Talk:Borg (Star Trek)/Archive 2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents

Do Borg Know about Q?

The Borg think they are perfect yet they seem unaware of The Q. I emailed a long message about this to a friend of Jeri Ryan and a year later Q's son met Seven of Nine on an episode of voyager. Yet, so far The Borg Queen has never met any of The Q and she seems unaware that they exist and are impossible for the borg to do anything about. I think this must be noted somewhere. Thodin 21:38, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Q: If the Continuum's told you once, they've told you a thousand times, Junior...DON'T PROVOKE THE BORG!! -Lordraydens 08:55, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Well, yes they would know about the Continuum, they assimilated Picard after all 66.189.90.207 15:54, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Luddite prophecy?

I googled this phrase and all I got were half dozen copies of this exact article on various other free encyclopedias.

"The Borg, with their frightening appearance, immense power, and most importantly a no-nonsense, totally sinister motive became the signature villains for the Next Generation era of Star Trek. Its strongest definition is most probably the fearful Luddite prophecy."

so what the hell is a Luddite prophecy? Vroman

Greetings. Try google for "modern day luddites" and "why the future does not need us". For these people the Borg would then be the ultimate nightmare. The articles does not require that exact term. Wikiborg 00:10, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
I don't know exactly, but taking a guess here. A luddite dislikes technological change and the Borg do whatever they can to make change (assimilation). So to a luddite, the borg represent the worst thing imaginable. Cburnett 16:41, Jun 22, 2005 (UTC)
I made the same guess, but its a pretty obscure reference and should be explained better Vroman
I happen to have a little knowledge relevant to this question. Recently, a newly emergent philosophy known as Transhumanism has begun to develop which advocates the usage of newly developing technologies such as genetic engineering, nanotechnology and robotics/artificial intelligence (all technologies used by the Borg) to enhance human beings beyond their natural state and to create a super-race of posthumans who will take over humanity's role as explorers, discoverers, and subjugators of the world around us, a task that they would be infinitely more suited to due to the fact of their vastly superior collective intellect (Borg Collective) and that they would be able to re-engineer themselves to fit any situation imaginable (Borg Adaptation). Before one dismisses these ideas as science-fictional noodlings taken too seriously, one should note that the majority of Academia involved in the hard sciences now agrees that technology has gathered to it such a momentum that within the next hundred years we will become capable of making human capabilities obsolete. If one does not believe what I say, read the works of many prominent scientific experts; Stephen Hawking's book The Universe in a Nutshell, for one unusually well-known example, has a chapter which analyses whether or not our future might ever be Star Trek-like, in which he concludes "no", stating quite flatly that before we reach the level of Warp Drives and Tachyon Physics, we will be likely to have long ago developed ways of surpassing human abilities, and thusly the only way a Star Trek-world might come about is if such a thing had already happened and natural human beings had somehow managed to miraculously overcome it (a theme dealt with in greater detail in Enterprise than in any other of the series). Back to the point, however; Transhumanism is only one wavelength in the spectrum of philosophical thought which can be accurately defined under the little known term of Cosmism, coined by Hugo de Garis, which believes that human technology is now advancing so quickly that our own technology will invariably overtake us in all ways in the relatively near future, and that this situation is not necessarily a bad one. The opposite philosophy to Cosmism is Terranism, which believes as Star Trek seems to believe, that Cosmism is inherently wrong, and that human beings should attempt to avoid this "technological revolution" and that although technology may be a good thing, that it can only be good when it is used as a tool by natural human beings. Terranism encompasses such diverse philosophies as soft Terranism, which simply believes that when we figure out genetic engineering and Data-like androids, that they should be our servants and not our masters; it also encompasses many hard-line philosophies like neo-Luddism which says that all technologies which go beyond the natural human limits are inherently evil because of the purported fact that humanity is a natural pinnacle and is evolutionarily perfect. As the tension of an inevitable ideological struggle builds between these two emergent philosophies, naturally, both sides have developed epitaphs and bad words for each other. Cosmists commonly call Terrans Luddites because of the perceived aversion to technology, and the inevitable rallying cry of Terrans is the Star Trek-like struggle against an inhuman Borg-force, something which is inarguably superior but which one would nevertheless never what to be a part of. This may help to shed some light on your Borg and Luddite references. -jove
(Superior) transhumanistic technology does not automatically entail a superior (Borg-like) collective intellect. A Borg-like collective intellect will require a lot more (knowledge and intelligence sharing, etc. technology). --Abelani, 21:59, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
Of course, nothing automatically entails something else, it depends on how these things go, I'm simply pointing out that like all political movements, Terrans and Cosmists like to generalize each other's philosophies beyond all reason, specifically so that these philosophies do seem unreasonable. Cosmists like to boil down Terranism to "Technology is bad. Let's all live simple lives like nature intended."-style Primitivism, while Terrans like to boil down Cosmism or Transhumanism to the Borg, or Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines or something to that effect. I'm just trying to shed some light on the reference about the Borg as a Luddite prophecy. Such terms can be a bit obscure if you're starting from the standpoint of no knowledge regarding these particular issues; it would be like somebody from the 1800's trying to understand a debate about Abortion, when you're not familiar with the technology or the terminology used to describe it. For more information on the topic, two quick and informative places to visit would be on this website: Transhumanism and Technological singularity, these briefly explore the topics, but the true wealth of information can be accessed from the external links in those sections. -jove

The See Also Section

Hello there. I've added the Reavers, the nomadic cannibals from Firefly into the "See Also" section. They're not exactly the same as the Borg, nor am I aware of what the similarities are (Haven't seen much Trek), but from what I can tell, they're definitely similar. Hydragon 08:27, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Both are similar in that they're juggernauts. :) I also like the other recent addition, "We, Borg." E Pluribus Anthony 05:10, 18 November 2005 (UTC)
I'm familiar with both mythologies, and I would disagree pretty strongly that the Reavers belong here. The Reavers are vicious, brutal, and unthinking--aggression personified. They mortify their own flesh and seek only to kill. They have no philosophy as such, and although they seem to lack individuality, they don't appear to have any overarching organization, either. The Borg are coldly intellectual, organized, and motivated by a distinct, abstract, philosophical goal. Although both possess zombie-like unthinking implacability, I don't think that's sufficient to draw the parallel. I would recommend that the bullet point on Reavers be removed from this section entirely.--216.43.17.100 19:17, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

I would like to bring up that my adiition of Death's Head II to this section should not have been removed, as the two concepts are similar. The Death's Head II, as I mentioned in that article addition, is similar yet different, comparable to the Borg in his existence and the fact that he does in fact assimilate others, but is not a collective in the way the Borg are.

The Death's Head II link does not belong here. As you stated in your edit, he is nearly the complete opposite of the Borg. This is not, by any version of the english language, 'similar.' If we are to begin adding any subject to See Also, merely to compare the Borg to them when there is only the slightest connection between the two, I fully expect to see Microsoft and Darth Vader added to the list, as both are closer to the subject material than Death's Head II. - Hayter 17:59, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

While Death's Head II is in most way opposite to the Borg, he IS a cyborg which uses assimilation in order to gain new skills. Which is among the things listed in that edit. I placed it in the see also section because of the similarities between the two, such as the fact that both are collectives, both assimilate others, and of course, both adapt to attacks from opponents. The differences are that Death's Head II is a singular being containing multiple minds and that he is a passionate and emotional being. This was all in that edit. I have never seen any of the other things mentioned in the see also section, and as even the editor who placed the Reavers on the list states, that edit does not truly relate to the Borg in terms of comparable, if not copmpletely similar concepts. Just figured I'd point this out, as that feels like a double standard to me.

Comparison with Islam

Original statements

This section has been deleted many times. The greatest contribution of Wikipedia is to free speech. Unfortunately there are always those that wish to stifle it. To give in to attempts to censor uncomfortable truths and to silence opinions is to submit to those repressive forces that Wikipedia seeks to defeat. If you disagree with this article then write a rebuttal and let the force of your argument show through instead of simply deleting it. Evil succeeds where good men do nothing.

Ideology Many modern commentators have drawn a comparison between the Borg and the ideology of Al Qaeda and fundamentalist Islam. Just as the avowed aim of the borg is to assimilate all non-borg civilisations, so fanatical Muslims desire to make the whole world Islam, by force if necessary. Both the Borg and radical Islam believe not only that other cultures should be assimilated into their own, but that peaceful co-existance with those cultures who refuse cannot be counternanced. It should also to be noted that very few Borg are ever de-assimilated; in a similar way that in radical Islam, the price for converting to another faith is death, so very few convert out.

Capabilities Like modern Islamic terrorism, the Borg are equipped not only with an unshakeable ideology but a decentralised structure with high levels of redundancy that makes them incredibly difficult to defeat. They can adapt very rapidly to measures opponents devise to defeat them, and learn quickly from their adversaries tactics and weaknesses.In a similar way one sees That you should convert or suffer the consequences in this life or the next.

The Borg most strongly resembled radical Islam in their first incarnations. Most Star Trek fans consider the early Borg to be more powerful and truly implacable enemies than they have subsequently become. For instance, in their first encounter with the Borg in Q Who, the Next Generation crew initially see the Borg as another interesting species to study and to engage with, naivelly confident even after the Enterprise is attacked that the Borg will respond to reason once they understand them. This can be read in retrospect as naive western liberal politics coming up against the resolute implacability of Islam. Later in "The Best of Both Worlds" this naitvete is disabused and the Borg are presented an as out and out threat to the very survival of the Federation's way of life,s s striking at its very centre. The creation of the "Borg Queen" has been a rather futile effort at humanising the Borg. The fundimental point here is that the borg are not human and attitute is as unacceptible as it is non-negotiable. A similar state of affairs exists between the West and radical Islam.

Discussion

Criticisms

I personally think that the comparisons between the Borg and Islam should be removed entirely, particularly in the view that the Al Queda wasn't really big in world news during the time the Borg were conceived.--Vercalos 17:58, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

Some flaws with the post:

  • It is posted in the wrong place. If it has to be posted, it must be much lower somewhere - not on top and above the Overview.
  • There are major spelling and grammatical errors in the post.
  • Just who are the "Many modern commentators"?
  • Fanatical Muslims desire to kill a whole lot more than to convert. The Borg do not by default desire to kill.
  • The Borg are truly powerful, while fanatical Muslims are not. Moreover, they (fanatics) do not quickly learn from their adversaries tactics.
  • The Borg are not entirely non-negotiable. There was a temporary deal between them and the Voyager crew.
  • The Borg only assimilate technology and species that are sufficiently advanced. For example, as extracted from the article, Seven of Nine once stated to Neelix that the Kazon were not worth assimilating because they would not add to the Borg's perfection. In contrast, radical Islamists want to convert everyone to Islam.

--Abelani 2:44, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Hello! Agreed: the comparisons between the Borg and Islam are uncited and POV: any belief set may have parallels to the Borg and singling out Islam just highlights the bias of the user(s) who persist in including it in the article. E Pluribus Anthony 18:51, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Reply to criticisms

I will try to reply to critisms point by point.

Firstly, I am quite happy to correct the grammatical errors and post it in a different section of the article; however I fear that this will not really change your opinion of the article.

Two, your comments that the borg seek to assimilate/convert and not to kill; I would be happy to remove the references to killing. For it is the avowed aim of all true Muslims that the whole world should become muslim. A uniform world of conformity; a Borg ideal.

What I try to make clear is that the article refers to the initial incarnation of the Borg. That implacable, non-negotiable entity that equates with a philosophy that sees all other religions as inferior and ripe for conversion. As this philosophy is so far removed from the norms of freedom of religion that we cherish the writers naturally amended this initial into a form people could more readily identify. A more negotiable, more understandable, more liberal form. And you’re right this has less relevance to radical Islam.

No Muslim country is a signatory to the UN convention on the freedom of religion. Why is this? This is because in Islam the price for converting out of Islam is death. Indeed one receives a reward in the afterlife for killing members of ones family that perform such apostasy. In a similar way few convert from being borg.

I am not saying that the writers when they first created the Borg meant to create an analogy to Islam. Nonetheless in its initial incarnation the Borg were emblematic of radical islam.

So finally, if I amend the grammatical errors, remove the references to killing, make it clear that it refers to the first form/impression of the Borg and site it near the cultural allusions section of the article will you allow it to be included. Or is the actual problem the subject matter? Free speech is total or it is nothing at all. Unfortunately radical Muslims have threatened, cajoled, and silenced anyone who dares to make any direct criticism of Islam. This has resulted in a climate of fear where comedians will refuse to make any jokes about Islam after the death threat issued against Salman Rushdie in the early 90’s. Salman Rushdie wrote a fictional book about the birth of islam. Film makers make no films directly criticising islam, after the killing of Theo Van Gogh. Van Gogh made a film criticising the treatment of women under islam. He was stabbed to death by a muslim.

I don’t know whether or not you’re a muslim. I don’t know whether or criticism of my article is due to the causes listed in your entry or due to the fact that I criticised islam. Whether or not you feel that islam is beyond criticism or you fear Wikipedia will receive a fatwa. But silencing an opinion you disagree with is something that I would never do. For although I may disagree or have distain for your opinion I will always defend your right to hold it.

Hello. Unfortunately, the comparisons between the Borg and Islam are uncited and point-of-view (POV): any belief set may have parallels to the Borg, and singling out Islam is biased. For example, the Borg may also be emblematic of Christians during the Crusades, et al.; perhaps both are better compared to juggernauts instead. Ultimately in Wp, it's not a matter of free speech, or even about truth: it's about including information that can be cited from authoritative or reputable works and verified with a neutral point of view. Moreover, a consensus (or more correctly, a supermajority in this case) must agree to include this or that. The Borg/Islam information added currently fulfills none of these. E Pluribus Anthony 18:51, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
Dear Sir/Madam
It is the first created attempt at a rebuttal. I would just point out the following. Your first critique of my article states it to be a biased work. Later you state that it is not the design of Wp to pursue free speech or truth but to create a sourced work that conforms to the consensus view. A basic understanding of consensus would reveal that it varies with culture, ethnicity and most importantly time. So necessarily, consensus is biased. Whether or not you feel the bias is slight or great, the consensus view on all things from Julius Caesar to the nature of time has changed through the ages, based on the current opinion i.e. it was biased. Furthermore, all sourced material is based on a person’s opinion of given evidence, and thus is prone to bias. If you have studied history, law, science, art or religion on you would know that all opinion is biased to some degree, and that degree is most effectively judged in posterity.
Thus, although I don’t feel your point about bias is remotely relevant, I do feel consensus is important. How is consensus arrived at? Well, commonly one issues a piece of work to be read, digested and analysed by ones colleagues, peers and public. Then opinion is canvassed, and consensus is achieved.
Unfortunately, your repeated attempts to delete my entry is simply censorship. If you genuinely wanted to see if consensus exists you would allow it to be read by the widest readership and, if necessary, write your own counter opinion.
Finally, and to be honest the very least, the analogy of the Borg to the Islam is not related to whether or not the writers meant this to exist. It captures a zeitgeist. I don’t strongly believe the ancient Romans or Hindu gods are trying to conquer, oppress and convert, to the repeal those freedoms we most cherish.
I would advice you read a little on the topic. Maybe start with the Quran. Then read about the relationship for islam to other communities in Nigeria, Sudan, Cypress, India, the Caucuses, Western China, Thailand, South-East Asia, the UK and so on.
Consensus is based on free speech and free thought. Consensus without free speech is simply the dictates of the tyrant, similar to those of the borg
  • You still need to register and sign-in, so we can refer to you by a name and correctly track your changes. Please consider using common Wikipedia conventions, such as correctly indenting and signing your comments, etc.
  • As also mentioned earlier, there are similarities between Borg and a lot of things - just one of which may be radical-Islam. Just a few other things that cherish attributes of the Borg include Microsoft (due to its largely post-innovation-assimilationist nature), Linux (due to its open-source collectivist nature), communism (again due to its collectivist nature), and a lot of other things under the sun. Are we then going to draw detailed comparisons of those because they resemble (just) a subset of attributes of the Borg?
  • When making a comparison, you've to consider everything known about the Borg - consider them as a whole, and not just what was known "early-on". There are some serious differences between the Borg and radical-Islam. In addition to those stated previously, here's one more: The Borg often did not assimilate a planet all-at-once, but in rounds, so as to get newer technology every time. Radical Islamists on the other hand would want to convert everyone to Islam at the same time if they could.
  • Have you thought that you may actually be elevating radical-Islam to Borg status, given that almost all who read the Borg article are fans.
--Abelani, 21:50, 27 November, 2005
Unfortunately, your arguments are somewhat flawed. I agree with Abelani. In accordance with Wp policies and procedures, and in the course of this discussion, you have not cited anything reputable (providing references) to support your position or contribution. Absence – or minimisation – of bias and neutral point of view are at the core of Wikipedia, and your discussion/argument is lacking in both of these. We cannot verify your information, so it doesn't belong in Wp in its current form. Moreover, in this canvass: at least three users have opposed this information vis-à-vis your sole support of it: this is as close to arriving at a consensus or unanimity, with or without discussion, as there can be. The article has also been locked because of your repeated attempts to include this information without discussion, in contravention of policies and consensus. Lastly: you should refrain from being pejorative in your commentary — read up a bit more on Wp process and historiography before advancing arguments and attempting to build consensus. End communication. E Pluribus Anthony 21:54, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
For additional users' opinions (all of whom are unanimous in their opinions that this has no place on Wikipedia), see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Borg and Radical Islam. --Nlu 23:24, 27 November 2005 (UTC)


Unprotecting

Now that we actually do have a conversation going on the topic, anybody object to my unprotecting the article in about one and a half hours (if I don't fall asleep before then)? --Nlu 23:25, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Fine by me! :) E Pluribus Anthony 23:30, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
Unprotected. Please note I will reprotect if things go back the way they were before the protection. --Nlu 01:12, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
Acknowledged; as well, have decisions been made regarding the related article and its nomination for deletion, which apparently has unanimous support? E Pluribus Anthony 19:46, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

Language

I strongly believe the borg communicate with machine language fundementaly. --Cool CatTalk|@ 12:10, 27 December 2005 (UTC)


Transformers? Really?

So much of so many Star Trek races' "histories" are wrapped up in noncanon and fanfics and what have you that it's virtually impossible to be both canonical and comprehensive while satisfying inquizitive minds. However, a lot of the speculation of the origins of the Borg reads like the What If series. Unreconcilable time travel schemes? Megatron City? Conjecture in here, solidify out there. -Unregistered User

Perhaps. However, there is indeed a fanfiction in which the Borg capture and assimilate Megatron, which at one point was available over the internet. And while conjecture is certainly interesting to read, in this case, I had posted that particular passage, along with the Death's head II passage (which DOES in fact relate to the Borg as it is a semi-similar concept, though a study in reversal in terms of his differences from them), because it is a suggestion of how some fans might interpret the 'machine world' to be, given that the Borg's centrul hub resembvles nothing even similar to an actual planet. PlaneTOID, perhaps, but not a planet, whereas V'Ger was said to have been pulled into the Machine Planet via is't gravity. We know that Cybertron has gravity, and so it is a source of possibility that may be explored by fanfiction writers, even if such has not happened yet. After all, historically speaking, the events of Beast Wars are not completely historically possible because the original Voyager probe was launched before the Transformers themselves awoke aboard the ark when Mt. Saint Hilary erupted in 1984.

Telepathy? (!)

The Borg do not use telepathy. As Cybernetic-Organic entites, they use technology. As was seen in Voyager, they blocked their signals to Seven of Nine by shutting off her sub-space radio connection (or something radio). They are not telepathic. If there is no dissent, I move to change the article to reflect the situation as portrayed in the series BoLingua

Some species of the Borg are telepathic, this is due to their assimilation of telepathic species. You are correct, they do not use telepathy to communicate with each other no more than they talk to communicate with each other. However, the option is available to them when communicating with other species, again, because of their assimilation of telepathic species such as the Betazoid. --Evmore 07:23, 13 July 2006 (UTC)


Picard

Picard was clearly not biochemically assimilated in the standard Borg sense as often seen later. His face remained Picard's, and his skin did not change. Anthony Appleyard 21:28, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

This is supposition. And I beg to differ: in the episode "The Best of Both Worlds", Dr. Crusher mentions (after Locutus/Picard's reabduction) that the Borg implants were infiltrating him on a cellular level (i.e., rewriting his DNA) and, since they got him early enough, she could reverse the damage and remove the implants through microsurgery. In addition, Star Trek: First Contact implies that his assimilation was more than just "cut and paste" (e.g., with the 'spider' implant, a la later assimilations, emerging from his face during a dream, etc.); a retcon of sorts.
Moreover, some recent edits were grammatically incorrect or wanting of style, so I made edits appropriately and (in some instances) restored the status quo. E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 21:48, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
There is evidence that Borg techonology remained present within Picard after his removal from the collective. Thereafter, he could feel the presence of Borg. Borg are not telepathic; that he could sense their presence is evidence of remnant Borg technology.--Jeffro77 21:56, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
I wonder whether this was truly a technological remnant – which I wouldn't doubt, given that Seven of Nine still retained implants and 'hardware' (e.g., nanoprobes) long after her recovery – or one more related to ... the residual effects of the vast hive mind and related psionics (for lack of a better term). Various episodes involving telepathy, i.e., where technology is not present, have yielded similar residual effects. E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 22:04, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
This was still not a typical assimilation as often seen later. His face remained as Picard's."the Borg implants were infiltrating him on a cellular level": In normal Borg assimilations this happens in a few minutes. In a Star Trek movie I saw a human man turning into a Borg inside his spacesuit, after a Borg injected him. With Picard this was happening very slowly, spreading from the implants. OK, the idea of Borg assimilation was still evolving in real time (film studio time), and that may cause inconsistencies in the fictional time line. Anthony Appleyard 07:23, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
I'm not saying it was typical: given Locutus' function, it was rather atypical. I'm saying Picard's assimilation occurred on as much a molecular level, as indicated in episodes, as others have (which the prior statements indicated) – the initial method of co-opting differs (and of course the process was refined throughout the course of the numerous series), but the results are the same. You will also note that this is fully addressed later on in the appropriate section of the article and need not be reiterated. E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 08:49, 19 January 2006 (UTC)


Queen's chambers

when the borg queen takes 7of9 to the unicomplex, the door to her chambers has a symbol on it that looks like the triskelion. any concurs out there? -Lordraydens 07:39, 16 March 2006 (UTC)


Borg from V'ger theory

It was mentioned that Voyager 6 could not have made it very far even at maximum warp and therefore could not have gotten to the Delta quadrant. However, in the movie I believe it mentions that Voyager 6 went into a black hole or a wormhole only to emerge on the far side of the galaxy, aka Delta Quadrant. Despite this though, we have no idea where V'ger went after melding with a human. It was postulated that V'ger went off to explore other universes or dimensions, not the delta quadrant which it may very well have already visited in that uberpowerful ship of his.

V'ger from Borg theory

An additional critizism of this theory is that the ship V'ger had was way beyond what the Borg could have produced to give to V'ger at the time, in my opinion at least.

Agreed. The Borg have never shown any weaponry anywhere near as advanced as the giant plasma balls V'Ger used to take out the Klingons, the Epsilon Station, and almost the Enterprise. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.123.145.114 (talk • contribs) 10:03 26 May 2006 (UTC)

The Borg need not have equipped V'ger with it's own present technology; they just souped it up to be able to collect and use whatever V'ger itself found along it's own journey (perhaps the creators of the Dyson Sphere from the "Relics" episode of ST: TNG might have been ingenious enough to have given V'ger some of it's amazing stuff). Although just speculative, I've always liked the Borg/V'ger connection...especially since Spock (while inside V'ger's visual memory banks) sees a computerized-mechanized world with unbelievable technology. It's clear that that world reengineered Voyager, so until contradicted, let's just say that it encountered either the Borg homeworld, or at least a planet already fully transformed by Borg technology. User:Odysseybookshop June 12, 2006