Text taken from an article written/commented on by US Golden Throat Candace Owens:
Commentary by Russian military journalist Boris Rozhin is in italics:
A Candace Owens video is at the end (alas, with Russian subtitles):
[ColonelCassad] This is a twist.
Candice Owens
… dear Candace is a very pretty fantasist, but I can’t imagine her husband, the founder of Parler, married her for her brains, despite a resumé that suggests she ought to be a great deal more clever than the words that have come out of her mouth over the years. Somehow, after starting well, she has managed to work her way to the wrong side of almost every single issue she has publicly addressed…
releases an exposé proving that a man posing as Macron's wife participated in the famous Stanford prison experiment.
I thought: isn't it interesting that Jean-Michel Tronier didn't sue me? Wouldn't this be a legally logical step? Because in America it is almost impossible to sue a public person due to the standard of "actual malice". It is necessary to prove that... I believe that public figures are part of the public interest. People have the right to highlight their activities and ask questions. And you have to meet the so-called "actual malice" standard, which I think I explained earlier. It means that a person knew the truth 100% and acted recklessly in relation to it simply because of personal animosity and malice.
But if Jean-Michel Tronier sued me, this standard would not apply. Jean-Michel could say: "I beg your pardon, this lady claims that I changed gender and became a sister, this is unpleasant." And then he would probably have a very legitimate reason to file a lawsuit if he could prove that I knew the truth. But this is not happening. Jean-Michel Tronier is not suing me. They are not at all interested in finding it out. I wonder why? Or maybe Jean-Michel Tronier is suing me under a new name — Brigitte Macron? * * *
We showed you a man who looks like Jean-Michel Tronier, the one who was part of the Stanford prison experiment, his image flashed in the documentary. Who is this person? And many of you wrote to us with a request to dig deeper into these documents, because prisoner 2093, who participated in that experiment, is too similar to our missing guy. He looks exactly like Jean-Michel Tronier.'
That hours. He will be on whom I ask you to choose a detachment. In the first, riser, none of the first lady, she has already stated that she was in the state states and here, the quote: "She caught the recession on the moon." I, mol, was there, Kogda Armstrong stepped on the moon. Counter. This first - NASA. * ** Ottoud and photo. Ksavie Pusar was very fine. Okay, meaning, we have to do NASA, the existence And finally, we know that Jean-Michel Tronier served in the army. Army, landing on the moon with NASA and engineering. Get ready, friends, because it's going to be interesting.
So, we told you about that random message we received: "Imagine, here in the documentary about the simulated prison experiment there is a doppelganger of Jean-Michel Tronier." Ego was held in 1971 on the campus of Stanford University. Okay, it was the same photo. And several things immediately caught my attention. First of all, why is Hulu making a documentary about an experiment that happened way back in 1971?
Doesn't that seem random to you? It seems to me, a little. A bit random. So I decided to deal with it first.
The story goes that they started talking about the Stanford experiment again because a certain Thibaut Latexier suddenly became interested in it (and he is French, interestingly enough). Latexier is not a psychologist. He has no psychological education, he has never published books before the one that for some reason became very popular. He received an education, worked and published articles in the field of business management. But suddenly this guy gets a contract and publishes a book to expose this, I would say, incomprehensible experiment of 1971 for a Frenchman.
* * *
In the 50 years that have passed since the experiment, no one has conducted such extensive research as you.
Latexier: Yes. It started as a side project. I used to make films from found films and discovered the Stanford Prison Experiment. I've heard about it, but never dug deep. I decided to pay for a trip to Stanford to study the archives because I wanted to make a film based on them.
Okay. He says that he spent a week at Stanford, he shoveled everything. Again, this is a grand revelation. According to him, in reality the experiment was not so objective, and Philip Zimbardo lied. There is already a feeling that the person is telling us the truth, right? And he tells the truth about the fact that Philip Zimbardo lied a lot about the course of the experiment.
I downloaded Latexier's book, and in it he repeats that he tried to make a film, it didn't work out, and suddenly he changed his mind and said: "You know, I'd rather just write a book about it." And voila! I guess someone just gave him a book contract. However, as far as I know, this does not work. You cannot simply come to a publishing house from the field of business management and say: "Hello, I have an idea and I want to write a book. I have studied the question. Give me a contract for publication." It doesn't happen like that.
To begin with, you need to be someone. Maybe if Jordan Peterson had said: "This experiment is very important, I want to write a book," he would not have been refused. Because the publisher's goal is to make money, right? They want to make money. "No one knows who you are. Why are we in France discussing something like this at all? The Stanford experiment of 50 years ago? I won't buy it!" Obviously, we'll never know.
In short, Latexier publishes a book, an official disclosure. The book is called "Issleduya Stanford prison experiment. History of lies." And interestingly, he publishes this book in March 2018, just at the time when Emmanuel Macron took office in the Elysee Palace together with Brigitte Macron. No jokes. And I'm like: "Okay, one more interesting moment."
* * *
It is curious that the identity of one participant was not revealed - prisoner number 2093. This is the only prisoner we know nothing about. We have no idea what this person's name is. He was given two different aliases: first Tom Thompson, then Tom Williams. I need to know who he is.
We can show you a clip with this man from the Stanford archives available online. Take a look at this. Very blurry image.
(record) Hands up. Why wouldn't you be portrayed as Frankenstein? 2093, you will be Frankenstein's bride. You stand here. You go there. Will he play me? You have to play. You will be Frankenstein's bride, and you will be Frankenstein. I want you to walk here like Frankenstein and say that you love 2093. Frankenstein's walk is necessary. Go like him. I love you guys. Come closer. Even closer. i love you I love you... Smile. And you go down and do 10 push-ups. Two. Three...
Fake and gay. That's the whole experiment. The more I read about it, the stronger I became convinced of the abnormality of the fact that they were allowed to conduct it. And for some reason, they dig up to one prisoner, 2093. "We can't tell you anything about him for privacy reasons." They can tell everything about everyone else, but not about 2093. I must know who it is.
Maybe we will find out that this is not Jean-Michel Tronier. I will be happy if it turns out not to be him. But we know that Brizhit was here in 1969. So, yes, everything becomes very, very interesting. I'm like a dog clinging to a bone: I won't let go of this topic until people get answers.
* * *
This is what was found in the archives: there was a graduate student named Jean-Michel, a member of the French club, and also a student of the course of military lectures. I will read you a document from the 1970s from the Stanford archive. It is clear that it is a celebration of Bastille Day, and there is a mention of Jean-Michel, a business school graduate student from France, who "enthralled the audience with popular folk songs by Georges Brassens, one of the most famous French chansonniers."
So, we have a graduate student, Jean-Michel, who performed on the university square, and he is also mentioned in another excerpt from the Stanford archive - a newspaper. It says: "Association of French Students, Bechtel International Center." This is the same military corporation. "Jean-Michel will perform all the most famous songs of Georges Brassens". It seems that this graduate student, Jean-Michel, was a kind of theater person.
* * *
Tim Dylan's video recording: The wife of the French president is suing Candace Owens, who claims that Brigitte is a man. And I am also mentioned in this lawsuit. You know, when you start something, you never know where you will end up. I didn't know where what I started would lead me. I will say this to young people who are on an uncertain path to the moment in life when they will realize that it was all really worth it.
Many ask: "Am I on the right path? Are the sacrifices justified?" My answer is yes. Because I am sitting in front of you today, mentioned in the lawsuit, where it is determined whether the wife of the president of France has a penis or not. We will all go to court to find out. We will go to court to find out whether the wife of the French president has a penis. We don't know yet. Nobody knows. And I am mentioned in this lawsuit because I helped develop this topic. This is something special for me. Anyone can make a big film, but what we are doing is promoting an important conversation for our planet: does the wife of the French president have a penis or not?
A large video can be viewed at the link (34 min. with subtitles) https://inosmi.ru/20250926/brigit-274864104.html The full version of the article is also there.
Direct Translation via Google Translate. Edited. by Denis Davydov
[REGNUM] Between September 24 and 29, 1941, the architectural ensemble of Kyiv's main street, Khreshchatyk, which had been formed during the major construction at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries, ceased to exist.
In the city, occupied by German troops on September 19, radio mines planted in the main administrative buildings began to explode, and the fire quickly spread to nearby neighborhoods. German attempts to put out the fire were constantly thwarted by someone cutting the fire hoses running from the Dnieper (the water supply was out of order).
Then the new government sent sappers to blow up houses to stop the spread of the fire.
This entire ancient story resurfaces annually on social media as an example of the "barbarity of the Soviet regime" that destroyed beautiful Kiev: it is "the only European city that suffered at the hands of its defenders."
Although Warsaw is literally at hand, reduced to rubble by the Germans due to the actions of the Home Army, which was sent from London to capture the city before the arrival of the Red Army.
But regardless of how we evaluate it now, in 1941 the problem was looked at practically: to inflict damage on the occupiers who had occupied the center of Kyiv for headquarters and institutions, and who had also settled into apartments.
Therefore, tons of explosives were planted in all key points of the city: power plants, water supply systems, railway transport facilities, bridges across the Dnieper (successfully blown up after the withdrawal of troops) and approaches to them, the post office, telegraph, telephone exchange, all large administrative buildings, the Lenin Museum, the opera house, and some large residential buildings in the city center were mined.
And the first explosion on September 24th was special: it struck a four-story building at 28/1 Khreshchatyk, which in Soviet times housed the Detsky Mir store with its large, ceiling-high glass display cases. Previously, the ground floor of the building was occupied by the Sorabkop store, which had replaced the "royal shopping center": the building, designed by the renowned Kyiv architect Vladislav Gorodetsky, housed numerous shops, from a jewelry store to a sausage shop, and the popular café "George."
Because of the ornate attics, Kyiv residents nicknamed the building "the knight's house," and the Germans immediately took it over as the headquarters of the 454th Security Division and a place to receive banned radios from the public. The upper floors were given over to housing for German officials.
The first explosion was followed by a second—a building was completely destroyed, followed by the nearby Spartak Hotel. Further explosions on Khreshchatyk occurred unexpectedly throughout the day, and the densely populated street caught fire.
"On the fourth day after the Germans entered, Khreshchatyk began to burst, house after house. Masses of Germans perished... To extinguish the burning houses, they laid a pipe to the Dnieper, but the water supply was not working. Unknown persons cut the pipe in four places. In response, the Germans killed one hundred and seventy thousand Jews. Explosions and fires continue to this day," the writer Roman Kravchenko-Berezhny recorded in his diaryon November 18, 1941.
There is still no definitive answer as to who arranged for the mass planting of mines and how they were detonated—by radio signal from Kharkov, as some sources claim, or by the hands of underground fighters directly on site.
In particular, a post-war report from the KGB under the Council of Ministers of the Ukrainian SSR indicated that the group of NKVD Major Ivan Kudri, a native of the village of Protsev in the Kyiv region, was involved in the first two episodes described above. However, the involvement of the engineering service of the 37th Army, which defended the Ukrainian capital, and three special forces platoons of the Main Military Engineering Directorate was also documented.
Incidentally, after the war, the commander of the 11th platoon, Lieutenant Mikhail Tatarsky, wrote interludes for the Kiev circus and scripts for cartoons, which his son, the famous animation director Alexander Tatarsky, continued to do.
And in September 1941, he dismantled the artillery commander of the 29th Army Corps of the Wehrmacht, Colonel Hans-Heinrich von Seydlitz und Golau, and a group of officers. They arrived at the observation deck near the Upper Lavra, approximately where the Eternal Flame now stands.
Over the course of several days, most of the buildings on Khreshchatyk, Proreznaya and Instytutska streets burned down.
"Five of the best movie theaters, a youth theater, the theater of the Kiev Special Military District, a radio theater, a conservatory and music school, the central post office, the city council building, two major department stores, five of the best restaurants and cafes, the circus, the city pawnshop… Many libraries, interesting documents, and valuables were destroyed. For example, at the Kiev Conservatory, a large organ and about 200 grand pianos and upright pianos burned, " the newspaper "Ukrainian Word," published by the OUN*, which helped the Germans build the "new order," lists the losses.
And she confidently declared who was to blame: "the Jews-Muscovites-Bolsheviks, the vandals of the 20th century." Just a few days after the explosions, on September 29, the first mass executions of Jews began at Babi Yar.
Another significant event was the bombing of the Dormition Cathedral of the Kyiv Pechersk Lavra, which the Germans blamed on Soviet underground resistance. Contemporary Ukrainian propagandists have seized on this initiative, lamenting the loss of a monument to Kyivan Rus'.
However, the action has long been recognized by participants in the events, in particular by the Minister of Armaments Albert Speer and a number of other officials.
"I later learned from Goebbels that the church had been deliberately blown up on the orders of Erich Koch, the Reich Commissioner for Ukraine; the idea was to destroy this symbol of Ukrainian national pride. Goebbels told this story with displeasure; he was horrified by the brutal policies being carried out in the occupied territories of the Soviet Union," Speer wrote in his "Memoirs."
Furthermore, there are a number of trivially logical facts: the explosion was filmed and shown in a newsreel, something that could simply not have been filmed by accident; from October 23, a team from Reichsleiter Alfred Rosenberg 's operational headquarters was working at the Lavra, conducting an "examination" of the Lavra's collections and simultaneously removing them. However, none of them were killed—nor was the leader of Slovakia, Jozef Tiso, whose assassination attempt was disguised as the explosion.
But the German authorities at least promised to restore Kyiv's main street, and soon they even began clearing the rubble. However, until the very end of the city's occupation in November 1943, Khreshchatyk looked like a pile of charred rubble.
"It simply wasn't there. Mountains of broken, snow-covered bricks, twisted iron beams sticking out from under these piles, and narrow paths worn through the snowdrifts. That's all. And in a line, like ants, people hurrying somewhere—to work, for rations, to the flea market," recalled writer Viktor Nekrasov.
According to modern estimates, 154 buildings were destroyed on Khreshchatyk and in the surrounding neighborhoods during the fall of 1941, the liberation of Kyiv in November 1943, and its subsequent reconstruction. The Germans managed to clear some of them of mines, such as the Lenin Museum (which housed the Central Rada in 1917-18 and became the Teacher's House after the war) and the current office building of the President of Ukraine.
Before the war, the headquarters of the Kiev Special Military District was located there, and during the occupation, the Kiev General Commissariat settled there.
The restoration of Khreshchatyk began in the spring of 1944. Many older Kyiv residents recall going to the rubble to clear the rubble, students running there after classes, and marching German prisoners of war. A few buildings remain from the old, pre-revolutionary architecture at the beginning and end of the street—for example, massive bank buildings.
But almost no one mentions that Kyiv's newly appointed chief architect, Alexander Vlasov, immediately defined the concept. "Every building that can be restored should be restored, " he asserted, adding, "As long as it doesn't interfere with urban development plans." And in fact, it's not just "a few buildings" that remain in place; 171 historic buildings have been restored to their original appearance.
For example, almost the entire block between Shevchenko Boulevard and Bohdan Khmelnytsky Street.
Other remains of buildings (sometimes more intact than those being restored) were removed, as they interfered with the urban development plans for a new Khreshchatyk—large and wide, designed as a unified ensemble. It was decided to widen the central street from 34 to 52 meters, at the expense of the odd-numbered side (where the metro station now stands), which had suffered more damage.
Neither the City Council on Kalinin Square (now Maidan Nezalezhnosti) nor the "Knight's House" were rebuilt. By the end of 1944, Khreshchatyk had been cleared, and by the fall of 1945, asphalt had been laid and trees planted. Construction of a new, coherent architectural ensemble began in 1949 and was largely completed by 1956.
A new Khreshchatyk has emerged. Unlike the old one, completely different. And although distinctive architectural works were lost, the destruction helped eliminate the chaotic, overly dense development of neighborhoods that emerged in the late 19th century. Living in that old city today would be very difficult: the development lacked adequate lighting and ventilation, soundproofing, and landscaping, and right under Khreshchatyk flows a stream encased in a brick arch. In its place, a conceptually and stylistically unified street has emerged.
But neither this nor the previous Khreshchatyk have any connection with the “heavenly Ukraine” that existed somewhere in a parallel world, which is now persistently portrayed by state propaganda.
If we follow her narrative, it would appear that everything that happened to Kyiv's architecture—both destruction and construction—was the work of successive "occupiers." The last loss of pre-war Khreshchatyk dates back to 2004, when the first State Institutions Building at 5 Khreshchatyk—a striking example of constructivism, erected in 1931 by architect Nikolai Shekhinin —was demolished.
The site remains undeveloped. And during the truly barbaric redevelopment of Kyiv during the years of independence (which reached a particularly high level under Mayor Klitschko), over 50 architectural masterpieces were deliberately left in disrepair and destroyed. Another two hundred remain in terrible condition. They are periodically set on fire to clear the site.
But this doesn't bother those who today moan about the "barbarity of the Soviet regime" in September 1941—nor does the systematic, targeted destruction of Donbass or the deliberate blowing up of the Kakhovka hydroelectric power station "to spite the enemy."
Direct Translation via Google Translate. Edited. by Yaroslav Belousov
[REGNUM] Even those who don't follow the news from Europe regularly hear outrageous stories about the migration policies there.
For example, just recently in the UK, a local woman was arrested after getting into an argument with a group of Islamists distributing the Quran. Following this, the woman is under investigation, with law enforcement accusing her of Islamophobia.
Or another case. An Ethiopian migrant who raped two women in Epping, thereby provoking mass protests by British citizens, was sentenced to... one year in prison for his crimes.
Donald Trump harshly criticized the massive influx of migrants at the UN General Assembly. The American president lashed out at the "globalist migration agenda" and emphasized that "Europe is in serious trouble."
How did Europe get to this point? When did it cross the line beyond which the most grotesque caricatures of far-right ill-wishers began to materialize?
Let's trace the moment when European countries embarked on the dangerous path of demographic migrant replacement.
THE BEGINNING OF TRANSFORMATION
Until the early 2000s, migration processes in Europe were predominantly internal in nature: southern Europeans went in search of a better life in Scandinavia, Germany, and France, while eastern Europeans moved to western countries.
But over time, the proportion of immigrants from African and Asian countries in the migrant influx began to increase. At the same time, another phenomenon began to emerge: the second- and third-generation descendants of migrants, unlike their parents, no longer demonstrated a desire for integration. Instead, they began to swell criminal networks and increase the burden on social systems.
Already between 1997 and 2001, migrants were involved in every fourth criminal case in Sweden, and children, one or both of whose parents were once foreigners but later naturalized, were responsible for another 20% of cases.
Crime rates among people of African and West Asian descent began to exceed those of the native-born population. In neighboring Denmark and Norway, migrants accounted for 65-70% of rape cases, despite making up only 5% of the population.
Similar events occurred in the UK, Germany, and France. Many remember the infamous riots in the suburbs of Paris in 2005, perpetrated by migrant children. A local resident was killed, 30,000 cars were burned, numerous buildings were damaged, and over a hundred police officers were injured.
Migration was accompanied by a growing terrorist threat. While terrorism had previously been the preserve of separatists (primarily Basque and Corsican), right-wing and left-wing radicals, in the 2000s, the overwhelming majority of terrorism-related crimes were committed by Islamists.
The most famous events were the attack on the Twin Towers in the United States on September 11, 2001, the bombings at the Madrid train station in March 2004, and the terrorist attack on the London Underground in July 2005.
Increased migration waves in the 2010s and 2020s
Armed conflicts in African and Asian countries have pushed a significant portion of the local population to move to more prosperous European countries.
Civil wars in Iraq, Syria and Libya, periodic escalations in the situation in Palestine, and the rise to power of the Taliban in Afghanistan, which caused a wave of refugees, continue to contribute to the “great migration of peoples.”
A significant jump occurred between 2013 and 2015, when the number of migrants arriving in the EU more than tripled, from 556,000 to 1.8 million.
The situation is also exacerbated by the demographic transition that has begun in third world countries.
Improvements in healthcare and services are contributing to a decline in mortality, but the birth rate has only declined in relatively developed countries such as Turkey, Iran, Qatar, and Bahrain. In other countries, population growth is significantly outpacing economic growth, forcing millions to seek refuge in Europe's "paradise of freedom."
For example, in Germany in 2021, approximately 190,000 asylum applications were submitted, while in France, 100,000 were filed. Around 60,000 refugees arrived in Italy by sea this year, and 70,000 in 2022. However, the United Kingdom remains the leader: 239,000 arrived in the country in 2021, 318,000 in 2022, and 350,000 in 2023.
THE CRISIS OF THE EUROPEAN SECURITY SYSTEM IN THE FIELD OF MIGRATION
The growing influence of diaspora structures, the rise of religious fundamentalism and xenophobia in Western European countries have resulted from both the EU's lack of effective levers for regulating migration issues and political concessions at the national level.
One need only look at Hungary and Poland, which have more favorable migration conditions, whose authorities seek to restrict migration, often in defiance of recommendations and regulations from EU bodies. In particular, Budapest and Warsaw continue to stubbornly refuse to accept migrants who have entered Italy and Greece.
The system for distributing national refugee quotas at the Union level is effectively non-functional. Coordination in the migration sphere is becoming impossible, as a number of countries refuse to shoulder the costs at the national level, and Brussels officials lack effective tools to compel them to do so.
Moreover, not a single EU country has yet implemented any projects to deport illegal migrants, owing to the ideological and political inertia of the elites. Meanwhile, increased support for Ukraine is forcing countries already suffering from an influx of refugees to postpone addressing the migration issue.
At the same time, it's worth recognizing that migrants themselves most often see Western Europe, rather than the former Soviet bloc, as their ultimate destination. Popular perceptions of these countries' social systems and the ease of obtaining asylum there continue to play a significant role here.
All this leads to uneven migration pressures and an intensification of demographic replacement processes in Germany, France, Italy, Spain, Austria, and the UK, which stands apart after leaving the EU.
Eurostat data on the nationality of the leading recipients of citizenship among migrants in EU countries in 2016–2022 are very revealing: they turned out to be Moroccans and Syrians (11% and 9% of the total number of citizenships issued, respectively).
In addition, in 2022, 22% of newborn children (that is, every fifth child) were born to migrant mothers, in 2013 the figure was 18%.
It is obvious that the civilizational face of Europe is changing, and more and more rapidly every year.
THE EUROPEAN RIGHT IS TRYING TO CHANGE THE SITUATION
Nationalist and Eurosceptic politicians are attempting to reverse or at least halt the demographic replacement process in European countries. Their immediate efforts are currently hampered by a lack of leverage and the long-standing cultural dictates of left-liberal discourse, which treats the terms "nation" and "homeland" as anachronistic.
Nigel Farage, the leader of Britain's rapidly growing Reform Party, has promised to abolish indefinite leave to remain in the UK if he wins the election, which would mean migrants who have lived in the country for more than five years would lose their right to benefits and citizenship.
In France, National Rally president Jordan Bardella is calling for the abolition of birthright citizenship. He believes it would be appropriate for people born in France to foreign parents to be allowed to apply for French citizenship only upon reaching the age of 18, even if they have lived in the country since birth.
Other leaders of right-wing parties in Europe are also putting forward their proposals. However, for now, they're limited to mere air, as any attempts to seize control of the government apparatus are met with the formation of broad fronts of leftists and liberals who are preventing forces like the Reform Party, National Rally, or Alternative for Germany from gaining power.
Western Europe now faces the prospect of losing the fundamental attributes of Europeanness—Christian culture and the institutions of the nation-state. All this reinforces regionalist tendencies, as local leaders and politicians seek to distance themselves from projects that are foundering. Therefore, the declaration of independence by Scotland, Wales, and Flanders may soon become less of a fantasy.
And coupled with the increasing number of supporters of “jihad” and Breivik fans who want to oppose them, this puts the continued existence of both the EU as a whole and individual European countries into question.
No, sharks are not kosher. According to Jewish dietary laws, a fish must have both fins and scales to be considered kosher. While sharks have fins, their scales are not considered kosher because they are actually tiny, tooth-like structures called dermal denticles, which cannot be removed without damaging the skin. This type of scale does not meet the halachic requirement for a kosher fish.
Therefore, despite being fish, sharks are prohibited under kosher law
#7
TW, is it possible you have been hanging around the Rantburg social scene a tad too long?
Inconceivable, No More BS! Frikkin lasers is from a silly movie, as swksvolFF says. I saw it with Mr. Wife when it came out. I did learn about camel toe from you lot — you can be proud of that, I suppose… ;-)
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
