted by: Doug at August 16, 2007 5:52 PM


@Jill: Oh I knew about it...I just figured I'd let you find out on your own, I knew it wouldn't take long for it to happen (I belong to the same forum as Jen).

@Mary: I finally quit taking my anti-depressants just about two weeks ago, had a nice week of withdrawal-ish symptoms and then I've been a cranky "pill" since. So in other words, it is not going as smoothly as I hoped due to a major incident/fight I had with a friend among other things, but I finally started seeing a behavioral therapist this week, so it should be improving. At least I hope it does. :)

Currently I'm just bouncing up and down as I wait for August 21st...the day Darren Hayes' new album comes out, I've been waiting for it for just about a year now so I'm *very* excited to hear the whole thing! :D

Posted by: Rae at August 16, 2007 6:07 PM


Rae,

Thank you for the update and keep up the good work. You've chosen a difficult road but I know you will succeed. Don't expect it to be easy and there will be setbacks. Don't let them defeat you. What's important is how you pick yourself back up after a setback. Take care and keep me posted.

Posted by: Mary at August 16, 2007 6:23 PM


Doug,
Did you read the interview link? If so, what is your respone to this? There are many more stories just like this one.

If these clinics really wanted to support women, why don't they offer real counseling services and do a psych evaluations of women to make sure they are capable of handling their decision?

Why don't they take their million dollar profits and help women who make the choice to keep their babies by supporting crisis pregnancy centers?

Why do they feel compelled to continue lying to women regarding PAS???, offer no support, but blame the women themselves for making a decision they were unsure of???

Why are they not in support of women viewing ultrasounds so they can actually see what they are about to kill????

Why does this industry remain so unregulated that there are clinics operating today without properly credentialed staff, no hot water, caked blood under the tables, infestion of bugs, unsanitized equipment????

Why are they against informed consent to allow women to understand the development of their unborn children, and to evaluated the risks associated with abortion??

I really don't feel compelled into agruing personhood vs. human vs. fetus vs. embryo vs. conciousness vs. soul.

These unborn babies are living beings that deserve the right to life just like you, Erin, Laura and everyyone else out there who was given the right to life.

Now I am going to digress for a moment....
(but I am curious to know your opinion or any pro-choicer who cares to weigh in)

When I was about 13 years old, I had a friend who had a dog which had never been nuetered. The dog became pregnant with several litters of puppies of the course of our friendship I later found out that upon thier birth, my friend's dad would collect the frail puppies, (with eyes still closed) from the mother and put them into a gunny sack bag and drown them in the local river.

They could have never survived without their mother to feed and nurture them, just as they did minutes before in her womb.

Do you feel these puppies had a right to life or was my friends dad justified in dunking them in the river to end their lives because they would have been too much of a burden to feed and take care of???

Another friend of mine lived on a farm. They had several cats that would make a home in their barn and deliver litters of kittens. I later found out, her dad would collect the frail newborn kittens, (with eyes still closed) put them into a gunny sack bag and attach it to the exhaust pipe of their truck.

These newborn kittens again, never would have survived on their own and were reliant on their mother for survival just like they were minutes before in their mother's womb.

Did these kittens have a right to life or was her dad justified in killing these kittens because they were too much of a burden??

Posted by: Sandy at August 16, 2007 9:13 PM


Did you guys hear about the guy who threw his terminally ill wife off a balcony because he couldn't continue to pay her astronomical medical bills?

Posted by: JKeller at August 16, 2007 9:22 PM


Jkellar, Wow! That's drastic!

Posted by: Heather4life at August 17, 2007 12:32 AM


"If these clinics really wanted to support women, why don't they offer real counseling services and do a psych evaluations of women to make sure they are capable of handling their decision?"

I can't speak for every clinic ever, but I do know the PPs in NYC give two counselling sessions prior to any woman's abortion. My friend who interned there spoke of many women who changed their minds once they were told the other options they had besides aborting, and then walked right out of the clinic.

"Why don't they take their million dollar profits and help women who make the choice to keep their babies by supporting crisis pregnancy centers?"

Planned Parenthoods across the board offer discounted prenatal care and parenting classes to those without insurrance. They also offer referals to adoption agencies.

"Why do they feel compelled to continue lying to women regarding PAS???, offer no support, but blame the women themselves for making a decision they were unsure of???"

Who exactly is blaming women? PPs at least offer group counseling for those who have recieved an abortion.

"These unborn babies are living beings that deserve the right to life just like you, Erin, Laura and everyyone else out there who was given the right to life."

I don't ever argue that a fetus isn't a person. I find that to be a silly argument. I see the fetus as a person, and I use the case Shimp v. McFall in my arguments, meaning I see the fetus as a person like anyone else, but as this case ruled, no person is allowed to use another person's bodily tissues unless that person gives consent. Even if that person would die otherwise (as this case went, a terminally ill man sought to force another man to donate blood, I believe (memory's a little foggy), or he would die from a rare blood cancer).

And as to your dog and cat references - I have been chastised in the past for making comparisons between animals and human fetuses because as we all know, they are not the same, and are not treated the same.

If a child was drowned in a river or suffocated minutes after birth, I would not feel that was right. Why? Because after birth a multitude of options become available (you can pretty much give a child to anyone at that point, family, friends, adoption agency, hospital doorstep). However, during birth, you don't have a multitude of options. You have carrying it to term, and you have abortion. You can't give the fetus to someone else to carry. If you could, I'd be all for outlawing abortion because then abortion would be obsolete. But you can't.

Why is this deviating into a debate on abortion as a whole anyway? Is there no more comment to what I said towards the original comments and the original post?

Posted by: Jen at August 17, 2007 11:01 AM


Is there no more comment to what I said towards the original comments and the original post?

Jen, I replied yesterday but the post did not show up; gremlins I reckon.

I don't like the hanger, either. There is the obvious association of the hanger with "closet space," but also "right to choose" --> abortion --> the hanger signifying the time when abortion was illegal; a very bad time for many women.

Agreed that there is some "shock value" intent with it but is it really "proper"? Interesting how if affects us.

For most expensive US cities, it may depend on if "NYC" is considered to be the five boroughs or not. CNN/Money.com ranks the most expensive in this order: Manhattan, San Francisco, Los Angeles, San Jose, Washington, D.C.

Doug

Posted by: Doug at August 17, 2007 12:13 PM


Thanks for your reply Doug!

And thanks for that info on most expensive cities. It makes sense, I happen to live in Brooklyn, and its certainly no where near as expensive as some of the west coast cities I've been to.

Posted by: Jen at August 17, 2007 12:56 PM


Jen, Rae, can you give me the addresses of good pro-choice blogs?

Posted by: Jill Stanek at August 17, 2007 2:21 PM


@Jill: It's not a blog, it's a message board. Sorry. :)

Posted by: Rae at August 17, 2007 4:44 PM


Rae, you may think I'm a complete idiot for asking this, but will you please explain to me what a message board is? I know there's a whole new world there and I want to understand it and maybe participate. Someone just asked me to be a myspace friend, and I don't know what that means to me.

Posted by: Jill Stanek at August 17, 2007 5:17 PM


Brooklyn...Yum.. makes me thing of "Embers" - a steakhouse/restaurant, 95th St, & 3rd Ave.

Doug

Posted by: Anonymous at August 17, 2007 6:18 PM


@Jill: A message board works very similarly to your blog here. What you do is you start a "thread" or a "topic" and you post what you think. Then people can respond to what you say, much like they do on here, except you usually can directly reply to people, making it a bit easier to know who exactly you are talking to.

Another term for "message board" is a "forum", if that helps. :)

Posted by: Rae at August 17, 2007 8:10 PM


@Jill: I don't actually know of any pro-choice blogs myself. I'm not big on reading political blogs because I find they can be littered with misinformation (this is so not a jab at you, just my experience with political blogs in general).

My group is on facebook, and its basically a central place where a lot of people contribute a lot of information, its discussed, further researched, etc. We also do what you do, post news articles with commentary that we find relates to the subject of our group, share theories and ideas, help shape a more accurate idea of what abortion is and what we as pro-choicers are trying to do, not just simply yell about a woman's right. There's also the compliment to our group, called simply "Pro-Life" on facebook, and I and a few other members of my group go there and debate and sometimes just make friends and talk and share ideas with the people who post regularly over there. We (the admins of both groups) have been trying to share information and discuss things civilly, and we have helped each other with research and correct info on abortion from time to time.

Posted by: Jen at August 17, 2007 9:16 PM


Thanks to you both for the info. How does one go about breaking into this world?

Posted by: Jill Stanek at August 18, 2007 12:10 PM


This is a message board right here. Only the moderators can start new threads (topics, columns, etc.)and Jill is the only one who does it, but after that we posters are free to argue our fool heads off.

Posted by: Doug at August 18, 2007 9:45 PM


Sandy: Doug, Did you read the interview link? If so, what is your respone to this? There are many more stories just like this one.

Sandy, sorry - I missed your post until now. I'm not even sure what link you mean.

........

If these clinics really wanted to support women, why don't they offer real counseling services and do a psych evaluations of women to make sure they are capable of handling their decision?

I think you want to demonize them by acting like they all fail to do that. I am all for real, good counseling and evaluations.

........

Why don't they take their million dollar profits and help women who make the choice to keep their babies by supporting crisis pregnancy centers?

I think you may be overstating their profits, and you could ask that of any doctors, organizations, etc., that had that much money.

........

Why do they feel compelled to continue lying to women regarding PAS???, offer no support, but blame the women themselves for making a decision they were unsure of???

I don't know that they're lying about stress after having abortions. They shouldn't "blame" women, though.

........

Why are they not in support of women viewing ultrasounds so they can actually see what they are about to kill?

Personally, I have no problem with ultrasounds if the woman wants to see it.

........

Why does this industry remain so unregulated that there are clinics operating today without properly credentialed staff, no hot water, caked blood under the tables, infestion of bugs, unsanitized equipment?

Sounds bad to me. I'm not for that, no matter what type of place it is.

........

Why are they against informed consent to allow women to understand the development of their unborn children, and to evaluated the risks associated with abortion?

If they really are, I don't know.

........

I really don't feel compelled into agruing personhood vs. human vs. fetus vs. embryo vs. conciousness vs. soul. These unborn babies are living beings that deserve the right to life just like you, Erin, Laura and everyyone else out there who was given the right to life.

"Deserve" is your opinion. If nothing else, there is also the woman to think about.

........

Now I am going to digress for a moment.... (but I am curious to know your opinion or any pro-choicer who cares to weigh in) When I was about 13 years old, I had a friend who had a dog which had never been nuetered. The dog became pregnant with several litters of puppies of the course of our friendship I later found out that upon thier birth, my friend's dad would collect the frail puppies, (with eyes still closed) from the mother and put them into a gunny sack bag and drown them in the local river. They could have never survived without their mother to feed and nurture them, just as they did minutes before in her womb. Do you feel these puppies had a right to life or was my friends dad justified in dunking them in the river to end their lives because they would have been too much of a burden to feed and take care of?

Good question. Was the mother dog capable of taking care of the pups? These were born, feeling creatures (unlike abortion), and I also don't think it's like the abortion argument since we're not talking about the mother dog not wanting them (are we?). I don't think the pups should have been drowned. There is also the option of giving the pups away once the mother dog has raised them enough. Better to have the dog spayed, first of all. Failing that, I say better to have the pregnancy aborted than to kill the pups after birth.

........

Another friend of mine lived on a farm. They had several cats that would make a home in their barn and deliver litters of kittens. I later found out, her dad would collect the frail newborn kittens, (with eyes still closed) put them into a gunny sack bag and attach it to the exhaust pipe of their truck. These newborn kittens again, never would have survived on their own and were reliant on their mother for survival just like they were minutes before in their mother's womb. Did these kittens have a right to life or was her dad justified in killing these kittens because they were too much of a burden?

Same here - I'd say better to have the cats spayed. If not, then better if the pregnancies were aborted than killing the born, feeling kittens. I know some old farmers that would do just as you describe - there is hardly ever any "aborting" pregnancies for cats or dogs on the part of people, and spaying costs money and new animals can just show up, too. I'm presuming, here, that the mother cats and mother dog could have raised their litters, and if so then how much of a true "burden" is it on the people? If the cats & dog are being fed anyway, don't the animals do all the "raising" of the litters? Then later on they can be given away.

Doug

Posted by: Doug at August 18, 2007 10:11 PM