i don't think it's true. probably part of the info war.

"Hypercamouflage traps possibilities for fighting and surviving along the enemy, a total withdrawal from friend’s sensors and dissolution into the enemy: the rebirth of a new foe."

Can it be true? - No.
What does it mean? - That the appeasenik left has opted for auto-parodic insanity in a desperate attempt to resolve their cognitive dissonance.

that's the issue in a nutshell innit? there's no way to break this unending stream of cognitive dissonance.

cognitive dissonance links:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance
www.ithaca.edu/faculty/stephens/cdback.html

this one seems to illustrate hyperstition gone bad maybe.

When Prophecies Fail
www.freeminds.org/psych/propfail.htm

oopsie. IS this story true is different from CAN this story be true.

yes it can.

discussion about this issue here:
www.metafilter.com/mefi/43378

thanks northanger

extreme solipsism also important psych ref.
'It's OUR invented racist other ... no, it's that WE deserve it for fighting back ... no, WE DID IT ALL, in fact the Jews gassed themselves in Nazi Germany ... no, there wasn't a Nazi Germany, it was invented by Western intelligence services ... communism was just a McCarthyite scare ... Global Jihad was cooked up by the CIA ... no, no, my brain hurts ...'

oh. i think i finally figured out how to make a hyperstition real. it's sorta like alchemy. :)

There is no reason to not believe it is true. Peter Power did appear on Radio 5 to make those statements. You're being way too quick about this. It doesn't mean that the bombings weren't genuine - but what does it mean?

here's another link about Peter Power during the King's Cross station fire of 1987:

news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/witness/november/18/newsid_3267000/3267833.stm

And 9/11? And Madrid? And the Russians? Funny how the infidels keep atrocitizing themselves. Bin Laden sure struck lucky with his enemies.

stop being silly Nicky.

wasn't there a question about how quickly the 7/7 bombers were identified? wasn't the bombing exercise about "jumping from slow time to quick time thinking"?

see 8 key thoughts here:
www.visorconsultants.com/disaster.html

wouldn't it make sense to run ANOTHER bombing exercise TWO WEEKS after 7/7 to get everyone back on track?

it's the coincidence that's throwing me.

AND, it's Power's response to 7/7 that's interesting. why was HE freaking out?

the only thing that makes sense (9/11, 7/7 & 7/21) is controlling collateral damage. yes, a series of controlled bombs went off to bring down the WTC because that's part of a simulation. worse case scenario: how do we bring down the WTC if we need to control collateral damage?

cognitive dissonance: it was already bad with the WTC being slammed by two planes. it would have been much worse if we all found out right afterwards: "we blew the building because we had to".

hmm, was 7/21 a bombing exercise?

"eyes wide shut" -- see this:
hyperstition.abstractdynamics.org/archives/004187.html

& this:
www.whale.to/b/assassinations_q.html

more info on Peter Power:
antagonise.blogspot.com/2005_07_01_antagonise_archive.html

apparently, peter powers will speak about his bombing exercise comments to anyone able to "demonstrate a bona fide reason for asking (e.g. accredited journalist / academic)" — everyone else gets a canned reply:

Business exec confirms same-time-as-attack underground bombing exercise
www.torontofreepress.com/2005/cover071405.htm

London Bombing
www.indymedia.org.uk/en/regions/world/2005/07/318160.html

northanger - you're wading deep into moonbat territory - would you set off into kook land in search of holocaust denial material? So what's the difference?

the holocaust is part of history; the london bombings are current events. until news crystallizes as fact it remains fluid & speculative. observe recent events concerning SCOTUS nominees & men shot in the head five times in the London Underground.

the Peter Power angle may be discounted eventually. however, the major news groups haven't picked this one up yet. even the "holocaust denial material" was a hotly debated news item several years ago.

ps. it even has it's own wiki entry.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocaust_denial

rereading this thread it seems to me that it may well be dr land who is guilty of 'auto-parodic insanity' in defence of his flaky worldview, rather than the evil leftist western news media. I suppose that kind of febrile ideological aggression is what comes of living in a country whose bubble economy is foundering so badly that the state has even reluctantly started selling some of its massive mandatorily-retained share in all stock-exchange-listed companies.

northanger - but as you say, it's a matter of politicized (dis)information, designed to establish the credibility of Jihadist-sympathizer conspiracy theory (thus part of the tedious antisemitic and antiamerican tradition including the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, holocaust denial, Jenin 'massacre' BS, 'Jews/CIA did 9/11' literature and countless other hot-selling topics in islamist and leftist propaganda outlets). Why treat it as anything other than the diversionary totalitarian brain-toxin it is?

nicky - i'll get to you in a minute, until then, stop playing with yourself & read these (hi angela!):

CIA / Mossad Front Group Attacks London
blogspot.mg.co.za/?q=node/1163

Coincidence of bomb exercises?
www.channel4.com/news/special-reports/special-reports-storypage.jsp?id=372

et tu northanger

nicholas. politicized (dis)information eh? a well-known US newsguy has a segment on his show about China. the lower screen displaying a dynamic graphic: RED STORM RISING. above this is a equally dynamic sneer.

news is simply "who, what, where, when, why, and how". just the facts, ma'am. but, IMHO, what we've got is agitprop & propaganda parading as news. all the constant speculating about Judge Edith Brown Clement for an evening just left me thinking that the Bush administration can keep secrets secret. nope, i'm getting news by agenda & opinionated sneers. maybe i'm suffering from too much adjective soup.

"et tu northanger" - rotflmao.

London under attack
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/panorama/3686201.stm
This film is a mock exercise of what might happen in London if there was a terror attack now. In a unique fusion of drama, detailed research and expert discussion Panorama puts Britain's emergency plans to the test. Set in the future - but only just - the city of London is thrown into chaos by a series of terrorist attacks.

Preparing for a crisis by Peter Power
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/panorama/3686423.stm

Wargames Were Cover For the Operational Execution of 9/11
www.prisonplanet.com/articles/september2004/080904wargamescover.htm

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planning_and_execution_of_the_September_11,_2001_attacks#War_Games_Paralleled_Attacks
The 9/11 Commission neglected to investigate or report on this subject, therefore it is presently unknown what relation, if any, these exercises had to Global Guardian, Vigilant Guardian, Vigilant Warrior, or Northern Vigilance, or how any of the war games might have affected the military's response to the real attacks.

I think the very-Blairite sounding crisis management group working through a terror simulation sounds plausible enough; also just look at the face and garb of Mr [Corporate] Power – proper scary…

As for the speed of the inquiry and the identification, in yesterday’s Observer the Beeston muslim youth were quoted as saying it’s a conspiracy stemming from one of the quartet’s mothers saying she didn’t know the whereabouts of her son. The Islamist/leftist conspiracy fear is well documented, but Jenin massacre denial? London Jewish comedian Ivor Dembina (see link) visited the West Bank town and attests to the damage caused in his stand-up routine….
www.thinkbeforeyoulaugh.com/index.asp

www.soulinvitation.com/triplosion/ wave forms of primes anybody?

good link, piet

rereading this thread it seems to me that it may well be dr land who is guilty of 'auto-parodic insanity' in defence of his flaky worldview, rather than the evil leftist western news media

quite. Is there ANYONE who is denying the existence of Islamist terrorism? (Outside Nick's head I mean). Thought not.

This is surely interesting in its own right - i.e. what DOES it mean if such an exercise was taking place (and no-one has denied that it did)? Saying 'co-incidence' is surely absurd.

As for the wider issues, it is now beyond question that the policies Nick advocates have led to the spreading of the Islamist terror threat. Well done!

appeasers' party in the house

thank the unutterable powers of the abyss you leftists are just an irrelevant lunatic fringe

>>Is there ANYONE who is denying the existence of Islamist terrorism? (Outside Nick's head I mean). Thought not.

besides me there's Iqbal Sacranie, general secretary of the Muslim Council of Britain.

um ... Sir Iqbal Sacranie ::curtsey::

however...

www.vinnomot.com/AKasem/LondonTerror.htm
Therefore the anti-terrorist squads (of infidels) must learn a few lessons from the Islamists. They should learn how to beat their enemy in their own game. Once these squads learn what real Islam is all about, it will be so simple to map out the correct strategies to extinguish Islamic terrorism—for good. And it costs so little to know ‘real Islam’!

A good starting point will be to comprehend the above verse. An old adage says, ‘Know your enemy.’ This is true, but the truer version should be, “Know your enemy’s motive.” The motive of the Islamists is Islam—not terrorism, not Iraq, not Afghanistan. Terrorism is just a tool employed, but Qur’an is the motivator and Islam is the final goal. There can be no clearer message than this. The civilised world is at war—a war with Islam. The Islamists will surely confirm this truth. Full stop.

what is dr land's flaky worldview exactly? maybe it does boil down to, "numerology, the dungeons and the dragons, the fantasies of being whipped in top floor docklands offices by cold eyed capitalist domanatrixes in power-suits and stilletoes". heck, i don't know much about bataille but he did do that headless thing with plenty of willing sacrificees but no executioner. interesting when you consider ... "do not hanker for peace with the infidels; behead them when you catch them" (Quran 47:4).

> you leftists are just an irrelevant lunatic fringe

Yes, unlike you smug bigoted sinophile astrologists. All the major intelligence agencies of the world are constantly focussed on your portentous inanities. Thank god there are still some people around who really _know_ about inventing number patterns: otherwise how could the glorious freedoms won by those brave armies of CNN news-anchormen and starbucks franchisees be saved from the evil threat of islamofascism?

&, from arthur silber -
coldfury.com/reason/?p=819
The primary key to why I will vote for Kerry on Tuesday lies in one inescapable fact: Bush and his most ardent supporters believe, to the very core of their being, that saying something is true will make it so. In the final analysis, facts and reality do not matter to them at all. They truly and completely believe that if you say the “right” thing, the facts will adjust themselves accordingly. It does not matter to them that their own actions inevitably lead to the destruction of everything they say they value and are trying to achieve: if you say something is so, then it is. In this manner, Bush and his acolytes reject facts, logic and evidence on principle—and it is the central animating principle of their manner of functioning.

vide: www.yuricareport.com/Bush'sBody/BushAndEasyCertainty.html
“’We’re an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you’re studying that reality—judiciously, as you will—we’ll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that’s how things will sort out. We’re history’s actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.’‘

Sinophile · One who admires China, its people, or its culture.

ouchie.

What does it mean for intelligence when the only possible interpretation of a suggestion that the world might be more complicated than a star-wars-style manichean struggle, is that the suggestion must be the work of THE ENEMY?

Cold irrationalism? "Yes, I am a transcendental dogmatist"? That's not capitalism and schizophrenia, it's capitalist paranoia; a volatile pre-emptive attack mode characterises those whose posturing as the heroic destiny of civilisation is built on a fragile structure of all-too-human venality, subterranean exploitation and decadent laziness. Thin bark of cornered runt cur too stupid to change position.

What makes one stronger is to admit complexity; refusing it can only make this last dogmatic redoubt crumble faster. Never mind, keep chanting: U S A ! U S A ! U S A ! if it makes you feel better. Perhaps it _is_ better that way. A sort of anaesthetic?

>Bush and his acolytes reject facts, logic and evidence on
>principle—and it is the central animating principle of their
>manner of functioning.

It's called 'hyperstition', I believe.

but on the other(?) hand:

>Saying 'co-incidence' is surely absurd.

Why? Alternatively, what about saying 'nice marketing opportunity for security consultancy?' and/or 'handy spacefiller for flaky news website?'

>> It's called 'hyperstition', I believe.

hmm.

Oh yes, I remember now, the only type of 'complexity' welcomed here is the entertaining, "intense" kind, consisting of the feeble reduplication of sketchy 'hypotheses' by which a group of neo-teenagers stimulate each other's half-cocked theoretical edifices.

Oh wow man, I, like, don't know what's true anymore.

'angela' - or may i call you 'Ms Compexity' - your fumings would be more convincing if they had the slightest hint of positive content. Start with an easy one:
What is the broad outline of economic organization you propose (in contrast to neoliberal harridan superficiality, or whatever). A sentence or two would do. See if you can accomplish this task without using any negative terms.
Not that I expect anything except the usual vacuous snark.

why do things always boil down to money?

It's called critique. Sorry if it's not 'positive' (=watchword of american liberalism and ego-psychology-derived soc1alisation processes) enough for you.

The issue isn't which model of economic organization you or I might choose to imaginarily impose on the world. That sort of idiotic irrelevance is precisely what does lead to pointless exchanges of insults. However I've read enough to know that this is the only register in which most of you operate nowadays, so I won't labour the point.

I simply thought it might be worthwhile to let anyone reading this know that some people would still like to work towards the possibility of adopting an intelligent analytical stance vis-a-vis the actually existing (leaving aside the fact that this is a derogatory term hereabouts) world. It's not so "intense", granted, but perhaps intelligence isn't "intense" or even "positive", after all. As Northanger's quotes suggest, the idiots running the world don't need any help from expat-academics in creating clouds of hyperstitional obfuscation.

"It's called critique" LOL

well yes, pointing out contradictions, inconsistencies and absurdities in a position, and suggesting the uninterrogated assumptions behind it could be called 'critique', I would have thought. Even the most hardened cynic with regard to logical argument would surely have to admit that it's a preferable tactic to a retreat into smug, arch laughter?

'retreat ... smug' - this is priceless!
maintaining a set of prejudices so wildly incoherent you can't even be drawn into positively hinting at them you snipe in soundbites and dated Brit TV references barely long enough for an atom of Boolean algebra, then get on your high horse and make out you're some kind of lofty master of critique - I wouldn't even have imagined that combination of cowardice and smuggery were possible if i hadn't been anklebitten by it repeatedly.
Still, 'punisher' probably thinks you're a genius ...

Me a genius? Me claim to be a lofty master? How could I?

I'm sure everyone reading this agrees with your painstaking and sober analysis and is fully convinced that anything more subtle than 'bomb the bastards' is transparently nothing more than an advertisement for al-Q. Praxis is all, as you so ably prove.

With their access to the noumenal realm of cantonese powerpoint presentations and their unparalleled facility with adding numbers between 1 and 9 together, the hyperstition bloggers have undoubtedly surpassed in wisdom and power all of us who are gauche enough to harbour any residual cravings for sanity.

>>With their access to the noumenal realm of cantonese powerpoint presentations and their unparalleled facility with adding numbers between 1 and 9 together, the hyperstition bloggers have undoubtedly surpassed in wisdom and power all of us who are gauche enough to harbour any residual cravings for sanity.

::blushing::
gee, _really_? ah ... thanks.

A less nauseating species of contemporary leftism: hurryupharry.bloghouse.net/

and anyone looking for a smidgin of common sense:
www.samizdata.net/blog/

sd - please come back here often :)

> A less nauseating species of contemporary leftism: hurryupharry.bloghouse.net/

Just about says it all, doesn't it.

nobody ever invites me back.
:(

if I remember correctly it was leigh myers at lbo last week (his own site is www.leighm.net) who scolded the harryites as brainless idiots; I thought that was pretty harsh but haven't visited there for a long time now.

of interest to Reza et al: www.sociologyesoscience.com/muslimm/
Explaining Muslim Neofundamentalism

Exploding the Middle-East Myth

Jihad: Who is Culture?
Probably the fact of the location of beliefs and values in culture adds no additional barrier that the subject must escape to contact objectivity. Thus what marks the special nature of Islamic fundamentalism, is its modernism. Like E. P. Wijnants pointed out in early 2003 in his two part essay on various radical groups, the intellectual roots and historical precedents of today's Islamic revival can be traced back to Sayyid Jamâl al-Din (1833-97), called al-Afghani. And entail a closeted form of the Western modernism that it so publicly claims to oppose. This included also the Deoband movement that emerged from central India in the wake of the ill-fated revolt against the British in 1857. Founded by Mohammed Zasim Nanautawi (1833-77) and Rashid Ahmed Gangohi (1829-1905), it set up madrassas in India, Afghanistan, and Pakistan.

piet:
All true but too conventional in focus; not quite long wave enough in the sense of showing how close the ME monotheisms are inextricably entangled, attempts at extraction by the likes of Hamas scholar Bassam Jarrar (www.nashiri.net/imag march 2005 has 2 Jarrar articles) for instance notwithstanding. His harangue about semitc sibling Israel's sins (not allowing enough fallowness ((sabbath)) in other words overgrazing, over demografixyfucksing) claims they will some time soon now lead to the third chase out as sure as the Quraniclockwork (which Jews ((who prefer bible code distraction and)) won't count with/by/on or countenance) ticks on even while going down toilets and such.

However, the abjabobinariouslessly abject way he casts his net (starting simple enough to lure the unawarare with the odds and even trick for instance ((serial order of suras, chapter two in the 'numerical miracles' pamphlet freely available from multiple websites))) betrays the shortcircuit absolutist pretence these people suffer which if we let'm cleaves whole worlds into famously and variously named cliffedges and destroys all synthesis, systemicism and synergy (counting beyond dualities, 2s, etcetera), a perversion of the true cleaveage leavesage .. .. hey, I AM a leafsage come to think of it; dust into rain blowing archaonizer .. thought I'd be explicit about it for a new monumental moment since I despair about others taking such perfect notice. Quit substituting for multi-micro-cultural soil populant demographix with way too specifically singling out ID attempts and favoritisms of the digital abstract or even human kind; leave proliferation and abundance up to the subtly hoppering and size segratory ache shaking earthans: soil organisms; all we can do is feed life with death and that doesn't mean putting the former to the latter like trying to drag a horse to water either.

groups.yahoo.com/group/CubicMagicSquares/ 'numbonotioner Antony Burr

Nick - been a long time. Why do you bother hanging out with people who constantly write self-indulgent high-horse leftist bollox? You know it only winds you up. Thought you would have been a bit more nomadic than this ;)

The euradists refused containment in the Tangents zone and are now contaminating the whole blog. Reza has disappeared and only seems to re-surface with interesting but sadly ignored works. Admit its time to disengage in the melee and bring out the big guns!

That should be impressive.

It's 3 o'clock in the morning - let us say one is still waiting...

why do things always boil down to big dick?

Well you know how it is with the male menopause.

I was wrong

[lbo-talk] Galloway/Respect Party moneybags on London bombings
www.leninology. blogspot.com leninology at hotmail.com
Sun Jul 17 11:18:01 PDT 2005

Previous message: [lbo-talk] Galloway/Respect Party moneybags on London bombings
Next message: [lbo-talk] Galloway/Respect Party moneybags on London bombings
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Search LBO-Talk Archives

Limit search to: Subject & Body Subject Author
Sort by: Date Rank Author Subject Reverse Sort

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'm sorry, but this is utterly pathetic. The article was not written by
Mohammed Naseem but by another member of the Islamic Party of Britain.
Naseem may approve or disapprove of the article, but the suggestion that
Galloway is in any sense implicated in such a view is rather torn to shreds
by the fact that he has expressed the opposite view *on behalf of Respect*
in public.

What we have here is a feeble attempt to imply guilt by association. And it
falls flat on its face. Unsurprisingly, the intellectual amoebas at Harry's
Place are crawling all over the story.

>From: Michael Pugliese
>Reply-To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org
>To: lbo-talk
>Subject: [lbo-talk] Galloway/Respect Party moneybags on London bombings
>Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2005 11:08:54 -0600
>
>hurryupharry.bloghouse.net/
>Eric Lee
>www.ericlee.me.uk/archive/000126.html
>reveals the political background of George Galloway's Respect Party's
>main financial backer:
>
>Dr Mohammed Naseem is a leading figure in the Respect Coalition. He is
>its single largest donor, providing more than 50% of the funds
>reported to the Electoral Commission. He was a Respect candidate for
>Parliament in the general election. The organisation he leads, the
>Islamic Party of Britain, is today saying that the (London) attacks
>were a provocation, staged by the police, the Blair government, or the
>Mossad -- or all of them together.
>
>Follow Eric's links. Also check out what Galloway's backer's magazine
>said about 'Who was behind September 11?'
>
>If you haven't guessed already.
>
>July 17, 2005
>7/7 - Provocation or genuine terror attack? The two views of George
>Galloway's Respect Coalition
>
>Under British law, political parties are obligated to inform us of the
>names of their major donors. A visit to the website of the Electoral
>Commission reveals that most of the money donated to George Galloway's
>Respect Party comes from one man, Dr Mohammed Naseem. Google searches
>quickly reveal that Dr Naseem, in addition to having been a Respect
>candidate for Parliament, is also a leading figure in the Islamic
>Party of Britain. And that party, whose website is largely dormant,
>did have some things to say about the recent terrorist bombings in
>London in a document posted yesterday (16 July).
>
>That document, entitled "In Times of Terror the Truth takes a Tumble"
>makes the case that Islamic fundamentalists were not responsible for
>the terrorist bombings. The reasons given include:
>
>* They could not have been Islamic fundamentalists because one of them
>was "married to a Hindu lady"
>
>* The Israeli politician Netanyahu was warned not to leave his hotel
>before the general public was informed that there had been a bombing
>-- tipped off by the Mossad, which somehow knew what was really going
>on.
>
>* Critical evidence, such as a CCTV camera on the number 30 bus,
>suspiciously disappeared from the scene.
>
>* Finally, who benefits from the attacks? Why the Blair government, of
>course!
>
>There is more, but here's a typical sentence:
>
>"London needed a real terror attack in order to numb people
>sufficiently for the government to push through legislation that they
>had not been able to push through even before their electoral fiasco."
>
>(By "their electoral fiasco" the author means Labour's unprecedented
>third straight election victory.)
>
>These are the views of Dr Mohammed Naseem's organisation, the Islamic
>Party of Britain. They were written by the party's general secretary,
>Dr Sahib Mustaqim Bleher, a German-born convert to Islam.
>
>Contrast this with what George Galloway told the House of Commons on
>the very day of the attacks:
>
>"I condemn the act that was committed this morning. I have no need to
>speculate about its authorship. It is absolutely clear that Islamist
>extremists, inspired by the al-Qaeda world outlook, are responsible."
>
>Dr Mohammed Naseem is a leading figure in the Respect Coalition. He is
>its single largest donor, providing more than 50% of the funds
>reported to the Electoral Commission. He was a Respect candidate for
>Parliament in the general election. The organisation he leads, the
>Islamic Party of Britain, is today saying that the attacks were a
>provocation, staged by the police, the Blair government, or the Mossad
>-- or all of them together.
>
>George Galloway -- do you stand by what you said in the House of
>Commons on 7 July, or do you share the views of your colleague Dr
>Naseem and his Islamic Party of Britain?
>Posted by ericlee at July 17, 2005 07:48 AM
>--
>Michael Pugliese
>
>___________________________________
>mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk

piet - thanks for links (found your 11:46 comments a little difficult to decode ;))

Tachi - hoping that we can crank the discussion out of the WWIV hatefest next week - don't nomadize off too far before then

decoding poetpiet with extreme prejudice: beware the fatwa engraved on the heart placed there by Allah Himself.

don't ever stop carving curves into rock and blowsowing fresh dust into the next nearest 'shower' or storm, that's the only type of religious action that can make wahlhalla happy, beleave me.

can this be true? And if so, what does it mean?

"He is supposed to have been shot after having been chased and wrestled to the floor. But an intelligence officer's statement says he followed Menezes down the stairs and onto the tube. He was apparently beckoned by police, who did at that point identify themselves. "He stood, and walked towards me", the intelligence officer said. He grabbed Menezes, pulled his arms behind his back and pushed him back into the seat. "I heard a shot in my left ear". The intelligence officer said he was pushed to the floor at that point. A number of officers shot him in the head, seven times. Three bullets missed. One went into his shoulder.

Split-second decision? That is murder in cold blood, following the procedures laid out in the shoot-to-kill policy.

What was also disgusting was the performance of a former Metropolitan Police officer, some kind of bigwig named Peter Powers. That fucking animal of a man did everything he could to justify the killing, saying how terrible it was for the police, a decision made in the space of a few minutes etc. Then he said "I don't know for sure whether we can say that Mr Menezes was totally innocent". Probed about this by a bemused news anchor who noted that the police had already admitted that he was totally innocent, Powers said, "I just find it difficult to believe that he would be shot for ad hoc or whimsical reasons. And I, er, don't want to prejudice the enquiry that is ongoing."

leninology.blogspot.com/2005/08/more-on-itv-revelations.html