text:
Search results for digital playground
Teachers (2009)
Feb 15th
Teachers (2009)
Starring: Jesse Jane, Riley Steele, Stoya, Katsumi, Angelina Armani, Lisa Ann, Angelina Valentine, Jenna Haze, Mason Moore, Evan Stone, Mick Blue, Tommy Gunn, Erik Everhard, James Deen, Scott Nails, Ben English.
Digital Playground's exclusive contract girls Jesse Jane, Riley Steele, Stoya, and Katsuni, plus Jenna Haze and Lisa Ann. Shot on location at a private-school, the movie chronicles a group of girls who keep a diary with records of all the dirty liaisons between teachers and students. When the diary goes missing, they'll do anything to get it back. At Fillmore Bush Academy, extra credit never felt so good.
More >
Fly Girls (2010)
Feb 14th
Fly Girls (2010)
Starring: Jesse Jane, Janie Summers, Katsuni, Riley Steele, Sasha Grey, Alanah Rae, Jayden Cole, Diamond Foxxx, Raven Alexis, Nikki Benz, Jenna Haze, Lisa Ann, Ben English, Evan Stone, Marco Banderas, Yurizan Beltran, Scott Nails, Erik Everhard, Manuel Ferrara, Mick Blue.
The skies are a whole lot friendlier when a group of the world's most beautiful porn stars pose as slutty flight attendants and sneak onto a plane to shoot a reality show. Cleared for take-off, the Captain leaves the real stewardesses detained in security. Sex erupts aboard the flight, and the horny bliss proves too much for the weak-hearted pilot. Not it's up to Digital Playground's girls to land the plane to safety.
More >
No Limits (2003)
Jan 2nd
No Limits (2003)
Starring: Devon, Jessica Drake, Jesse Jane, Cheyne Collins, Mike Horner, Barrett Blade, Herschel Savage, Brittney Skye, Robby D, Jenna D'amato.
NO LIMITS is a fast paced, mind-bending thriller starring contract superstar Devon and industry sensation, Jessica Drake. Additionally, NO LIMITS features Digital Playground's new contract star, Jesse Jane in her very first scene.
Everything was just fine in Adrian's life. She was happily married with a good career and a fantastic home. She led a safe, secure, predictable, boring, mind-numbing existence. So her husband decided to stir things up a little but something went horribly wrong. From the acclaimed director of Rush and Devon: Stripped comes a supercharged, erotic thriller that will grab you until long after the last frame.
More >
Blonde Bombshells (2014)
Dec 31st
Blonde Bombshells (2014)
Starring: Jesse Jane, Riley Steele, Kayden Kross, Teagan Presley, Nikki Benz, Shyla Stylez, Alexis Texas, Gina Lynn, Memphis Monroe, Lacie Heart.
Blondes porn! Digital Playground's best golden beauties in the adult DVD Blonde Bombshells! Watch as these stunning XXX all stars, including Teagan Presley and Kayden Kross show you why blondes have more fun.
More >
Nurses 1 (2009)
Aug 5th
Nurses 1 (2009)
Starring: Jesse Jane, Riley Steele, Katsuni, Shay Jordan, Gabriella Fox, Sasha Grey, Shyla Stylez, Evan Stone, Stoya, Jenna Haze, Shawna Lenee, Erik Everhard, James Deen, Mr. Pete, Tommy Gunn, Danny Mountain.
The SEXY nurses of Coos County General Hospital are patient care experts of the most FEVERISH kind. Digital Playground's 'Nurses' includes contract stars Jesse Jane, Stoya, Riley Steele, Katsuni, Gabriella Fox, and Shay Jordan, plus sex sensations Sasha Grey, Jenna Haze, Shawna Lenee, and Shyla Stylez in eight intense scenes. With these hot nurses bathing, pampering, and tending to patients' every need, it's easy to see why no one wants to check out.
More >


text:
Hotels in Iznajar, Spain
Search & Compare Iznajar Hotels
Trending now in Iznajar
Hotels in Iznajar
- Most bookedHotel Caserio de Iznajar
8 people looked at this hotel in the last hour
Most recent review
"Unfortunately the weather was extremely cold in February, and the Hotel did not excel itself with heating, particularly in the dining area that was in the Courtyard. Probably in the Summer would be fine when you want to cool off."
A Traveller, Feb 2016, GB
Hotels within 5 miles of Iznajar
18 people looked at this hotel in the last hour
Most recent review
"This is a nice hotel for the price. We were well welcomed even though we arrived early for check-in, this was not a problem at that time. The room was traditional and nice and clean, and big enough for two of us. The bed was fine and definitely not the worse I have slept in! It is true that some ..."
A Traveller, May 2015, GB
Hotels within 10 miles of Iznajar
133 people looked at this hotel in the last hour
Most recent review
"Great service, good food, nice room and lovely atmosphere. Massages were excellent and would have been a 5 star review if it wasn't for the fact the steam room wasn't working and the indoor pool was pretty chilli so the spa was a little disappointing."
A Traveller, Mar 2016, GB
12 people looked at this hotel in the last hour
10 people looked at this hotel in the last hour
Most recent review
"Nice wayside hotel. Out of town - if seeking town centre stay quite a long walk. Lovely views. Pretty garden with swimming pool and obviously very pleasant opportunities to enjoy the open spaces in the summer. Nice and plentiful breakfast. Friendly and helpful staff, some English spoken."
A Traveller, Mar 2016, GB
8 people looked at this hotel in the last hour
Most recent review
"Breaking up a journey from Valencia in Spain to Portugal this hotel was a much needed stop off about half way along on the journey. Easy to find just 5 minutes from the autovia the hotel is a small rustic family run hotel. On the day of my stay I was the only guest and had the large pool, gardens..."
A Traveller, Aug 2015, GB
8 people looked at this hotel in the last hour
Most recent review
"Unusual noise from water pipes during the night. Good base to explore nearby attractions such as the Alhambra."
A Traveller, Oct 2015, CA
8 people looked at this hotel in the last hour
Most recent review
"Despite the difficulty in our GPS finding this hotel, once we arrived we fell in love with it. The owner was delightful and very helpful. The room was wonderful and inviting. We did have problems with the shower-head, however this was highly likely to be 'user error' than a plumbing fault. "
R, Apr 2016, AU
8 people looked at this hotel in the last hour
6 people looked at this hotel in the last hour
Best hotels in Iznajar
Iznajar overviewIznajar is a relaxing place surrounded by picturesque views of beaches and lakes. You'll enjoy the ample bar and dining options, along with outdoor areas for biking and walking. Spend a relaxing day at Sierras Subbeticas Natural Park and Red Park when the weather is nice. There's plenty to explore, including local sights like Parroquia de Santiago Apostol and El Canuto. A family-friendly area, Iznajar also has something for everyone.
Where to stay in IznajarWhether you're planning to stay for a night or for the week, Iznajar has accommodations to fit every need. There are 44 hotels in the Iznajar area and you can shop as many as 16 deals for rooms on Hotels.com, some with discounts of up to 33%.
- • 13 2-star hotels with an average price of $27 per night
- • 13 3-star hotels with an average price of $26 per night
- • 11 4-star hotels with an average price of $51 per night
- • 2 5-star hotels with an average price of $78 per night
Here's the top hotel based on 598 user reviews of Iznajar hotels: Hotel Caserio de Iznajar
How to get to IznajarFly in to Granada (GRX-Federico Garcia Lorca), 29.7 mi (47.8 km) from downtown Iznajar. Seville (SVQ-San Pablo) is the next closest major airport, 88.2 mi (141.9 km) away.
What to see around IznajarIts beaches and lakes are well known, and favorite spots for nature lovers include:
- • Sierras Subbeticas Natural Park
- • Red Park
- • Mycological Truffle Garden
- • Zuheros Bat Cave
- • Parroquia de Santiago Apostol
- • El Canuto
- • Casa Museo del Jamon
- • Anis Museum
- • Plaza de Espana
When to visit IznajarWondering when's the best time to visit? Here are seasonal norms to help you plan your trip:
Seasonal temperature averages
- • January-March: 67°F day, 33°F night
- • April-June: 91°F day, 41°F night
- • July-September: 95°F day, 52°F night
- • October-December: 79°F day, 34°F night
- • January-March: 0.2 inches
- • April-June: 0.1 inches
- • July-September: 0.1 inches
- • October-December: 0.2 inches

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Sorry, this item sold. Have lonestarestates make something just for you, or try these other items:
Up for sale is a super pair of fiery old mine cut diamond ear studs set in never worn 4 prong vintage basket mountings. The hand cut stones are slightly rectangular measuring 3.2 x 3.4 mm and very nice quality (I-SI1). The have excellent fire and old warn warmth and glow, a lovely pair. They weigh 0.40 carats combined (actual weight) and are set in 0.5 grams of 14K yellow gold with a set of ear backs included.
Old Mine Cut Diamond Ear Studs - 0.40 Carats TW
- Vintage item from the 1980s
- Materials: yellow gold, 14K gold, old mine cut diamonds
- Only ships within United States.
- Feedback: 289 reviews
- Favorited by: 8 people
- Listed on Aug 24, 2012
- 204 views
- 8 favorites
- Add item to treasury


text:
By Matt Parrott | 49 Comments
Cranks and Credibility
At 14, while most kids my age were probably out doing something healthy and normal, I was reading Carl Sagan's "The Demon-Haunted World". I have been and always will be a skeptic and an admirer of the scientific process. While Sagan remains a cardinal influence, it's more than a little ironic that the spirit of skeptical inquiry he inspired me to embrace ultimately led me to identify and explore the subversive Jewish influence on traditional American culture that he participated in. He inspired me to see through the pretense of "free thought" as more dogmatic and certainly more decadent than the traditional dogmas. Finally, he inspired me to recognize that his yearning for transcendence in the vacuum of outer space is an avatar of the very "god of the gaps" phenomenon he admonished religious folks for indulging.
I didn't arrive at a Jew-wise, racial realist worldview because my forefathers fought for the Confederacy or because I want to make things awkward at dinner parties. I arrived at it because it's the single most predictive model of reality; the simplest and most reliable framework for explaining not only how things got to be, but how they're going to be. I could have stood before Congress in 2001 and warned them that No Child Left Behind would fail. I can predict with a negligible margin of error that the next educational fad will flop, Detroit will continue deteriorating, Japan will bounce right back from its string of disasters, and the organized Jewish community will churn out more pop culture that's hostile toward White America's Christian majority.
While we may lack political power, as an ideological and philosophical force we have strength beyond our numbers. Why? Because we have the truth on our side. Our racially aware frame of reference gives us the power to find demonstrable truths and to falsify popularly accepted dogmas. Only a handful of dissidents hold the Jew-wise and race realist line in institutional academia, but the Bell Curve dealt a body blow to politically correct psychology.
Mearsheimer & Walt's "The Israel Lobby" created a major row in policy circles. Steve Sailer's humble blog often provokes responses from rarefied masters of multicult dogma like Malcolm Gladwell.
Personally, I believe many in our movement diminish the credibility of our fundamental insight by indulging in conspiracy theories and wild speculation. Our truth, opposed as it is by the near universally embraced secular religion of equality, can be made to sound like a crank's conspiracy theory, and our enemies are all too eager to frame it as such. When we as individuals dive headfirst into the latest idle speculation about Obama's birth certificate or the Bin Laden assassination "hoax", we do more than merely set ourselves up to look like fools when the establishment trots out the long-form birth certificate and graphic photos of what's left of Bin Laden's head. We make it that much harder for ordinary people to take seriously our decades of peer-reviewed research on differences in intelligence, or volumes of meticulous work on how the organized Jewish community is subverting their host population.
We set ourselves up to be even less trusted than the establishment. The establishment lies and deceives the public all the time, of course. They do it most often by omission and diversion rather than making bold statements that could be contradicted by dozens if not hundreds of different people scattered throughout multiple organizations and institutions.
No proposition should be suppressed, per se. If you've got proof that Obama was born in Kenya or that Bin Laden was killed a decade ago, make your case. If you know that colloidal silver has healing properties, direct us to a trusted reference to learn more. For all I know, fluoride may be poisoning us all and vaccines may be causing the spike in autism diagnoses. Conspiracies have happened in the past and are probably happening right now, but the same standard of skepticism should be applied to them as is applied to the establishment line.
For instance, shortly after Obama released the long form birth certificate, I was forwarded the video of the man explaining how the PDF document was a forgery because it contained "layers". He never explained what were in the additional layers, leaving one to envision numbers and names being altered, damning stuff being excised, and such. He didn't show us the layers, which on further examination were perfectly typical for some scanning software and didn't contain anything that even appeared human generated.
While it's appropriate to be skeptical about Obama's birthplace, the skepticism has to cut both ways. There is far more evidence that he was born in Hawaii than in Kenya. For him to have been born in Kenya and to have pulled off this deception for this long would have required a pretty elaborate effort fit for jewel thieves. Sure, it could have happened, but is it the simplest and most likely explanation? No, I don't trust Obama, but don't we have more verifiable or at least more relevant points of fact to focus on?
The simplest explanation for his reluctance to disclose his birth certificate was the prominence of his middle name "Hussein" which he wanted concealed by the media during the presidential election.
Later this week, when the White House trots out their gory images of Osama's body, few if any of the people who were claiming that this is an elaborate hoax will publicly recant. They'll just move on to the next conspiracy theory, perhaps declaring that the images were doctored or that the concrete coffin dropped overboard contained a dummy. For all I know, any of that could be the case, though it seems pretty elaborate and it's also pretty tangential. Whether or not Osama was already dead, was recently killed, or resides among the reptilians in a far away galaxy doesn't make much of a difference, does it? Does it make enough of a difference to stake our credibility on it?
While at the AmRen 2008 Conference, I enjoyed Michael Walkers' definition of a crank, which has stuck with me…
Many who point out unwelcome truths are called cranks. For those heavily invested in the conventional wisdom, anyone who denies that wisdom can be viewed as cranky and disagreeable. However, my definition of a crank is someone who cannot confine discussion of his dissenting or "cranky" views to appropriate settings and audiences. It is one whose views are either so persistent, so emphatic, or so extreme as to cause embarrassment in "normal" company. If you feel you might be embarrassed by, say, having someone to dinner with friends or relatives—especially relatives—then he is likely to be a crank.
Women have a better nose than men for cranks – those who lack awareness of socially appropriate boundaries and the reactions of others – and women are less afraid to call a spade a spade. Some years ago I went with my wife to a meeting in Germany organized by a man who edited a publication I read regularly and enjoyed. When we arrived a little late he was in the middle of addressing a meeting in exactly the terms one might expect of someone who had just achieved supreme power. In fact he had reached about paragraph 20 of what he called the "Constitution of the Fourth Reich." My wife was pitiless: "Quite definitely a nutter," she told me.
I emphasize that one must distinguish between "cranks" and dissidents who are merely derided as cranks. There's a very real difference. Walker at Amren 2008 described the crank as one who's an embarrassment around normal company. That's a pretty succinct working definition, but I would like to extend that with one observation: overclocked pattern recognition. We're all designed to detect patterns in nature and in our social interactions. We couldn't function without that capability, but we sometimes detect patterns where none exist: the man on the moon, the Virgin Mary on the grilled cheese, or the guy who's trailing you because he happened to turn in the same direction you did an unlikely number of times.
As an example, the net effect of Jewish influence on its victims may feel like it was the unanimous action of all 15 million members of that race organized by elders gathered from time to time to fashion and execute meticulous plans and protocols. But it is not. It's the emergent effect of a group evolutionary strategy which has evolved and adapted over centuries to exploit weaknesses in a group that is unable to organize themselves to resist that influence.
It is the weakness of that host group that allows small and detached groups of Jews with similar interests to dominate whole industries and institutions and to shape the popular culture.
I am reminded of an amusing parody, "Local Jew Feels Left Out of Worldwide Jewish Conspiracy". To believe that Jews could impose upon all members of their race the obligation to labor for and take orders from the ADL or SPLC is to believe that humans are far more submissive, loyal, discreet, and organized than they are. And if you talk to a crank long enough, you'll often learn that this pattern of thinking isn't limited to politics. They're often into "numerology", obsess over calendrical coincidences, and suspect close friends and family members of micro-conspiracies against them. They rarely if ever attribute anything to mere happenstance or seek a simple innocuous explanation.
There can be no worldwide Jewish conspiracy of the sort lampooned in the Onion article, because not even Jews are capable of the level of secrecy and organization necessary to pull that off. What they have is a milieu within which countless little conspiracies can succeed unopposed, such as the conspiracy to drag the US into the Iraq War, the conspiracy to bring as little attention as possible to the embarrassing relationship between Obama and Jeremiah Wright, or the conspiracy to ignore his illegal immigrant aunt.
There was evidently a conspiracy within Pakistan's military elite to hide Bin Laden. While Pakistan's military elite probably didn't conspire as a cohesive unit to hide Bin Laden, it was sufficiently sympathetic to Bin Laden – and interested in continuing the foreign aid which his continued existence secured – to create an environment in which that large elite could ignore the small handful who did conspire to hide him for a long time. A couple neighborhood kids here and there probably knew about it, and others here and there probably knew or guessed. Some of the servants were probably in on it, as well. But it was the kind of subculture where "omerta" prevailed and people didn't tend to turn in "freedom fighters" to the imperial Yankee invaders.
Conspiracies exist. After all, every profit making enterprise that employs the efforts of more than one person is a "conspiracy" of sorts. Most "conspiracies" are benign or beneficial. We tend to call them "conspiracies" only when they are doing something illegal or destructive and thus depend upon secrecy and deception for success.
But conspiracies are subject to the same rules of inquiry as any other subject. As Professor MacDonald has demonstrated with his trilogy and Mearsheimer and Walt have demonstrated with their report, it's very possible to expose those conspiring against us with the illuminating glow of skeptical inquiry and methodical peer-reviewed research. If we divert our energy into "chemtrails", obvious hoaxes, faked moon landings, or Kevin Trudeau's nature cures then we invite our opponents to use such easy to understand foolishness to diminish our work and our message.
Related Posts
"I arrived at it because it's the single most predictive model of reality; the simplest and most reliable framework for explaining not only how things got to be, but how they're going to be."
Without a doubt it is a very accurate and useful theory, well-grounded in reality and easily tested. This theory even contains the very reasons why Jews tend to support our more bizarre conspiracy theories; to distract gentiles from it's own revelatory truth. The power of the Jews can be effectively countered only by knowledge of their methods, combined with the actions of our tribe acting as a unified opposing force against them. To allow the Jewish agenda to run it's intended course, is to allow them to win the war of Darwinian, genetic survival over us and against our children, born and yet to be born.
I agree with the overarching point. I think Obama was born in Hawaii.
But when it comes to 9-11 I think the glaringly obvious fact that WTC 7 was never hit by a plane and still collapsed is proof positive that the government version of the story is crap and patently false. Who did it I dont know, maybe it was just as they said with a little help down below, maybe it was the usual suspects, who knows. We could ask the 100 Israeli jews ejected from the USA shortly thereafter as reported on Fox by Carl Cameron but of course I guess they would not have too much to say about that publically would they. There is a Russian running around sayign it was Mike Harari; there is a US government alumnus saying it was the US military; yet at the same time plenty of Muslims sure "owned" it well enough to make me think they both participated and count it as a victory. Regardless, the wtc 7 issue is a glaring anomaly to the US official story, which renders it provably false not to qualify as a spurious "conspiracy theory" and also disturbing enough to the average white person that we should never let it go.
Likewise, though to a lesser extent perhaps due to passage of time, Roosevelt's advance warning of Pearl Harbor, either, for that matter; see Stinnet's book "Day of Deceit." Roosevelt got us into the big war for Jews that was WW2; and Bush got us into the big war for Jews with Islam that is now WW3. Plain and simple.
I'm not an expert in the fields that would empower me to make an intelligent statement about WTC. There are; however, plenty of experts who do corroborate what it looked like – which was that two towers went down because they were struck by jumbo jets and a third tower that was poorly designed went down after smoldering for hours. What I never seem to get out of any of the Truthers I've discussed these issues with is evidence of an alternative hypothesis.
I'm dismissed as a fool for more or less buying the establishment's narrative, but don't get much else to work with aside from insinuations that this or that group was probably behind it. I buy the narrative that the attack was blowback for irresponsible Middle Eastern policies, but the establishment narrative of the actual event (Osama's henchmen fly jets into buildings, causing them to fall) seems like the simplest and most likely.
But until there's some sort of real evidence directly pointing toward somebody other than Osama, I don't believe the speculation is useful for White Advocates. If anything, I see a lot of these hobbyists exploiting the gullibility of White Advocates to advance their pet projects. How much time and money have we wasted on historians who are still fighting WWII? Sure, the truth should be pursued by historians, whose freedom of inquiry should be defended, but where's the added value for us?
And even if we did prove it, we have no organizational framework to do anything about it. We proved that a cabal of Likudniks falsified intelligence and duped the US into the Iraq War. This is well-established by respected institutional sources. And, yet, there's no real public reaction to the revelation. Even if we proved that Jews did WTC, I doubt it would do us much good, given that we haven't invested our time and money in creating a political force capable of framing and politically capitalizing upon these things.
I agree with you Matt that the official narrative of 911 is indeed good enough for us to run with in our awakening efforts. This is what William Pierce observed before the criticism of the official narrative really got going.
But I simply dont believe it. I think wtc 7 and the other 2 buildings were demolished. I think so because that is how it looked. I have seen buildings demolished and it takes a certain measure of skill to make them collapse all in a one nice heap of rubble. I think it is nearly impossible that the collapse of the three buildings should have happened the way the G says it did. Why exactly should a building burning near the top suddenly pancake? Why not just pancake from the top down to the impact, or just say burn down and leave some kind of charred upright structure? And as for WTC7 suddenly collapsing after having burned for a while on a couple floors, that is even more implausible.
But the Truthers do come up with some wild extensions beyond the minimum. I dont think for a second that the Pentagon was hit by anyting but a hijacked aircraft.
Likewise I do think Usama's henchmen did fly jets into the two buildings, but that crime was known to some state actors (whom I do not know) who arranged for a concurrent demolition.
Anyhow, people who are independent thinking enough to see the truth about race versus political correctness are going to be able to question the official narrative of 911 without going overboard. I will agree with you that to some extent the debates are a diversion for matters of more immediate social impact. Nevertheless there is also a strong possible use of the 911 critique for weaking a person's pee-cee matrix or "paradigm" and allowing for a shift in radical shift in thinking. If we are subtle observers and listeners we can detect in whome and when these questions might induce the desired effect.
If a group rallies over a lie, everybody, unless he somehow feels he cannot go that far (but he will get punished by the group), will build in this without having to explain everything to each other.
Sure, groupthink is a real phenomenon, but this same herd phenomenon can as easily lead us over a cliff as it can work toward our group evolutionary advantage, no? And the phenomena caused by groupthink stampedes are not the same as the phenomena supposedly caused by elaborate conspiracies.
The Guardian has demonstrated, by showing the two original photos that were use in making the composite fake OBL dead picture.
Fake Osama death photos have been around since shortly after 9/11. The Guardian demonstrated how they were created. This is compatible with the establishment narrative, as the establishment have described how he was killed, none of which are compatible with the existing images.
Why does Obama not present the real certificate in paper for examination?
The most obvious explanation that comes to mind is that he's "playing" the far-right in a way that marginalizes them and allows him to make fools of them at a time of his choosing – as he recently did with the long form birth certificate. While people do have a right to ask serious questions, the whole birther thing is one big distraction. First of all, it's a disingenuous way of questioning his identity while forfeiting the moral high ground to our opponents by abiding the taboo against accusing people with American citizenship of being true Americans. Second, even if he were born in Kenya, it's likely that the Supreme Court would declare in favor of him having been a "natural-born" citizen. His mom was a US citizen from Kansas.
You must remember that the Arab pretend origin of Obama is a diversion tactic, the real identity that is important to him, his rallying point, is his Jewish identity.
I can't remember, given that I've been hanging in White Right circles since well before Obama was a national candidate, and this is the very first time I've heard it proposed that he's a crypto-Jew. Do you have any evidence to support that claim? The fact that his cabinet's Jewy only proves that Jews are powerful Washington insiders.
His grand mother from his father's side is jewish. This has never been denied or challenged by the press or the jews. It is just that no one gives it attention. And the Jewish lineage in Kenya have made jews and israel very proud ever since a study, presented in a 1999 PBS documentary were presented to the public. There was the first genetic proof of widespread jewish genetic markers in a pure black african tribe. This was also very important for the coherence of some part of the Talmud.
For the remainder of your remarks, I think, effectively that our strategies differ. Accepting propaganda is allowing the other to symbollicly kill you. Anytime someone offers a lie, you must expose it for what it is, otherwise you accept being treated like a fool.
I understand that having firm footing in a see of challenges in the landscape of our fake created perception of reality is difficult, but the solution cannot be to ignore these lies. Because they have been many fake photos, then photos are not important? The narrative of their story has been a work in progress, and that in itself is probably a desired effect, a strategy on the part of government, to destabilize any form of cohesive perception. "Follow us, but remember that we are the only one allowed to cristalyze the truth."
If your answer is that time is so critical, that we cannot get divided by these issues; my answer is that we cannot all work together as long as some members of the group have primal identities tied firstly to subgroup identities. That is why the whole appraoch of Washington and women in the media in particular of "We all have to work together" is a fraud. Because subgroups primarely work only for themselves.
And there lies the greatest challenge: Rallying people under the zenith of the primal identity, the first reflex of group identity as American-European Christians, superseeding any other reflex of subgroup identities. This is what we are failing at, and in fact it is a challenge because we must use tools that are counter to our core values, that are mimickery of minoritism strategies; we must, for the sake of change control our re-enforced instinct of altruism.
I'm generally inclined to agree that we all need to rally toward a unified group identity, and I'm also in the White American Christian faction. I believe the onus is on us to lead, inspire, and convert skeptics and pagans – avoiding infighting at nearly all costs.
Can I get a reference on this claim that Obama is partially Jewish?
Matt , I tried to put some links a first time but it does not work, I will try again.
These are only sources that one can reference more. Enough to go get more info. During the campaign, both abcnews and cbsnews said his kenyan grandmother was genetically jewish, but I cannot find copies of these videos. They stop bringing the jewish ancestry of Obama during 2008 when they found out that reactions were negative in the ratings. They referred to it as the "Lieberman effect". It is now very difficult to find anything on the subject on the internet because the Javex crews have passed by, a bit like they do everytime a holocaust revisionist site puts graphic pictures of horrors committed by jews. I hope you won't ask me for a blood test genetic marker result of POTUS.
These are only sources that one can reference more. Enough to go get more info.
No. That's not fair. You present the evidence. Don't wave your hand and leave it on me to find the evidence. You're making an extraordinary claim, yet refusing to offer even ordinary evidence.
I hope you won't ask me for a blood test genetic marker result of POTUS.
It's not a grave imposition upon you to merely ask for a reference, sarcastically wondering if I'm going to demand a blood test.
One of your links merely makes an assertion that his grandmother claims he was born in Kenya. That would definitely be placed on the "Born in Kenya" side of the scale, but would be insufficient in itself make a definitive determination. More importantly, it has nothing to do with whether Obama has fractional paternal Jewish ancestry or not.
Note that fractional paternal Jewish ancestry is not the same as "being Jewish".
In another link, some Jew declares that Obama is "Abner Mikvner, "the first Jewish President." Taken in context, even in the context provided by the conspiracy theory blog, it's clear that it was meant in the same spirit as "Bill Clinton is the first Black President."
The Downtown Express article is a transparent parody.
The Subverted Nation article is a confused hodge-podge of the aforementioned articles, breathlessly listing the parody article as the best evidence it has of Obama's fractional paternal kinship with a group of Black Africans that had some Jewish ancestry that they had pretty much forgotten about until it became a useful ploy for immigrating to a first world country.
I am starting to believe your mother must be jewish, you love the theatrics so much.
If you read the articles, you will see that the grandfather immigration records stated that his grandfather on his father's side was jewish with the name: "Immigration records show that Sen. Barack Obama's grandfather, Baruch Heshy Obramowitz, was an Ethiopian "Falasha" Jew, who changed his surname when he moved to Kenya."
So much so for the Paternal side.
The great grandfather on the Ann Dunham side is also so a Jew who was a furniture salesman in Kansas. Here is the tree on the Mothers side:
(This is from the following URL:http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread555051/pg1)
Obama is One-quarter Jewish heritage (House of David) and is a descendent of 2 Kings (King Edward I of England, William I King of Scots) and 6 Presidents (Madison, Truman, Johnson, Carter, GHW Bush, GW Bush.
Barack Hussein Obama II is:
7% African
43% Arab
25% Anglo Saxon
25% Jewish
His mother was half Jewish judging from Obama's genealogy through the past 400 yrs.
Obama is a descendent in the line of David through a descendent on his mother's side of the family who lived in England 400 years ago named Martha Eltonhead.
I have highlighted the members of Barack Obama's family who are likely to be of Jewish heritage in bold. (the bold does not work in this pasting so the name that is jew is Henry Ellington Armour)
Barack Hussein Obama I, Ph.D. (4 April, 1936 − 24 November 1982) (Father)
Stanley Ann Dunham, Ph.D. (November 29, 1942 – November 7, 1995) (Mother)
Stanley Armour Dunham (1918-1992) (maternal grandfather)
Madelyn Lee Payne Dunham (1922-2008) (maternal grandmother)
In addition to President Obama, Stanley is related to six US presidents: James Madison, Harry Truman, Lyndon Johnson, Jimmy Carter, George H. W. Bush, and George W. Bush.
Henry Ellington Armour ( great grandfather)
(b. Jan. 10, 1874 Quincy, Illinois; d. Dec. 5, 1953)
Ruth Lucille Armour (great grandmother)
(b. Sept. 1, 1900; Nov. 25, 1926, Wichita, KS)
Now, if you read the articles I have posted, you will find many interesting facts, as he attended a radical jewish school called Yasheva when he grew up in Hawaii. Why would he attend such a school if he had not jewish heritage what so ever? Why would the school accept him if he had no jewish heritage whatsoever?
What you must understand is that for crypto jews as for jews in general, jewishness is a race, not a religion. Israel measures lineage in fractions to grant citizenship, and you might not know this but different region must have more or less jew in them to be granted citizenry. For example, recently, due to the increased immigration from Sudanese jews, if I remember well, Israel determined that the new threshold should be 1/8 jewish blood instead of 1/16. This was to lower the number of people qualifying for citizenry originating from Sudan (I am not sure if it is Sudan or another adjoining country).
When I say Obama is Jewish, I am not saying he is 100% pure breed jew, I am saying that he has enough kinship for the jews to include him as one of theirs. In their quest to appropriate talent, jews will sometime include amongst them someone that has as little as 1/128 jewish blood, but then his talent must be great, his contributions exceptional.
Do you understand what I mean? If you want to see how Obama was adopted by the Jewish community, go to the following URL:
This will give you a great idea of how, when the jews accept you as a blood relative, they teach you but they always test you on your reflexes to your identity. And if someone passes the tests successfully of always reacting as a jew first, putting that identity in front of all others, then you become a permanent part of the family, even if you only have the tiniest particles of jewish blood.
If you are not jewish, then you can become a capo; but capos are always a subcategory that never have the same access, the same full fledge acceptance.
But the most incredible in all of this is how everything that concerns Obama's Jewish-ness is disappearing from the internet databases.
If you search a bit, you will also find out that a cousin and great friend of Michelle Obama is a Black Rabbi.
If this is not enough, I wonder what you expect. You cannot be as committed to jews as Obama is without having a very strong sense of jewish identity, and this strong sense of identity implies that you have some jewish blood. Remember that Rabbis do research on kinship background of VIPs all the time, and on request from their constituents.
In true exaustion,
You've offered a veritable whirlwind of unsupported assertions, assertions that were wildly extrapolated from a combination of obvious parodies and perfectly mundane rhetoric taken wildly out of context.
You're exhausted with me, while you're the one who keeps banging this "Baruch Heshy Obramowitz" drum despite the fact that it's literally and obviously a JOKE. Even after I told you it's a joke, you picked it right back up without missing a beat. Why should anybody go along with the rest of your assertions after you've proven yourself so sloppy with the data that you'll not only build most of your case on a parody article, you'll completely blow me off and keep right on conspiritizing without missing a beat after I call this out?
Your thing about Michelle's cousin being a rabbi omits that the man is a convert, deliberately encouraging people gullible enough to take your assertions seriously to imagine Jewish ancestry and crypto-Jewish shenanigans.
I did not say that Michelle was Jewish, I am talking about so much proximity, that Obama himself has demonstrated that his Primal identity is Jewish, but obviously, I can see that you are so devensive about this, that you are not going to listen to anything I say. And the fact is, you are not very good at destroying what I present, except at saying "it is not true" which is you right, but that it.
The fact is that many people have the feeling that he is not genuinly american. They either feel is absolutly dislikes white america, or feel he was not born here, or that he is hiding something about his identity, his belief, visions, commitments. And effectively, he has done more for Israel than for the american middle class, he has been fighting the middle class, which is still predominantly white. In fact he is at war with the middle class by continuing spoiling the top 20% income earners with fiscal relief; by adopting a a full corporatist view of america, while pretending to do the opposite. He has created a punitive healt care concept, punitive for the middle class, rewarding for the upper class, etc…
You are proud to be an elitist, because you believe in strong leadership, but strong leadership and forcefull leadership are not the same thing, yet I believe you cannot nuance this difference.
If strong elitism is accompanied with economic and financial elitism, than what you get is authoritarian forcefull leadership. Is that what you believe in?
It is not what I believe in. I believe in a strong middle class in economic terms, this will do more to restore our political leadership than any other road.
Obama himself has demonstrated that his Primal identity is Jewish
We both agree that Obama has been sucking up to the Jews. My explanation for this is that all major American politicians suck up to the Jews and Obama is not an exception to this sweeping rule. He's never said or implied that he's Jewish, or that his "primal identity" is Jewish. I would recommend Sailer's "Half-Blood Prince" for a thoughtful and thorough analysis of Obama's extensive writings on his identity issues. Not to spoil the book, but his preferred identity is Black American – despite a somewhat tenuous claim on it.
I can see that you are so devensive about this, that you are not going to listen to anything I say. And the fact is, you are not very good at destroying what I present, except at saying "it is not true" which is you right, but that it.
I read every single one of your sources…I apparently read them more carefully than you did. I even identified one of your primary sources as an obvious parody – a charge you've repeatedly sidestepped. I don't believe it's fair to accuse me of being unwilling to listen to what you say when I've taken the time to carefully review what you said. I may be so closed-minded that I'll ignore serious evidence when it's presented – but you haven't given me that chance.
The fact is that many people have the feeling that he is not genuinly american.
I fully agree that many people feel that way, and I'm one of them. The problem with Birtherism is that it misdirects the perfectly healthy intuitive suspicion that he's "not one of us" away from a serious conversation about race, tribe, and identity toward a farcical and quixotic attempt to prove by the enemy's rules (citizenship = identity) that he's not one of us. Even if that could be proven, he's not one of us because he's not a White American. He would not be one of us if he were born on the Washington Monument on the Fourth of July. He would be one of us if he were a White American who happened for whatever reason to have been born in Kenya.
You are proud to be an elitist, because you believe in strong leadership, but strong leadership and forcefull leadership are not the same thing, yet I believe you cannot nuance this difference.
I don't know if I've ever framed myself as an "elitist", though I do believe in limited government leadership and stewardship and reject both libertarianism and anarchism. I would like for you to explain how you came to the conclusion that I can't differentiate between "strong" and "forceful" leadership.
If strong elitism is accompanied with economic and financial elitism, than what you get is authoritarian forcefull leadership. Is that what you believe in?
I'm afraid this is pretty far from our original point of disagreement. You appear to be imagining points of disagreement with me out of whole cloth. Can you explain to me how you came to believe I favor authoritarianism and how my thoughts on authoritarianism relate with conspiracy theories/dissident perspectives?
Guys, we lose all credibility / validity of this argument immediately when you call a jew "a descendant of David". jews are NOT a descendant of David – you may very well be, but a modern jew is not. Don't believe me? Read your Bible…or just read the jew's own writings. Check the article in the jewish almanac called "A question of identity" or some such. They KNOW they are not of Abraham, David, etc, but know its imperative to make you think so to continue their parasitic existence of sucking the life out of the true children of Israel.
I have my own $.002 worth (and maybe it's not worth even that). My eyes glaze over the whole birth certificate flap. Was BO born in Kenya? Well, it's six of one, half a dozen of the other. It would make no sense for a very pregnant Stanley Ann Dunham to get a wild hair up her ass in the advanced stages of pregnancy and visit Kenya (not knowing what kind of medical facilities they have over there) when she had first-rate facilities in Hawaii. One would think her parents could/would talk her out of it. But then this is the White teenaged girl who so suffered from Mandingo Syndrome that she either got knocked up by a Negro while living under her parents' roof long before teenagers had the kind of autonomy they do now and Miscegenation Mania became so popular in the media.
My point is that even if BO and his Democrat confreres perpetrated some kind of birth fraud on the country to get the pregnancy, it can only be an issue if anyone making a to-do about it is powerful enough to do something about it, like impeach BO and throw him into jail. None of the finger-pointers fit that criteria and because they can't personally stop BO's antics, they only underscore their own weakness by making charges they will never be allowed to substantiate in a legal hearing. Even if the Repugnants got total control of the Congress, we know they will weasel out of holding hearings to investigate the birth certificate issue, because they are afraid of being accused of racism and setting off cross-country race riots. Justice Clarence Thomas, himself, baldly admitted that everyone on the SCOTUS is evading the issue. So where does that leave the accusers except looking like fools? NOWHERE.
I find it highly unlikely that BO is going to be voted out in 2012 much less impeached and taken out in chains, because the racial situation is that volatile. The fact that the sharper knives in the Republican drawer have already made a point to bow out means that only a sure loser, like John McCain in 2008, will be left to oppose him. IMO, the best thing to do is to elect the most right wing conservative Republican Congress to contain him as possible to make sure he is a lame duck. Then send him to the U.N. in some glamorous, high profile position which involves a lot of prestige but no real power.
Now, my next issue is the question of who is and who is not Jewish. Like Mark Twain, I find the number of Jews wildly distorted for their own purposes for any given reason. You can't swing a stick these days without hitting some remarkably healthy elderly Jew who claims to be a Holocaust Survivor. There are a great number of Jews over the centuries who changed their names and simply stopped going to the synagogues. There are a number of Jews who didn't change their names but felt it was more politic to convert to some other religion. There are a great number of Jews who married out and never looked back and this process went on over centuries. So, it never shocks me when some candidate gets elected and then we find out that s/he has a Jewish ancestor waaay back in his lineage somewhere to his own surprise (and I don't think it's feigned, either). There are probably some ardent WNists who have some unknown Jewish ancestor themselves, BTW. That's why I can't totally buy Jews as a race, but think of them more as some kind of supranational insider club with Israel as the capitol. So, it makes no sense to hate what they are but what they do.
I also think the whole Jew Flap conceals what really discomfits WNists and that is what is really an aracial class struggle between the rich and poor. The only difference between rich White elites and rich Non-White elites are that White elites have openly kicked middle and working class Whites to the curb without even bothering to make racial solidarity appeals while the Non-White elites can still pretend there is racial solidarity, because they can blame all the oppression being poor and powerless entails on Whitey.
But if you follow history and look at every country's elites before America's multiculturalism and diversity gave certain of our elites ass cover, you will see from Egypt's Pharoah on, that the rich elite of every nation colluded with International Jewry to dispossess and enslave their own people, literally getting in bed with them through marriage. You will see that as the enraged populace forced the elite to allow the Jews to be chased out of one country, the elite in another country – often the country right next door – rolled out the welcome mat for them. Moreover, the Jews were allowed back in to countries they were run out of in less than a generation. Obviously the elite brought them back as soon as they thought the Sheeple had calmed down. So again, BO being related to umpteen Presidents of elite lineage, who also have some sort of distant Jewish ancestry does not surprise me either.
Personally, I think the globe has been living in an emerging NWO since America fell to the Federal Reserve System. Once that happened, that was all she wrote. WWI was a consolidation forming the Anglo-American Union and Germany's National Socialism was the last gasp of resistance to the NWO which may have succeeded if Hitler's Jew Hatred had not blinded him to the larger class struggle of the world elite against the proletariat. We saw how the Common Market (Europe's NAFTA), which was billed as a free trade agreement that still left individual nations with a certain autonomy transform into the EU with all decisions made out of Brussels. We Americans are now being dragged, kicking and screaming, into a defacto North American Union by our treacherous elites. If it is not formalized by the end of my lifetime, it will happen shortly after.
I don't mean to sound like a total pessimist, but it seems to me that WNism has this inability to accept that there is a class struggle between the haves and have nots and that they are on the "wrong" side of having is what leads to creating this Jewish boogey man. I'm not saying certain Jews aren't a problem (to other Jews as well as Gentiles) but they aren't the only problem nor are they the biggest problem. Until we can recognize this, we will never be able to mount any kind of successful resistance or game plan for our survival.
Minor correction:
My point is that even if BO and his Democrat confreres perpetrated some kind of birth fraud on the country to get the PRESIDENCY, it can only be an issue if anyone making a to-do about it is powerful enough to do something about it, like impeach BO and throw him into jail.
Matt Parrott said:
"The problem with Birtherism is that it misdirects the perfectly healthy intuitive suspicion that he's "not one of us" away from a serious conversation about race, tribe, and identity toward a farcical and quixotic attempt to prove by the enemy's rules (citizenship = identity) that he's not one of us. Even if that could be proven, he's not one of us because he's not a White American. He would not be one of us if he were born on the Washington Monument on the Fourth of July. He would be one of us if he were a White American who happened for whatever reason to have been born in Kenya."
I respectfully disagree. BO's race or birthplace is not what makes him feel foreign to me. White Americans get too blinded by the criminal element of ghetto Negros at times to see what the real problem is with BO. I have temped at universities where I have had an opportunity to observe law-abiding, studious American Negros in a setting with foreign Negros and there is a substantial difference in the way they are.
People were overly impressed with BO, because he is "so clean and articulate," but put him side by side with another "clean and articulate" Negro like Col. Alan West and you will still feel more comfortable with West than you will with Obama. West would feel more authentically American to you and that is because his formative years were spent here. He grew up playing with the same toys, watching Captain Kangaroo, following the same sports and sharing the same cultural events as you and me. BO may have been born in Hawaii, but his formative years were spent being raised by an Indonesian Muslim in Indonesia. He didn't go to an American public school, he studied at a Madrassa. I'm Catholic and as the Jesuits famously noted, "Give me, the child for his first seven years and I have the man for life."
Barak Hussein Obama, Jr.'s birth certificate flap seems to me to be a very big diversion from what may really be dicey for BO and that is his legal name is Barry Soetero. It may not be where he was born that invalidates his qualifications to be president but where he was raised. Why was he using his stepfather's surname if Lolo Soetero did not adopt him? And if he did, then his mother voluntarily surrendered his citizenship back then, disqualifying him to be president.
Of course, since I am not in a powerful position to force a venue in which to pursue this theory, I see no point in making an issue of it. I know that Congress will sit with their thumbs up their asses and do nothing and the SCOTUS will evade the issue for the same reason they did the birth certificate controversy. And if we think about it, the reason is self-evident and demonstrable.
Notice that, aside from that idiot, Donald Trump, NO White Gentile bothers with it, because there's no point to doing so. There is ONE group with the chutzpah to try it, though. The AIPAC crowd has been agitating BO like crazy to attack Iran and when he's dragged his feet, that's when Orly Taitz or some other Zionist Jew would go on a birther bender. Shortly after, a flash mob of Negro teenagers would materialize in some expensive outdoor mall and beat the snot out of White patrons. ALL of these malls were Jewish owned.
As far as BO is concerned, I think Michael Savage called it correctly when he pegged him as a "malignant narcissist" and warned that "the people who think they can control him are in for a rude awakening." BO is Bill Clinton on steroids. He will use and/or suck up to anyone he has to in order to get into a position of power and then he will kick them to the curb as soon as he finds it expedient to do so. He did it with Reverend Wright, he did it with the Democrat Party with Obamacare, and he is going to do it to the Jews, too. He's White, Black, Jewish, Muslim, Christian and anything and everything else he needs to be at any given time. He has no real allegiance to anyone else but himself.
We are in for some interesting times once the usual suspects figure it out.
I think you fail to understand how human beings work when they have a clear sense of belonging for a group identity. Let's start simply with something that works. Most successful corporate leaders will explain that much of what goes on in a corporation is rarely explained between the participants. And usually, when too much explanation is needed, they fail in their objectives. Great leaders and members of a group know what they have to do. They just have to understand what the basic rallying premise is.
In group evolutionary theory analysis, this is well demonstrated. Much of conjoined actions are the result of implicit communications and understandings.
If a group rallies over a lie, everybody, unless he somehow feels he cannot go that far (but he will get punished by the group), will build in this without having to explain everything to each other.
The scale of the disaster of the real estate/financial catastrophe should make this clear to you. Not every detail of this disaster was plotted, but everybody acted with complicity in his area of expertise with the results we know.
As for the examples you give, I believe they are not the good one. The Guardian has demonstrated, by showing the two original photos that were use in making the composite fake OBL dead picture. Just do a quick search on The Guardian website with the words Fake Photos Bin Laden. The article will prop up.
As for the birth certificate, a photocopy would have closed the layers. The reason we can identify 9 layers is that the document was digitalized and created as a transformable picture, and the person who created the document did not resume it properly, leaving all layers open. This means that it was not a simple photocopy. Why? Why does Obama not present the real certificate in paper for examination? If you say asking these questions are stupid, while they go at the core of the foundations of our Constitution, I do not know what you stand for; its fine to be zealous to pass gay and lesbian hate laws but that is where the buck ends?
Referring to inquiries as these as conspiracy theories, is simply another authoritarian Jewish evolutionary strategy of dismissal. You must remember that the Arab pretend origin of Obama is a diversion tactic, the real identity that is important to him, his rallying point, is his Jewish identity. It was quite obvious with his first cabinet.
Denys Picard
For those interested, a good place to start acquiring independent analysis of the physical events that took place in Manhattan on 9/11 is http://www.ae911truth.org. As far as I know, there's no confabulation or conflation at that site.
Idealistically, all historical accounts, including alternative histories, should compete on their provable, factual merits. Yet big events and subjects tend to have their narratives defined by, or at least constrained by, direct governmental/institutional intervention, e.g. the 9/11 Commission. That gives an advantage to the official versions of certain events and topics beyond their merits, in the sense that contradicting those versions pits one against the state. And questioning the state's official doctrines invariably leads to the state, and therefore much of the public, questioning one's mental faculties in turn.
Perhaps relatedly, it's still an emotional issue for some. I recently found myself being interrogated unexpectedly and quite intensely by my New York City Republican brother-in-law (who's a great guy) about my 9/11 beliefs after having stated that we were lied into the Iraq war. I think that only my somewhat intellectually dishonest derision of 9/11 "conspiracy theories" as "crazy" mitigated a falling out — he had lost friends in the WTC. Family peace was far more important to me in that moment than openly maintaining a heretical view.
We ought to be judicious and strategic in deciding where to place our focus and what's good for our cause. Adding the baggage of 9/11 Truth to our own baggage is probably not a recipe for success at this stage, at least not among the principal actors for our cause who are reaching out to conservatives. Besides, 9/11 Truth has rejected the participation of those espousing WWII revisionism
in the past; they probably don't want our open participation anyway.
But we were lied to in order to attack Iraq. Surely you can submit this bit of truth to your bro-in-law?
He's a smart guy, and I'm not sure how much of his opposition was due to opposing beliefs and how much was due to a desire to enforce message discipline. Either way, he would have none of it. According to him, the Bush administration acted in good faith, and that was that. That's the Republican party line; I should have known better.
There are thousands of jews who claim to have been in and survived Nazi death camps. Now we know there were no gas chambers as is claimed.
How many jews have come forward to say they knew nothing of gas chambers, that they had weddings, plays, music etc in the camps?
I don't believe anybody denies that weddings, parties, and such happened in the concentration camps. It's just that the disease, starvation, and death sort of overshadowed that. While the height of the pile of dead bodies can be debated, and the exact way that the pile of dead bodies came about can be debated, I don't believe that instigating that debate serves contemporary White Advocates very well.
Revisionist historians have every right to pursue their research unimpeded and share their findings without fear of harassments and violence. I defend their right to do that, both in theory and in practice. But I completely reject the notion, commonly presented to me, that if you were to somehow "disprove" the "Holocaust", you would flip some master switch in the White American mind that would result in his awakening and inspire him to rally in defense of his people and their right to determine their own destiny.
When our enemies bring up the Holocaust, dismiss it as irrelevant. If they insist on it, call attention to the piles of dead bodies that are higher and more recent which were caused by egalitarian and social Marxist regimes. If they persist, note that you're the one arguing against genocidal policies and point out that the real "Final Solution" to the problem of genocide is a peaceful pan-national policy of granting every ethnic nationality, including our own, the right to a sovereign state where one needn't worry about minorities being oppressed.
Its just that you were talking about how you have to be a crank to imagine that all jews are behind everything bad that happens. Its pretty remarkable that no jew has come forward to refute the gas chamber lies. That makes it fairly obvious the extent to which jews stick together. Its not as though its a minor thing.
jews give meaning to the term "sleeper cell". I don't think of any of them as making up the list of "not all jews". How are we supposed to figure out who is just a nice jew and who would cut our throats? I don't believe that is the thinking of a crank, its thinking based upon jew history and their actions today.
Israel Shimear, or some jew, said of them, jews are like locusts, seemingly without a leader, they come in and destroy everything in their path.
I think we have every reason to talk about the holocaust. 60 million people died in WW2, mostly Aryan, Anglo Saxon and Christian. jews don't own that history they were just responsible for dragging us into it just like they are getting our kids killed in the ME today.
We can't let them get away with stigmatizing major points of fact that we should be making.
Its pretty remarkable that no jew has come forward to refute the gas chamber lies.
While Jews as a group have firmly worked toward exaggerating and capitalizing upon the episode, some of the most vehement critics of the Holocaust Industry are Jewish.
I don't think of any of them as making up the list of "not all jews"
I didn't ask you to trust any Jews.
We can't let them get away with stigmatizing major points of fact that we should be making.
We don't have an infinite amount of time and resources. In fact, both our time and our resources are painfully finite. So, yeah, there's some stuff in the history books we might be better off leaving to professional historians to bicker over while those of us whose first priority is preservation choose our battles.
" many in our movement diminish the credibility of our fundamental insight"
Nothing harms the branding of the altnerative right more than cooks (and cranks) showing up at events wearing swastikas on T-shirt.
Anyone wearing a swastika t-shirt at a tea-party rally is obviously a plant and not part of this sincere movement.
I think many are overlooking the "Birth Certificate Issue" in its' main point. Why doesn't he want the real truth of his birth out in public? He spent millions to hide it; why? Could his true father be Frank Davis the communist who followed the family from city to city and to Hawaii and was very close both to the family and to Obama as he grew up.
The admins' tolerance in both The Occidental Observer and Majority Rights about those commenters who religiously predicate their 9/11 conspiracy theories has become a nuisance for our movement.
And yes, Matt: Sagan and other skeptics helped me too to understand the silliness of every single conspiracy theory that strains our credulity to the breaking point.
I expected some adherents of conspiracy theories to take this as a challenge and am happy to respectfully and seriously take on their points as best as I can. If you don't want to get stung, don't kick the hive.
But what has me laughing aloud are the handful of people who are insisting that we must promote every anti-government conspiracy theory that bubbles up on the pretext that we need to undermine the government's credibility. I can't think of a worse way to fortify the credibility of our opponents and undermine our own.
You alluded to a "theory" of yours in at your blog on why some people are inclined to embrace conspiracy theories. I, for one, hope you'll present that.
While I mentioned "overclocked pattern recognition" in my article, I believe another factor to be taken into consideration is that very few people have well-honed critical thinking skills. The only difference between conspiracy theorists and the vast sea of "ordinary folks" is that conspiracy theorists reject the groupthink consensus. Anybody can superficially appear sane and balanced by following the herd, which is how most people manage to appear sane and balanced.
@ You alluded to a "theory" of yours in at your blog on why some people are inclined to embrace conspiracy theories. I, for one, hope you'll present that.
In his monumental work Silvano Arieti wrote a line that has been my favorite to understand the mind not only of the millions who hold religious or paranormal beliefs, but of those who subscribe to conspiracy theories as well. Alas, this is so huge a subject that I could only tackle it elsewhere by means of a lengthy article.
I draw my views on the conspiratorial mindset from psychohistory. According to the diverse methods of childrearing, there are different "psychoclasses", that is to say, different stages in the development of empathy.
Subscribing to, say, the silly belief that after the 1947 Roswell UFO incident there has been a massive, governmental cover up for an actual extraterrestrial visitation—a cover up involving several republican and democratic presidencies, from Truman to Obama!—is pretty much the same thing Sagan was talking about when he was seeing patterns on the ceiling. Sagan and the skeptics said that sometimes our mind makes connections that are not real.
The problem is that some people swear it's real: paranoids and paranoiacs see the pattern that every car is a cop.
Arieti's "paleologic" thinking means a catastrophic regression back to the mental processes of an individual or group of individuals: magical thinking among the primitive tribesmen for example where a profound meaning is attributed to prosaic events. I am too lazy to look for the exact quotation now. But the Arieti line I referred to above says something like this: "An hypothetical visitor from Mars could recognize several forms of paleologic thinking among sane Earthlings".
He meant that although those who religiously believe in (say) conspiracy theories are generally sane persons according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, for a truly psychologically-integrated entity (e.g., a fictional visitor from Mars) the difference between the conspiracists and those who get labeled schizophrenic would become a little blurred.
In other words: even we, "sane" modern men, once in a while still relapse to what Julian Jaynes called the "bicameral mind" (= "paleologic thinking" in contrast to Aristotelian forms of logic). The etiology of the whole thing lies in our childrearing process and, if it was abusive, in the lack of empathy or regressions we unconsciously resort.
Pretty dense stuff as I said. But if you want to take a look to my introduction to both Arieti and Jaynes see my interpretation of psychohistory.
'The admins' tolerance in both The Occidental Observer and Majority Rights about those commenters who religiously predicate their 9/11 conspiracy theories has become a nuisance for our movement.'
I'm pretty sure that most 9/11 truthers would be happy for white nationalists to distance themselves from 9/11 truth.
Then again, most 9/11 truthers are neither white nor United States residents.
Incidentally, @Matt: the "overclocked pattern recognition" idea is pure gold. You should develop that in future essays.
@ Incidentally, Matt: the "overclocked pattern recognition" idea is pure gold. You should develop that in future essays.
This 2011 Skeptical Inquirer article may also help.
You are a great writer. Disappointing that your very reasonable article drew such responses.
Re a group strategy – what do you think about the LDS. Sober, industrious and loyal. That is, we need whatever it is the LDS have. Their creation myth is recent – and pretty bizarre. Maybe humans need a bit of bizarre!
I am LDS. I hesitate to navigate that minefield, but probably should some day.
Mr Parrott, you do us all a disservice by conflating the birth certificate rumors with 911 truth. It's clear you don't know even the basic facts about the 911 Commission, and if you did read the 911 Commission report yourself, you may not be able to deal with the emotional fallout.
But there's no reason for you to do the enemies' work by slandering the victims of 911 with silliness about "conspiracy theories." A lot of 911 truth became mainstream political issues in the 2002, 2004, and 2006 elections.
If it wasn't for the "Jersey Girls" and Bob Mcilvaine – the original "conspiracy theorists" we would have never even had a 911 Commission.
Were you even awake in 2002? Just because you can't tell a "big lie" doesn't mean others can't.
Thank you for visiting The Journal of 9/11 Studies, a peer-reviewed, open-access, electronic-only journal, covering the whole of research related to the events of 11 September, 2001. Many fields of study are represented in the journal, including Engineering, Physics, Chemistry, Mathematics and Psychology. All content is freely available online. Our mission in the past has been to provide an outlet for evidence-based research into the events of 9/11 that might not otherwise have been published, due to the resistance that many established journals and other institutions have displayed toward this topic.
I agree, conspiracy theory is tricky ground when attempting to forward a serious argument. But what is your suggestion then for gaining momentum for white advocacy? What presence can we expect from your group and KM's group on college campuses? Think about it Matt, if all black activists and Jewish activists paralleled the strategies on this website, they would be out of control and we would be in control! If all they did was write articles highlighting the obvious while obstaining from public marches and public activism, this would still be a WASP run country. Words do nothing if not followed by some type of organized action. The left and people of color do it all the time but you're telling me were too scared or too inept? Cmon there is only so much your white audience can take before imploding due to non-direction and non-action.
Well, the shift in attitudes leads the shift in behavior.
Our statewide advocacy group meets monthly, regularly organizes public rallies, engages the local media, and aggressively lobbies politicians on relevant issues.
I've tried my best to lay out a clear and accessible vision in my self-published booklet booklet, which is available to read for free at our website. I've then spent the last couple years working with a great team of folks who have pushed back against antifa, taken their case to the street against illegal immigrant protesters, stood their ground despite death threats and petty vandals, and inspired others to join them.
We're obviously far behind our competition. We're clearly not winning. I don't have it all figured out and I may not be doing everything I should be doing. But you can't accuse either me or the group I'm in of shying away from public activism.
And most of the people involved originally got in contact with us as a result of stumbling onto the blog posts – which are an integral part of a comprehensive outreach strategy.
Matt: You state, "…and I'm also in the White American Christian faction. I believe the onus is on us to lead, inspire, and convert skeptics and pagans – avoiding infighting at nearly all costs."
I can't speak for skeptics, and cannot yet speak with authority for pagans since I have not experienced enough communion with them. However, I consider myself completely exited from any/all Bible-based belief structures. I was raised – or perhaps indoctrinated at a time when I was unable to exercise freedom of choice – in Lutheranism. Then, as an adult, I, and my belief structure changed to paganism.
Now, when I hear comments from non-pagans who wish to "…lead, inspire, and convert …pagans", it is a direct affront. In addition, such comments function as a lightning rod whereby infighting is attracted, invited.
If the invading non-White hordes are attacking my community, I don't care one bit if the person reloading my weapon believes in Jesus, Zeus, nothing or the fuzzy green mold at the bottom of trees. What I care about is that my kinsman stands with me. If he won't collaborate to the benefit of our collective survival because I am not of his faith, then we both have a greater chance of being overcome.
I have little to suggest to Christians as to how they reconcile "go, ye, therefore and teach all nations, baptizing them…" with respecting my non-Christian faith, not making any attempts to convert me, and accepting me as a kinsman. But I do have strong feelings, attitudes about another person or group actively negating my desire for racial cohesion because of my faith.
I look forward to a significant moderation on the part of non-pagans so we can work together successfully towards group survival.
I meant to imply the opposite of what you apparently inferred. What I meant is that we Christians need to leap toward the front of the pack in the fight to take it back. While I will continue to seek converts, there's a respectful and appropriate way to do that which doesn't interfere with collaborative projects and distract from the work that needs to be done to assure that there are even White folks around in the future to bother persuading to become White Christians.
All nations can and should receive the gospel – but as separate nations. Christianity can transcend racial, ethnic, and sociocultural differences between the nations of mankind without negating those differences. The notion that Christianity somehow implies globalism, universalism, or cultural relativism is merely one of the more obvious examples of our healthy and racially-conscious traditional institutions have been relatively recently subverted and re-purposed.
Ok Matt here's an idea. You're an excellent writer so I would ask you to please write a pamphlet for white college students that will A. speak to their experiences, past and present B. Speak To their ethics C. Using Comparison Theory, speak to their sense of other by showing how other ethnics publically display pride–So why the inequality?
A. In this section I would focus on a Survival Guide for college students. White students need to know that they WILL be assaulted in class. They need to know that, in this situation, they have the right to stick up for themselves. They need to know that if a teacher attacks their ethnicity in any way, the professor will be protested as a racist by a multitude of pushy white college kids with picket- signs. They need to know that we are out there and care about them!
B. I would speak to a persons right morally to have pride in their ethnicity. God made the white race so how can it be morally reprehensible to show pride in how God made us? White pride does not equal white hate towards non-whites. White people have accomplished amazing things and have a culture that the whole world wants to be a part of. How the hell can we not have pride with such a rich history and how the hell can we be racist when colored immigration has met ZERO resistance in America? What other colored country on earth can boast of diversity like America and yet the white majority is still labeled as RACIST on college campuses!?? HYPOCRISY! But when you have the liberal arts promoting marxist race-baitors a white student can quickly feel as though their culture is the worst mistake God ever made. That is wrong Matt and we need to work to fix the culture on college campuses.
C. I would show how every ethnic group attending an American college campus has a safe ethnic-haven to turn to in times of need. This haven is always in a "club" format solely so they can be with their own kind. Yet where the Flip is the white ethnic club Matt? In the book "The Diversity Myth" the authors show how Stanford barred an Irish club on Campus due to controversy over a white club! This needs to change! How can any white student not understand that the system is inherently biased against them? We need to stand up and fight to get our right to exist back. We need to fight to get the right to be equally compared for a job or for college rather than some positive prejudice towards non-white skin tone. Affirmative action in college application processes and the work-force is RACIST! WE NEED TO FIGHT TO GET THIS REVERSED!
– AFter writing this pamphlet send them to me. I will then recruit two good looking white college students, male and female, to pass out said pamphlets to white students at nearby colleges. We have the right to have our brothers and sisters protected and respected. And of course this website would be advertised in the pamphlet.
-This is just my two cents, but at least it's a plan to enlarge your audience Matt, as well as protect the next generation of white leaders by revealing the truth about the tribe. I really do appreciate this website but become frustrated when article after article highlights our plight, yet no plan of action seems to rise to the fore. But I do applaud your efforts and enjoy reading your articles.
While they're not exactly racial, I believe you should learn more about and support the YWC. They've been doing some great work with that audience and feature some of the smartest people and best writers in the "youth" bracket of our movement.
I've never seen the inside of a dorm. I'm more at home in a trailer park than a frat house. We all have our unique backgrounds and our unique roles to play in awakening the people whose experience we can speak to. My background is a working class small town background, and that's generally the voice I use and the audience I target.
I agree with you that college students are a very important group to reach out to. I'm just not the guy to do that.
-While they're not exactly racial, I believe you should learn more about and support the YWC.
Yes, I did just as you suggested and was supremely disappointed. Matt, I have a Masters Degree and my friends have Masters degrees. We are all fresh out of grad school and have concluded that there is much to be done in regard to civil rights for white students and white citizens. We watched in awe as anti-white propaganda was ruthlessly spewed in capstone sociological classes such as "Race, Class, and Gender." We read about the witch-hunt carried out at csulb against Kevin MacDonald. We want to help change things for our kind, especially in the college environment. These are the future leaders of our country and I feel this website should be doing more to reach out. But the YWC is headed by a grad-student who is attending some no name college. Their primary photo depicts a rally with students holding a sign in some foreign language. How does this site connect to smart, sophisticated white American students? I would be embarrased to re-direct my friends to that site. But I would not feel foolish redirecting traffic to this site because it is run by bonafied intellectuals and genuine members of the intellegentsia. How can we recruit top people if we don't get the word out to the masses? The only reason I heard of this website was through Kevin MacDonalds mention in the Press-Telegram. That is sad representation for such an awesome site!!!
-I've never seen the inside of a dorm. I'm more at home in a trailer park than a frat house.
What does this have to do with the ability to write a piece for interested college students? Why the self-deprication when it comes to activism? Are you saying you do not have a degree? I doubt that as I've witnesssed your obvious talent to form a sentence. But if you're an organic intellectual in the Gramscian tradition, then kudos. But I must ask you, if this site is not aimed at college youth, who is it aimed at? Don't make me choke Matt. What other group is more important than our youth? You state that conspiracy theorists hurt the movement, but what movement? You can't hurt what doesn't exist. I think what you meant to say was that when using Alinsky style stratagems, we must remember that we have to work within the confines of socities truth. Today's truth has silenced our voice while protecting and spreading the voice of non-whites. So we must operate in a way that does not silence us before we get our point out. If we sound like a nut, going against the truth setting of the mainstream media, which asserts that conspiracies are false, then we automatically lose the argument as our audience has deemed us foolish according to socities truth. That is good rhetoric and I commend your argument. But let's not act like we have this cohesive movement that may be put in jeopardy due to a white person forwarding conspiracy theories. Just remember, Noam Chomsky received hell and lost mountains of support for telling progressive leftists to get off the 911 conspiracy. So in effect, white nationalists who promote conspiracty theories are actually running parralel to arguments forwarded by lefties, so how can white conspiracy theorists be deemed foolish when both sides forward the same arguments?
-But once again, I do appreciate the time you have put into your writings and in no way want to marginalize your efforts.
Gag orders are wrong. Discussion of some of these allegedly "abstruse" "in the past" issues turns many a mind on to sober truths.
If all but respect scholars should avoid studying or discussing Holocaust revisionism on the grounds that it doesn't help our present cause, then you should not have read or thought about the medieval examples in Sagan's Demon-Haunted World. Those examples of irrationality are in the past as well, and bringing them up now in discussion or in writing would needlessly offend many. So perhaps Sagan should never have written such a book. Perhaps you should never suggest anyone read it.
There is, for some reason, a subset of our people who believe that gag orders, hushing, and censorship/censure of speech will lead to values. A necessary means of advancing toward the Millenium is to avoid saying, thinking, or broadcasting certain dirty words and certain dirty topics – this Puritan assumption is not only ineffective and senseless, but also womanish, cowardly, and contemptible. It's the psychology of a kindergarten teacher.
Nevertheless, it is fanatically (I choose the word carefully) embraced and upheld with stubborn devotion, as an instinctual matter, by this subset, this group of would-be moral guides, of whom you unfortunately appear to be a member.
How does the suppression (voluntary or involuntary) of any discussion of a subject result in anything but stultifying minds, i.e., cutting them off from potentially illuminating integrations? Let speech be wide open and let the chips fall where they may – that's the way to truth, and that's the scientific method.
This is a fine (and beautifully sane) post, Mr. Parrot.
And for what it's worth, I'd like to add that [i]overclocked pattern recognition[/i] is precisely the thing that's kept the rabbis busy for some 2000 years.
Denys Picard:
>Obama is One-quarter Jewish heritage (House of David) and is a descendent of 2 Kings (King Edward I of England, William I King of Scots) and 6 Presidents (Madison, Truman, Johnson, Carter, GHW Bush, GW Bush.
You're an obvious example of the cranks Matt talks about; in fact, the quote here shows that you're insane, a complete nutcase. You fail to support your claims in any way. And one of the links you provide is a parody, which you completely ignore when it is pointed out to you.
Stop making a fool of yourself. And stop insulting Matt for not agreeing with you. You need to talk less and listen more.
Don't be silly! The first conspicuous thing about 9/11 is that all three buildings come down at free-fall acceleration. Things only fall that way when there is zero resistance, as in a vacuum, or such negligible resistance as the air would have had on matter making up these buildings. I.e., they go down at the same speed a brick thrown off the roof would have gone down, totally unlike the collapse pattern for "pancaking." And this means everything.
You say there's been no hard evidence presented, and you're wrong. There is abundant and overwhelming evidence that the two planes did not cause the collapse of the three buildings, as well as that an self-vaporizing airliner did not go through that bore-hole in the Pentagon. You are simply obtuse in the face of conspicuous, direct physical evidence. If you had ever taken one semester of either calculus or physics, you would have learned the law of falling bodies, and you would know that the official explanation is impossible. And I've never seen a talking-head apologist for the official version respond to any of this; they always dart off in another direction, some red herring.
And none of this evidence is based on "conspiracies," but only implies conspiracy, though strongly implies it, implies it in the way a truth implies that its contradiction is false. I mean, the serious critics are not starting out with a "conspiracy" and reasoning backward to how it could have physically been pulled off; it's the physical issue that comes first, and then think what you will. The vast unwashed immediately see the implication, that, yes, it had to be an "inside job," and they reject the physical argument, simply proclaiming, "I'm not an engineer, . . . ." But, really, anyone who has studied a modicum of post-calculus science should see it immediately, and many do.
I suspect that, busy as you are with own issues, you simply haven't studied it. But, your lack of perception there calls your own credibility into question, however noble your stance on other issues. This is real, and it went down right in faces. I recently read that 89% of the German public in poll were shown to think the U.S. government is lying about it. And the Germans are not especially stupid, even after "re-education."
There is disagreement about exactly how the buildings were brought down; but anyone who understands the physical problem knows that the government account is a lie and implausible fabrication. I tend to favor Judy Wood's claim that it was some undisclosed energy technology used to bring down the buildings. But, really, whether it was that, small hydrogen bombs, thermite, thermate, super thermite or super-duper thermite/mate, I'm quite sure that it was some high-dollar engineers that brought all them buildings down on 9/11.
You must be reasonable and not just expedient!
SB is correct about 9/11, and anyone who's watched the videos of WTC Building 7 come down at free-fall speed seven hours after the North Tower fell, realizing that Larry Silverstein can be seen on TV clips saying the decision was made to "pull it," can only come to the conclusion Building 7 was taken down by controlled demolition. And, if Building 7 was pre-rigged with explosives, which it had to have been, then it follows the Twin Towers were as well. Matt, if you're such a stickler for the scientific method, I would recommend you read David Ray Griffin's Mysterious Collapse of World Trade Center 7, which utterly demolishes the NIST report, basing the rebuttal on hard facts and scientific reasoning. As far as the Pentagon goes, it appears you haven't even bothered to look at research showing it could not have been hit by a 757 since windows in what would have been the path of the wings, engines, and tail section remained intact. Along the narrow 14′ or so core demolished by the explosive there remained unburnt books, wood furniture, etc, proving there was no fireball of 8,600 or so gallons of jet fuel. This aluminum aircraft was said to have penetrated the three outermost rings, meaning a jet plane plowed through a total thickness of nine feet of heavily reinforced concrete, which is impossible. A total of several hundred firefighters and civilian eyewitnesses at the Trade Center site reported sequential explosions going off in the buildings ahead of the line of collapse. Steel was sulfidated, vaporized, and left molten in the depths of the basements for months following 9/11, which would be impossible from kerosene fires lasting a few minutes or collapse pressures.There are literally hundreds of pieces of hard evidence supporting the claim the buildings were demolished. The physics proves the impacts and subsequent fires could not have brought the Twin Towers down. As for conspiracy, you might take a look at Chris Bollyn's site, bearing in mind that with regard to circumstantial evidence and the obvious absence of confessions, elaborate efforts of concealment provide powerful evidence of guilt, which in this case implicates government insiders, American Zionists, and Israel itself. Sure, anyone would be thought of as a crank for bringing this stuff up out of the blue at the club, but so too would anyone bringing up any topic on this site for that matter.


text:
|WikiProject Tambayan Philippines
|(Rated B-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject Philippine LGUs[edit]
Wondering how to edit the article? The WikiProject Philippine LGUs could be of help. :)
FYI: PALAWAN IS NOT IN WESTERN VISAYAS BECAUSE WESTERN VISAYAS IS COMPOSED OF PANAY ISLAND LIKE AKLAN ANTIQUE ILOILO NEGROS OCCIDENTAL CAPIZ AND GUIMARAS. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 16:25, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
I have read recently about diminishing safety for westerners. Should I add it in? --220.127.116.11 (talk) 19:08, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
The aberration of one event of terrorism in Palawan has so negatively impacted eco-tourism that the economic consequences have, for many, been devastating for nearly a decade. These issues are very small in the history of Palawan and represent no real danger to visitors. Caril Ridley —Preceding unsigned comment added by Caril Ridley (talk • contribs) 07:53, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
In ancient maps, Palawan is indicated as
ParagoaParagoia, most probably by the Portugues before the'official' discovery of the Philippines by the Spaniards. I believe they meant it as a stop over from the Moluccas to Goa, India ( 'para Goa' ). I'm still searching sources.--Jondel (talk) 23:19, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
Ancient names[edit]
Ancient names included Paragoia, Calamianes, Puloamum. --Jondel (talk) 03:15, 25 November 2008 (UTC) I have cut from the article the following
(means Kapalauan in Meranau or Kepulauan in standard Malay or Islands in English)
A new paragraph etomology is needed to cover names Pbmaise (talk) 08:43, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
hi, i added some pictures in the geology section. Matikas 0805 (talk) 19:30, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
May July nonsense[edit]
Latest edit now results in text reading: As of May July, the abeyance is still in effect and Palawan remains a part of MIMAROPA.
This is nonsense.
I am reverting the text once again. Gubernatoria (talk) 11:27, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Region placement[edit]
This appears to be still in confusion. As the article notes, EO429 ordered the transfer of the Province of Palawan and Puerto Princesa City from Region IV to Region VI on May 23, 2005 and AO129 on August 19, 2005 ordered implementation of EO 429 to be held in abeyance pending approval by the President of its Implementation Plan. As of January 3, 2020, This PSGC Updates page lists AO129 but does not list EO429; it also lists a PSGC Updates (January 1- June 30, 2005) which lists the province of Palawan as having been transferred from Region VI to Region IVB on May 23, 2005 following on EO429. The PSGC Palawan page lists it as being in REGION IV-B (MIMAROPA) as of 30 June 2009.
The PSCG REGION IV-B (MIMAROPA) page shows Palawan as being in that region as of 30 September 2009. The PSGC REGION VI (Western Visayas) does not show Palawan as being in that region as of 30 September 2009. The NCSB Regional Divisions page does not list Region 4, saying that as of as of January 2010. there are ten regional divisions in the whole of the Philippines, but listing only nine (the Cordillera Administrative Region plus Regions numbered 1, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, and 12). The NCSB Provincial, City and Municipal Profiles page does not mention Region 4 or Palawan, and shows Region 6 as not containing Palawan. The PROVINCIAL SUMMARY; NUMBER OF PROVINCES, CITIES, MUNICIPALITIES AND BARANGAYS, BY REGION As of September 30, 2009 page shows Palawan under Region IV-B (MIMAROPA).
The General Appropriations Acts for 2002, 2003, 2005, 2007, 2008 and 2009 (I have not found the 2004 and 2006 acts) show Region 4 as "Region IV - SOUTHERN TAGALOG AND PALAWAN" and list Palawan budget items there.
Googling around, I stumbled over two files on the dbm.gov.ph website — this file, which contains "Sec. 83. Implementation of Executive Order No. 429, Series of 2005. The appropriations provided in this Act for the regional/field offices in Region IV-B may be realigned to Region VI to implement E.O. No. 429, s. 2005 upon approval by the President of the Philippines of the implementation plan to be submitted by the DILG under A.O. No. 129, s. 2005." and this file, which contains, " Sec. 82. Implementation of Executive Order No. 429, Series of 2005. The appropriations provided in this Act for the regional/field office in Region IV-B may be realigned to Region VI to implement E.O. No. 429, s. 2005 upon approval by the President of the implementation plan to be submitted by the DILG under A.O. No. 129, s. 2005." Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 05:29, 3 January 2010 (UTC) (copyedits/fixes 05:17, 9 January 2010 (UTC))
palawan massacre must have its own article[edit]
Can anyone split palawan massacre into a new article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.108.40.206 (talk) 08:31, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
I am looking to see how these people fit in. Should this be a stub, or are they referred to differently now? They are reported on Palawan by a U.S. government report, and are the subject of a short notice in Americana: Rines, George Edwin, ed. (1920). "Tandolanos". Encyclopedia Americana. Bob Burkhardt (talk) 17:44, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
Education data is out of date[edit]
There is an
{{update}} tag in the "Education" subsection of the "Demographics" section.
The data about public elementary school enrollment needs to be updated.
Kind regards, Matt (talk) 02:42, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
External links modified[edit]
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Palawan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add
{{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add
{{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080610075528/http://www.wowphilippines.com.ph:80/explore_phil/place_details.asp?content=description&province=22 to http://www.wowphilippines.com.ph/explore_phil/place_details.asp?content=description&province=22
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080307040733/http://www.nationalgeographic.com/traveler/pdf/nd07placesratedislands.pdf to http://www.nationalgeographic.com/traveler/pdf/nd07placesratedislands.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Archived sources still need to be checked
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 14:25, 17 October 2015 (UTC)


text:
Which is more important, data rate or CAS latency, when choosing RAM?
Last response: in Memory
Related resources
- RAM Frequency or CAS Latency more Important for Gaming? PLEASE HELP - Forum
- Which is more important: Lower CAS latency or higher clock? - Forum
- Which is more important, the latency of the ram or the frequency - Forum
- CAS Latency or Dual-channel more important? - Forum
- What is more important? CAS Latency or faster DDR - Forum
Related resources
- SolvedCAS versus MHZ, which one is more important Forum
- CAS Latency VS. Peak data rate Forum
- SolvedMixed Ram CAS Latency, Which do I OC? Forum
- SolvedResolution vs. Refresh Rate: which is more important for gaming? Forum
- Solvedwhich is more important texel or pixel rate for games? Forum
- response time vs refresh rate. What's the difference and which one is more important? Forum
- SolvedWhat RAM for PC3 12800 AND 1333 (which is more important) Forum
- How to find the latency rating of ram? & Help choosing Server Ram Forum
- Which is more important? GB VS RAM Forum
- SolvedNeed more ram, which should i choose? Forum
- More resources
Read discussions in other Memory categories


text:
Homestead Studio Suites Little Nahant hotels are listed below. Search for cheap and discount Homestead Studio Suites hotel rates in Little Nahant, MA for your upcoming individual or group travel. We list the best Homestead Studio Suites Little Nahant lodging so you can review the Little Nahant Homestead Studio Suites hotel list below to find the perfect place.
Our booking engine will also provide discounted Little Nahant, MA properties that get similar quality scores of a Homestead Studio Suites.
Enter your stay dates and any discounts you qualify for to see Little Nahant, MA rates found only on HotelPlanner!


text:
25 of 31 people found the following review helpful
Great protection for Ipad mini, some bulk and weight but worth the tradeoff.,
Verified Purchase(What's this?)
This review is from: OtterBox Defender Series Case for iPad Mini 1, 2 & 3 - Black (Personal Computers)
Being in the Army I tend to enter hostile environments with my toys. This Otterbox is the perfect solution for my Ipad mini. It does add bulk and some weight to the device put that is a fair tradeoff for the protection that it affords. The screen looks great under the installed screen protector. If you are wanting the Ipad as a cute little reader then you should probably find a nice little flap cover instead of this item. If you plan on throwing this in your assault pack (even if it's for college) and heading our then go for the Otterbox.
Review Details
Top Reviewer Ranking: 3,564,850