Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

Возникла проблема при загрузке этого видео. Это может быть связано с временными проблемами сети или видео может быть недоступно.

На главную

𝗔 𝗠𝗮𝗻 𝘀𝗺𝗮𝗰𝗸𝘀 𝗮 𝗳𝗲𝗹𝗹𝗼𝘄 𝘄𝗼𝗿𝘀𝗵𝗶𝗽𝗲𝗿 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝘀𝗮𝘆𝗶𝗻𝗴 “𝗔𝗺𝗲𝗲𝗻” 𝗮𝗹𝗼𝘂𝗱 𝘄𝗵𝗶𝗹𝗲 𝗽𝗿𝗮𝘆𝗶𝗻𝗴! While I deeply appreciate Imam Abu Hanifah & have gained valuable insights from the Hanafi fiqh, as well as the other three schools of thought, those familiar with me understand the intensity of my reaction when scholars... such as Imam Abu Hanifah & others are attacked & spoken ill of. What you see in the video is not only ignorant & foolish but also reflects a lack of understanding of fiqh. This behaviour is truly appalling. Even within the Hanafi madhab, engaging in such actions is unequivocally incorrect & it invalidates your prayer, the only exemptions of cutting the prayer are in exceptional circumstances. 𝗜𝗻 𝗙𝗶𝗾𝗵 𝗶𝘁 𝗶𝘀 𝗲𝘅𝘁𝗿𝗲𝗺𝗲𝗹𝘆 𝗻𝗲𝗰𝗲𝘀𝘀𝗮𝗿𝘆 𝘁𝗼 𝘁𝗮𝗸𝗲 𝗶𝗻 𝘁𝗼 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝘀𝗶𝗱𝗲𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗲𝘃𝗶𝗱𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲 𝗰𝗶𝘁𝗲𝗱 𝗯𝘆 𝗼𝗻𝗲’𝘀 𝗼𝗽𝗽𝗼𝗻𝗲𝗻𝘁 – meaning the scholar who holds a different view – in challenging his own established argument, which he had employed to assert a different point of view, this in Fiqh is referred to as مراعاة الخلاف. Ibn Abideen the hanafi scholar said; “𝗜𝘁 𝗶𝘀 𝗻𝗲𝗰𝗲𝘀𝘀𝗮𝗿𝘆 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝘂𝘀 𝘁𝗼 𝘁𝗮𝗸𝗲 𝗶𝗻𝘁𝗼 𝗮𝗰𝗰𝗼𝘂𝗻𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗱𝗶𝗳𝗳𝗲𝗿𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲𝘀 𝗼𝗳 𝗼𝗽𝗶𝗻𝗶𝗼𝗻.” This important concept of Fiqh has been cited by many of the scholars of the 4 madhabs and It is one of the principles upon which Malik built his Madhab on as mentioned by scholars such as Ibn Rushd, wansarisi، Ibn Arafa, Shaatibi & others. Ibn Taymiyyah says; “As for those who may differ with you on subsidiary Fiqhi matters such as the followers of Abu Hanifa, Malik, and Ash-Shafi'i, performing prayers behind them is 𝘃𝗮𝗹𝗶𝗱 & 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗱𝗶𝘀𝗹𝗶𝗸𝗲𝗱. This was emphasised by Ahmad because the Companions and their Successors 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗶𝗻𝘂𝗲𝗱 𝘁𝗼 𝗽𝗿𝗮𝘆 𝗯𝗲𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗱 𝗲𝗮𝗰𝗵 𝗼𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗿 𝗱𝗲𝘀𝗽𝗶𝘁𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗶𝗿 𝗱𝗶𝗳𝗳𝗲𝗿𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲𝘀 𝗶𝗻 𝘀𝘂𝗯𝘀𝗶𝗱𝗶𝗮𝗿𝘆 𝗙𝗶𝗾𝗵𝗶 𝗺𝗮𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗿𝘀, 𝗺𝗮𝗸𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗶𝘁 𝗮 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝘀𝗲𝗻𝘀𝘂𝘀. Additionally, because the opponent is either correct in his interpretation, earning rewards for his interpretation and correctness, or mistaken, still receiving rewards for his effort without incurring sin for the mistake”. Closing remarks. If you happen to be in a locality where a group of people behave like this, then my advice is to implement the principle of “𝘁𝗮𝗸𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗹𝗲𝘀𝘀𝗲𝗿 𝗼𝗳 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘁𝘄𝗼 𝗲𝘃𝗶𝗹𝘀”, this is what Ibn Baaz said when asked about refraining from saying “Ameen” loudly. And I quote: "Yes, it is allowed. If one is amongst a congregation where they do not raise their voices nor recite aloud, it is preferable that you 𝗱𝗼𝗻’𝘁 do so to maintain harmony with them. This way, they can be gently guided towards the right path, educated, fostering better relations among them. If u were to differ with them, they might condemn you due to the view they have of not raising the hands (excluding the opening Takbir) as they have learned & practiced it from their scholars. Similarly, not reciting aloud during the prayer is a well-known difference of opinion among scholars. Some say it is recommended to recite aloud, while others say it is not necessary. Some narrations indicate that the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ raised his voice during prayer, while others indicate he kept silent However, the preferred opinion is to recite aloud, as it is a recommended practice. 𝗟𝗲𝗮𝘃𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗮 𝗿𝗲𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗺𝗲𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗱 𝗮𝗰𝘁 𝗶𝘀 𝗽𝗲𝗿𝗺𝗶𝘀𝘀𝗶𝗯𝗹𝗲 𝗶𝗳 𝗶𝘁 𝗺𝗮𝘆 𝗹𝗲𝗮𝗱 𝘁𝗼 𝗱𝗶𝘃𝗶𝘀𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗱𝗶𝘀𝗰𝗼𝗿𝗱 amongst believers; hence, a believer refrains from performing a recommended act that might lead to discord and turmoil, especially if forsaking it serves a greater good. This is exemplified in Prophet ﷺ’s choice of not rebuilding the Kaaba according to the original structure of Ibrahim, since Quraysh had recently embraced Islam, & did not want to disturb the harmony for the greater good." #AtWritesshow more

MJ - Abu Taymiyyah

117,848 subscribers

220,585 просмотров • 2 лет назад •via X (Twitter)

Образование Здоровье и велнес Новости и политика

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

Комментарии: 0

Нет доступных комментариев

Здесь появятся комментарии из оригинального поста

Похожие видео

This is not a border dispute. It is a sermon. A Hamas leader on a Gaza stage tells seven million Palestinians abroad to stop warming up. There are Jews everywhere, he says. Attack every Jew on Earth. Slaughter them. Kill them. With Allah’s help. The crowd is not a war room. It is a public. Hamas did not invent that sentence. Hamas is but one franchise of it. Islamic Jihad says the same thing with a different logo. Hezbollah wraps it in Khomeini and the language of “the Zionist entity.” The Houthis put “death to Israel, curse the Jews” on a flag and call it governance. The regime in Tehran funds the network and calls the Jewish state a tumor. Different uniforms. Same theology. For them, Jewish sovereignty is an insult to Allah, and Jewish lives outside the land are not off-limits. That is why “from the river to the sea” is not a housing policy, and why October 7 was not an accident of occupation. The target list in this clip is not a soldier at a checkpoint. It is Jews as such, wherever they are. Once the enemy is a people, not a government, there is no ceasefire that satisfies the idea. There is only a pause. Western coverage keeps shrinking this to one militia and one strip of coast because a regional ideology is harder to manage than a “peace process.” Factions are useful that way. They let you condemn Hamas on Tuesday and treat Hezbollah as Lebanese politics on Wednesday and the Houthis as a shipping problem on Thursday. The preacher does not bother with those folders. He names the Jews and asks the diaspora to start. If you want to understand the war, start with what they say when they are not fundraising in English. The map they want is not two states. It is a world with fewer Jews in it, sanctified as duty. Hamas is the local office. The ideology is the corporation.

Mor Edge Insight

74,915 просмотров • 23 дней назад

As a gynecologist, one of the most frequently asked questions is about the ''hymen''. The hymen is not a structure located deep inside the vagina. It is a thin, flexible fold of tissue situated very close to the vaginal opening, anatomically at the entrance of the vaginal canal. It is typically found about 1–2 cm inside the vaginal opening, but in many women, it is almost at the surface. Therefore, the common belief that it is located deep inside is incorrect. One of the most important points is this: The hymen is not a closed membrane. It naturally has openings that allow menstrual blood to pass. Additionally, the structure of the hymen varies from person to person. Its thickness, elasticity, and shape are not standard. In some women, it may be very thin and elastic, while in others, it may be minimal or barely noticeable. This is completely a normal anatomical variation. A common misconception is that changes in the hymen occur only due to sexual intercourse. In reality, factors such as certain physical activities or tampon use can also lead to stretching or changes in this tissue. Therefore, the hymen is not a reliable indicator of a person’s sexual history or “virginity.” In summary, the hymen is a small and variable anatomical structure. The meanings attributed to it are largely shaped by sociocultural beliefs rather than medical facts.

As a gynecologist, one of the most frequently asked questions is about the ''hymen''. The hymen is not a structure located deep inside the vagina. It is a thin, flexible fold of tissue situated very close to the vaginal opening, anatomically at the entrance of the vaginal canal. It is typically found about 1–2 cm inside the vaginal opening, but in many women, it is almost at the surface. Therefore, the common belief that it is located deep inside is incorrect. One of the most important points is this: The hymen is not a closed membrane. It naturally has openings that allow menstrual blood to pass. Additionally, the structure of the hymen varies from person to person. Its thickness, elasticity, and shape are not standard. In some women, it may be very thin and elastic, while in others, it may be minimal or barely noticeable. This is completely a normal anatomical variation. A common misconception is that changes in the hymen occur only due to sexual intercourse. In reality, factors such as certain physical activities or tampon use can also lead to stretching or changes in this tissue. Therefore, the hymen is not a reliable indicator of a person’s sexual history or “virginity.” In summary, the hymen is a small and variable anatomical structure. The meanings attributed to it are largely shaped by sociocultural beliefs rather than medical facts.

Op. Dr. Mehmet Bekir Şen

597,069 просмотров • 25 дней назад

Putin’s speeches should be listened to through a special filter. Criminal and prison language is now the primary language of Putin’s power. Therefore, the Valdai speech should be listened to as a kind of street-criminal conflict scenario: "you don’t respect me," "they started it first," "we warned you," "you didn’t get it the nice way," "now we’ll have to respond." This is not just a style of speech, but a ready-made scheme through which the Kremlin explains and justifies escalation. I would interpret the Valdai speech as follows: ◾️"He started it first." This is the basic scheme of the entire argumentation. Not "I decided to use force," but "I was forced to respond." Putin literally says about Ukraine: "it wasn’t us who wanted it and it wasn’t us who started the war," and then that Russia was "deliberately put" in a situation where it was "forced" to take up arms. This is a classic street-domestic formula for removing responsibility from oneself: violence is acknowledged, but moral responsibility is shifted onto the one who supposedly "started it first." ◾️"He asked for it." The next step is to make the victim responsible for what will happen to them. This is especially visible in the logic regarding NATO: if Western states provide intelligence, technical support, and help Ukraine strike deep into Russia, Putin already defines this as their "involvement in the war with Russia." He does not say that Russia will not strike; he only says that Russia is not going to do it "tomorrow." The structure is simple: if a strike happens, the previous argumentation already allows one to say - "you were warned, you yourselves crossed the line." ◾️"You don’t respect me." The question of status constantly looms behind the security language. Putin returns again and again to the fact that after the collapse of the USSR the West did not accept Russia as an equal, did not listen to its objections, expanded NATO, and supposedly tried to finally weaken Russia. This is very close to the logic of conflict through "disrespect": the problem is not only in concrete harm, but in the fact that the other side demonstrates that it does not recognize your status. In street and criminal culture, precisely the inability to respond to an insult calls status and authority into question. ◾️"For something like that you have to answer." In this logic, a response ceases to be a choice and becomes an obligation. Putin constantly uses precisely such a causal construction: Ukraine started hitting tankers - "we began to respond"; started hitting oil refineries - "got a mirror response." Linguistically this is very close to the concept of "payback": after a certain action the response is supposedly already dictated by the code of behavior itself. The subject does not say "I decided to strike," but "you can’t not respond to something like that." ◾️"If you swallow it - they’ll stop respecting you." This directly links violence to the preservation of status. In yard and criminal culture it is important not only to win, but not to allow a situation where others decide that you can be humiliated with impunity. That is why the question from Lukyanov about European factories is formulated so interestingly: if Moscow has already named them potential targets, "the warning… will have to be confirmed by something." This is pure logic of reputational compulsion: a public threat itself creates a problem, because refusal to realize it under certain conditions can be treated as weakness. ◾️"You don’t understand the nice way." Violence is presented as a last resort after supposedly repeated warnings. In Putin’s narrative about NATO and Ukraine it is constantly repeated: we said "don’t do it," "stop," they didn’t listen to us - and therefore what happened, happened. This is a familiar scenario of domestic violence: "I warned you," "you didn’t get it the nice way." Its function is to turn a conscious choice of aggression into a supposedly inevitable result of the other side’s behavior. ◾️"If they can - then we can too." Here the yard code already directly transitions into a normative theory of international relations. Explaining Yugoslavia, Putin essentially formulates it literally: the West used force, everyone saw that "if someone is allowed to, then everyone else is allowed too." This is a very important pattern. Law or a universal norm stops working here. The main thing becomes the precedent of the other’s behavior: "you violated the rules - therefore I am no longer bound by them." This is already international relations "according to the code." ◾️"It’s not that we’re like that - life is like that." This is another strong Russian domestic formula, although it is not purely criminal. In the speech it manifests through the words "inevitably," "we will be forced," "we have no other way out." Even the possibility of using all means against NATO Putin explains not by his own decision, but by the balance of forces: NATO is bigger and stronger, therefore Russia "will be forced" to use its "competitive advantages." This creates an image of a world where Russia supposedly does not choose escalation - circumstances force it into it. ◾️And there is one more pattern that is very important for the current situation - "the client answers together with the executor" / "you’re fighting with someone else’s hands." Putin literally uses the formula "fighting against us with someone else’s hands" when speaking about Western support for Ukraine. Its practical significance is great: it allows gradually transferring the status of the adversary from Ukraine to the states that help it. Then a European factory, a satellite system, or a military specialist ceases in the Russian construction to be a "third party" and becomes part of the conflict itself. If this is reduced to one scheme, it sounds almost like a typical yard conflict: "You don’t respect me → I warned you → you started it first → you didn’t get it the nice way → for something like that you have to answer → you asked for it → now don’t complain." This formula allows the Kremlin to simultaneously be the initiator of the next step and psychologically and rhetorically not recognize itself as its author. And this, in my opinion, has direct significance for assessing the risk of a strike on NATO. A dangerous signal will not necessarily be the phrase "we have decided to attack." It is much more important to watch whether this linguistic sequence is completed: "this is already direct participation in the war" → "we warned" → "they didn’t understand" → "we are forced to respond." In such a linguistic system a decision to strike can be presented not as a new aggression, but as the fulfillment of an already announced "rule of response."

Putin’s speeches should be listened to through a special filter. Criminal and prison language is now the primary language of Putin’s power. Therefore, the Valdai speech should be listened to as a kind of street-criminal conflict scenario: "you don’t respect me," "they started it first," "we warned you," "you didn’t get it the nice way," "now we’ll have to respond." This is not just a style of speech, but a ready-made scheme through which the Kremlin explains and justifies escalation. I would interpret the Valdai speech as follows: ◾️"He started it first." This is the basic scheme of the entire argumentation. Not "I decided to use force," but "I was forced to respond." Putin literally says about Ukraine: "it wasn’t us who wanted it and it wasn’t us who started the war," and then that Russia was "deliberately put" in a situation where it was "forced" to take up arms. This is a classic street-domestic formula for removing responsibility from oneself: violence is acknowledged, but moral responsibility is shifted onto the one who supposedly "started it first." ◾️"He asked for it." The next step is to make the victim responsible for what will happen to them. This is especially visible in the logic regarding NATO: if Western states provide intelligence, technical support, and help Ukraine strike deep into Russia, Putin already defines this as their "involvement in the war with Russia." He does not say that Russia will not strike; he only says that Russia is not going to do it "tomorrow." The structure is simple: if a strike happens, the previous argumentation already allows one to say - "you were warned, you yourselves crossed the line." ◾️"You don’t respect me." The question of status constantly looms behind the security language. Putin returns again and again to the fact that after the collapse of the USSR the West did not accept Russia as an equal, did not listen to its objections, expanded NATO, and supposedly tried to finally weaken Russia. This is very close to the logic of conflict through "disrespect": the problem is not only in concrete harm, but in the fact that the other side demonstrates that it does not recognize your status. In street and criminal culture, precisely the inability to respond to an insult calls status and authority into question. ◾️"For something like that you have to answer." In this logic, a response ceases to be a choice and becomes an obligation. Putin constantly uses precisely such a causal construction: Ukraine started hitting tankers - "we began to respond"; started hitting oil refineries - "got a mirror response." Linguistically this is very close to the concept of "payback": after a certain action the response is supposedly already dictated by the code of behavior itself. The subject does not say "I decided to strike," but "you can’t not respond to something like that." ◾️"If you swallow it - they’ll stop respecting you." This directly links violence to the preservation of status. In yard and criminal culture it is important not only to win, but not to allow a situation where others decide that you can be humiliated with impunity. That is why the question from Lukyanov about European factories is formulated so interestingly: if Moscow has already named them potential targets, "the warning… will have to be confirmed by something." This is pure logic of reputational compulsion: a public threat itself creates a problem, because refusal to realize it under certain conditions can be treated as weakness. ◾️"You don’t understand the nice way." Violence is presented as a last resort after supposedly repeated warnings. In Putin’s narrative about NATO and Ukraine it is constantly repeated: we said "don’t do it," "stop," they didn’t listen to us - and therefore what happened, happened. This is a familiar scenario of domestic violence: "I warned you," "you didn’t get it the nice way." Its function is to turn a conscious choice of aggression into a supposedly inevitable result of the other side’s behavior. ◾️"If they can - then we can too." Here the yard code already directly transitions into a normative theory of international relations. Explaining Yugoslavia, Putin essentially formulates it literally: the West used force, everyone saw that "if someone is allowed to, then everyone else is allowed too." This is a very important pattern. Law or a universal norm stops working here. The main thing becomes the precedent of the other’s behavior: "you violated the rules - therefore I am no longer bound by them." This is already international relations "according to the code." ◾️"It’s not that we’re like that - life is like that." This is another strong Russian domestic formula, although it is not purely criminal. In the speech it manifests through the words "inevitably," "we will be forced," "we have no other way out." Even the possibility of using all means against NATO Putin explains not by his own decision, but by the balance of forces: NATO is bigger and stronger, therefore Russia "will be forced" to use its "competitive advantages." This creates an image of a world where Russia supposedly does not choose escalation - circumstances force it into it. ◾️And there is one more pattern that is very important for the current situation - "the client answers together with the executor" / "you’re fighting with someone else’s hands." Putin literally uses the formula "fighting against us with someone else’s hands" when speaking about Western support for Ukraine. Its practical significance is great: it allows gradually transferring the status of the adversary from Ukraine to the states that help it. Then a European factory, a satellite system, or a military specialist ceases in the Russian construction to be a "third party" and becomes part of the conflict itself. If this is reduced to one scheme, it sounds almost like a typical yard conflict: "You don’t respect me → I warned you → you started it first → you didn’t get it the nice way → for something like that you have to answer → you asked for it → now don’t complain." This formula allows the Kremlin to simultaneously be the initiator of the next step and psychologically and rhetorically not recognize itself as its author. And this, in my opinion, has direct significance for assessing the risk of a strike on NATO. A dangerous signal will not necessarily be the phrase "we have decided to attack." It is much more important to watch whether this linguistic sequence is completed: "this is already direct participation in the war" → "we warned" → "they didn’t understand" → "we are forced to respond." In such a linguistic system a decision to strike can be presented not as a new aggression, but as the fulfillment of an already announced "rule of response."

Anton Gerashchenko

39,621 просмотров • 3 дней назад

Learning is something you and your baby do together. You can think of the process as happening in three distinct stages, during which skills are transferred gradually from you to your little one: During the first stage, your baby is observing the behavior and skills of others. During the second, they begin to emulate these behaviors - and can find success with the support of a helpful adult (you) or more expert peer (often a sibling). And gradually they internalize these skills and perform them all by themselves. This video is a great example of the shared second phase. Infants explore the world with their mouths. But an important lesson of toddlerhood is that some things are for putting in our mouths, while others are not. This little one knows that we don’t eat the Play-Doh. But it sure is tempting! Watch as he breaks off a piece and brings it to his mouth. As he does his eyes lift and he realizes that Mom is watching - which alone prompts some introspection. He grins broadly, shakes his head and exclaims “No, no, no” - using Mom’s past words to affirm his decision to place the Play-Doh back on the table. Left to his own devices, who knows? But together, without exchanging a word, he managed to make the right choice. As a parent it’s important to remember the key role you play in the learning process. And that extends to your child’s behavior. Self-regulation begins as co-regulation. So be there. This sweet little guy was shared to IG by parentosa.

Learning is something you and your baby do together. You can think of the process as happening in three distinct stages, during which skills are transferred gradually from you to your little one: During the first stage, your baby is observing the behavior and skills of others. During the second, they begin to emulate these behaviors - and can find success with the support of a helpful adult (you) or more expert peer (often a sibling). And gradually they internalize these skills and perform them all by themselves. This video is a great example of the shared second phase. Infants explore the world with their mouths. But an important lesson of toddlerhood is that some things are for putting in our mouths, while others are not. This little one knows that we don’t eat the Play-Doh. But it sure is tempting! Watch as he breaks off a piece and brings it to his mouth. As he does his eyes lift and he realizes that Mom is watching - which alone prompts some introspection. He grins broadly, shakes his head and exclaims “No, no, no” - using Mom’s past words to affirm his decision to place the Play-Doh back on the table. Left to his own devices, who knows? But together, without exchanging a word, he managed to make the right choice. As a parent it’s important to remember the key role you play in the learning process. And that extends to your child’s behavior. Self-regulation begins as co-regulation. So be there. This sweet little guy was shared to IG by parentosa.

Dan Wuori

75,169 просмотров • 2 лет назад

Apparently, I saw this video online and I decided to share. What this worker is applying is called bitumen, or what many of us know as bituminous coating. Most people think a wall is a solid, impenetrable block, but in reality, it is more like a sponge. Concrete and blocks have microscopic pores that pull water from the earth through a process we call capillary action. This thick black substance is the shield that stops that water from climbing up into the house. It is not about making the wall look good because this part will be buried under the dirt forever. It is about creating a skin that water cannot breathe through. When do you need to do this? The need for this arises because the soil is a very aggressive environment. Water is not your only enemy.. The ground also contains salts and sulfates that want to eat away at the cement. If this moisture finds its way to the steel bars inside the columns, those bars will start to rust. And when steel rusts, it expands, and that expansion is what cracks the concrete from the inside out. This coating is the only thing standing between your foundation and that kind of slow destruction. Thats is why if you see wet patches at the bottom of your walls inside your house, it usually means someone skipped this step or did it poorly during construction. You can apply this anytime you are building parts of a structure that will stay in contact with the ground. It is common in areas where the water table is high or where the soil stays damp for most of the year. This is a one-shot opportunity. Once you backfill the soil, you can never go back to fix it without a lot of expense and a lot of digging. It is about having the foresight to protect the heart of the building while it is still exposed. Please don’t ignore this if you need to. If you ignore it now to save a bit of money, you will be funding the future decay of your own home. I hope this helps.

Apparently, I saw this video online and I decided to share. What this worker is applying is called bitumen, or what many of us know as bituminous coating. Most people think a wall is a solid, impenetrable block, but in reality, it is more like a sponge. Concrete and blocks have microscopic pores that pull water from the earth through a process we call capillary action. This thick black substance is the shield that stops that water from climbing up into the house. It is not about making the wall look good because this part will be buried under the dirt forever. It is about creating a skin that water cannot breathe through. When do you need to do this? The need for this arises because the soil is a very aggressive environment. Water is not your only enemy.. The ground also contains salts and sulfates that want to eat away at the cement. If this moisture finds its way to the steel bars inside the columns, those bars will start to rust. And when steel rusts, it expands, and that expansion is what cracks the concrete from the inside out. This coating is the only thing standing between your foundation and that kind of slow destruction. Thats is why if you see wet patches at the bottom of your walls inside your house, it usually means someone skipped this step or did it poorly during construction. You can apply this anytime you are building parts of a structure that will stay in contact with the ground. It is common in areas where the water table is high or where the soil stays damp for most of the year. This is a one-shot opportunity. Once you backfill the soil, you can never go back to fix it without a lot of expense and a lot of digging. It is about having the foresight to protect the heart of the building while it is still exposed. Please don’t ignore this if you need to. If you ignore it now to save a bit of money, you will be funding the future decay of your own home. I hope this helps.

A.Y.O

75,399 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад

A point of utter embarrassment and shame for many Iranians is the manner in which elements of the diaspora danced on the streets in Western capitals as bombs rained on Tehran. It is also a source for a lot of anger among Iranians in Iran who oppose the theocracy but nevertheless did not favor war and who are stunned to see some in the Diaspora being so indifferent to the suffering caused by the war. But there is another aspect that deserves closer scrutiny. These, almost exclusively pro-Shah elements of the Diaspora, did not dance to celebrate the downfall of the regime. They didn't dance because they had won. They simply danced because the war had started, nothing more. As if their goal was neither freedom nor democracy, but simply revenge and the pleasure they took from seeing Iran bombed. Had they danced after the theocracy had fallen (which it hasn't), it would be a bit different. It would be a moment where they could argue that the price was very high, but because the regime is defeated, it was worth it, and, as a result, a cause for celebration. But they didn't wait for the regime to fall. They danced right away. Signalling that the cost was worth it, EVEN IF the regime didn't fall. Because it was always about selfish revenge, not freedom.

A point of utter embarrassment and shame for many Iranians is the manner in which elements of the diaspora danced on the streets in Western capitals as bombs rained on Tehran. It is also a source for a lot of anger among Iranians in Iran who oppose the theocracy but nevertheless did not favor war and who are stunned to see some in the Diaspora being so indifferent to the suffering caused by the war. But there is another aspect that deserves closer scrutiny. These, almost exclusively pro-Shah elements of the Diaspora, did not dance to celebrate the downfall of the regime. They didn't dance because they had won. They simply danced because the war had started, nothing more. As if their goal was neither freedom nor democracy, but simply revenge and the pleasure they took from seeing Iran bombed. Had they danced after the theocracy had fallen (which it hasn't), it would be a bit different. It would be a moment where they could argue that the price was very high, but because the regime is defeated, it was worth it, and, as a result, a cause for celebration. But they didn't wait for the regime to fall. They danced right away. Signalling that the cost was worth it, EVEN IF the regime didn't fall. Because it was always about selfish revenge, not freedom.

Trita Parsi

129,269 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

Narrated Abdullah: "When the Prophet entered Mecca on the day of the conquest, there were 360 idols around the Kaaba. The Prophet started striking them with a stick he had in his hand and was saying, 'Truth has come, and falsehood will neither start nor will it reappear.'" (Sahih al-Bukhari 4287) This act represents holy intolerance, established as a binding commandment from the Sunnah of Muhammad. Quran 33:21 obliges Muslims to regard Muhammad as an excellent role model. Therefore, all his sayings and deeds embody the highest values of Islam and require eternal imitation. Before Muhammad conquered Mecca in 630 AD, tolerance prevailed in the region among all the many different worldviews. This harmony led to a prosperous multicultural social and commercial life. Muhammad turned everything upside down. A region and culture that had lived in tolerance side by side experienced a complete upheaval and became a violent area devoid of all tolerance. Muhammad and his followers smashed and destroyed all the sacred symbols of the other cultures that day in Mecca. Only the Islamic symbol, the Kaaba, remained standing. Since then, this is how Muslims have behaved, and this is how they will behave when they can and when circumstances allow them to do so in the future, because it is their sacred duty. There are countless examples of this. One such example is the destruction of the Buddha statues in Bamiyan by Muslims in Afghanistan in 2001. ⬇️

Narrated Abdullah: "When the Prophet entered Mecca on the day of the conquest, there were 360 idols around the Kaaba. The Prophet started striking them with a stick he had in his hand and was saying, 'Truth has come, and falsehood will neither start nor will it reappear.'" (Sahih al-Bukhari 4287) This act represents holy intolerance, established as a binding commandment from the Sunnah of Muhammad. Quran 33:21 obliges Muslims to regard Muhammad as an excellent role model. Therefore, all his sayings and deeds embody the highest values of Islam and require eternal imitation. Before Muhammad conquered Mecca in 630 AD, tolerance prevailed in the region among all the many different worldviews. This harmony led to a prosperous multicultural social and commercial life. Muhammad turned everything upside down. A region and culture that had lived in tolerance side by side experienced a complete upheaval and became a violent area devoid of all tolerance. Muhammad and his followers smashed and destroyed all the sacred symbols of the other cultures that day in Mecca. Only the Islamic symbol, the Kaaba, remained standing. Since then, this is how Muslims have behaved, and this is how they will behave when they can and when circumstances allow them to do so in the future, because it is their sacred duty. There are countless examples of this. One such example is the destruction of the Buddha statues in Bamiyan by Muslims in Afghanistan in 2001. ⬇️

Ofer Binshtok - Kafir - עופר בינשטוק

37,870 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад

"PRICE IS WHAT YOU PAY. VALUE IS WHAT YOU GET." I keep buying $Kekec and I have a strong conviction. Here's Why: While the market is down, and Kekec is declining with it, there are data points that few are considering. Kekec borned in October and since then has been posting a different and original 30-second video every day, which I find extremely funny. For the past couple of months, they have also been posting daily on Instagram, and the attention on Kekec (which doesn't present itself on social media as a memecoin) is growing, moreover, it's increasing exponentially. The number of followers is increasing by about 500-1000 a day. This is largely due to the fact that they are not just focused on the main account but have several others that post reels and redirect to the main one. In short, an excellent strategy to keep growing more and more. Instagram link: Guess What? Not only are the followers increasing, but the team's workload is also growing. In fact, for a little over a month, they have also started pushing on YouTube, and the data here is promising as well. YouTube link: If we want to make a comparison, we can take Pudgy Penguins as an example, which has shown it can reach millions and millions of users without mentioning that they are a WEB3 company that owns an NFT collection. Or, if we want to be more appropriate by comparing one memecoin to another, we could take PONKE. Thanks to the use of social media and the quality of their content, they managed to achieve incredible numbers, which then translated into an increase in the coin's price. Kekec came before PONKE, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's better than PONKE. I believe PONKE is unbeatable in terms of content, but I want to make you reflect on an important point. PONKE came after KEKEC, and after PONKE's success, many coins have emerged trying to imitate it. One of KEKEC's strengths, in my opinion, is precisely the fact that it leverages social media without being a copy-paste. Instead, it is a unique meme derived from a 90's film, and it uses a unique form of content. In short, KEKEC > KEKEC and no one else. I want to conclude by suggesting you follow them on Instagram and evaluate not only the exponential growth of their followers day by day but also observe how the views of each reel increase accordingly. Pay special attention to the comments. Many of the people commenting have no idea what it is, and you can see from the comments how Kekec generates particular emotions in people—strange but still emotions. Personally, I believe that when something is unique and even very strange, it needs time to be adopted. However, once it happens, it usually explodes and spreads like never before. A few days ago, a Kekec video was posted by a very popular meme page. They probably don't know what Kekec is about but thought the video could spark interest among their followers. How many other pages will do the same? Lastly, but not least, I want to point out how Kekec maintains a good market cap despite everything that has happened in the crypto world since October 2023. As far as I know and have personally observed, everything is extremely organic. There is no cabal behind it, and the quality is not reflected in a single jpeg but in work that has been ongoing daily for months. Every day they work harder, and the quality of their videos grows as well. I have no affiliations with the team, but I believe that Kekec truly deserves more in this world where we push celebrity or cabal-backed coins to hundreds of millions in market cap. I keep buying because the numbers suggest so. Don't just evaluate the chart (price), evaluate the data (value). BÂLKÂN DWÂRF

"PRICE IS WHAT YOU PAY. VALUE IS WHAT YOU GET." I keep buying $Kekec and I have a strong conviction. Here's Why: While the market is down, and Kekec is declining with it, there are data points that few are considering. Kekec borned in October and since then has been posting a different and original 30-second video every day, which I find extremely funny. For the past couple of months, they have also been posting daily on Instagram, and the attention on Kekec (which doesn't present itself on social media as a memecoin) is growing, moreover, it's increasing exponentially. The number of followers is increasing by about 500-1000 a day. This is largely due to the fact that they are not just focused on the main account but have several others that post reels and redirect to the main one. In short, an excellent strategy to keep growing more and more. Instagram link: Guess What? Not only are the followers increasing, but the team's workload is also growing. In fact, for a little over a month, they have also started pushing on YouTube, and the data here is promising as well. YouTube link: If we want to make a comparison, we can take Pudgy Penguins as an example, which has shown it can reach millions and millions of users without mentioning that they are a WEB3 company that owns an NFT collection. Or, if we want to be more appropriate by comparing one memecoin to another, we could take PONKE. Thanks to the use of social media and the quality of their content, they managed to achieve incredible numbers, which then translated into an increase in the coin's price. Kekec came before PONKE, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's better than PONKE. I believe PONKE is unbeatable in terms of content, but I want to make you reflect on an important point. PONKE came after KEKEC, and after PONKE's success, many coins have emerged trying to imitate it. One of KEKEC's strengths, in my opinion, is precisely the fact that it leverages social media without being a copy-paste. Instead, it is a unique meme derived from a 90's film, and it uses a unique form of content. In short, KEKEC > KEKEC and no one else. I want to conclude by suggesting you follow them on Instagram and evaluate not only the exponential growth of their followers day by day but also observe how the views of each reel increase accordingly. Pay special attention to the comments. Many of the people commenting have no idea what it is, and you can see from the comments how Kekec generates particular emotions in people—strange but still emotions. Personally, I believe that when something is unique and even very strange, it needs time to be adopted. However, once it happens, it usually explodes and spreads like never before. A few days ago, a Kekec video was posted by a very popular meme page. They probably don't know what Kekec is about but thought the video could spark interest among their followers. How many other pages will do the same? Lastly, but not least, I want to point out how Kekec maintains a good market cap despite everything that has happened in the crypto world since October 2023. As far as I know and have personally observed, everything is extremely organic. There is no cabal behind it, and the quality is not reflected in a single jpeg but in work that has been ongoing daily for months. Every day they work harder, and the quality of their videos grows as well. I have no affiliations with the team, but I believe that Kekec truly deserves more in this world where we push celebrity or cabal-backed coins to hundreds of millions in market cap. I keep buying because the numbers suggest so. Don't just evaluate the chart (price), evaluate the data (value). BÂLKÂN DWÂRF

m0ment0

133,250 просмотров • 2 лет назад

Reading the comments on this post told me everything I need to know about art. So many of you wrote to say you felt the exact same thing I did standing in front of the Starry Night. That strange pull, the sense that the painting is somehow alive... It turns out the feeling is completely universal. I am not someone who gets emotional easily. But every so often a piece of art really gets to me. And that is exactly what happened the first time i walked up to Van Gogh's magnum opus. I know how that sounds, it is one of the most famous paintings on earth, almost a cliché to be moved by it. But maybe it is that famous for a reason... It genuinely looks like it is moving while you stand there, shifting in a way I cannot explain and have never seen in any of the thousands of paintings I have looked at in my life. The same day I took the photo below, I also filmed this short video. It still comes nowhere near the real thing, but you can at least catch a little more of it here, the thick ridges of paint, the way the stars and swirls lift right off the canvas. This technique is called "impasto", from the Italian for mixture. It means paint laid on so thickly that every brushstroke and ridge stays visible on the surface. Van Gogh piled it on with a loaded brush, building the stars up thick so they would blaze as bright as possible against the dark. But no video and no explanation of technique can really convey what it feels like to stand in front of it. And the fact that so many of you felt the very same thing says something true about what art is really for. Tolstoy said it best: "The receiver of a true artistic impression is so united to the artist that he feels as if the work were his own and not someone else’s, as if what it expresses were just what he had long been wishing to express. A real work of art destroys, in the consciousness of the receiver, the separation between himself and the artist. In this uniting of it with others lies the great attractive force of art."

Reading the comments on this post told me everything I need to know about art. So many of you wrote to say you felt the exact same thing I did standing in front of the Starry Night. That strange pull, the sense that the painting is somehow alive... It turns out the feeling is completely universal. I am not someone who gets emotional easily. But every so often a piece of art really gets to me. And that is exactly what happened the first time i walked up to Van Gogh's magnum opus. I know how that sounds, it is one of the most famous paintings on earth, almost a cliché to be moved by it. But maybe it is that famous for a reason... It genuinely looks like it is moving while you stand there, shifting in a way I cannot explain and have never seen in any of the thousands of paintings I have looked at in my life. The same day I took the photo below, I also filmed this short video. It still comes nowhere near the real thing, but you can at least catch a little more of it here, the thick ridges of paint, the way the stars and swirls lift right off the canvas. This technique is called "impasto", from the Italian for mixture. It means paint laid on so thickly that every brushstroke and ridge stays visible on the surface. Van Gogh piled it on with a loaded brush, building the stars up thick so they would blaze as bright as possible against the dark. But no video and no explanation of technique can really convey what it feels like to stand in front of it. And the fact that so many of you felt the very same thing says something true about what art is really for. Tolstoy said it best: "The receiver of a true artistic impression is so united to the artist that he feels as if the work were his own and not someone else’s, as if what it expresses were just what he had long been wishing to express. A real work of art destroys, in the consciousness of the receiver, the separation between himself and the artist. In this uniting of it with others lies the great attractive force of art."

James Lucas

57,859 просмотров • 27 дней назад

The clinical term is malignant narcissism. There is a specific kind of man who walks into a room and immediately begins rearranging it. Not the furniture. The people. By minute four, he has forgotten the names of half of them. That is not a flaw in the system. That is the system. The clinical term is malignant narcissism. It sits at the intersection of four things: narcissistic personality disorder, antisocial features, paranoia, and sadism. The sadism part is what people miss. He does not simply lack empathy. He has inverted it. He reads your emotional state with the precision of a surgeon, then uses that information like a scalpel. Maximum discomfort. Minimum legal risk. Otto Kernberg, the psychiatrist who formalized the concept, called it one of the most dangerous personality structures a human being can carry. Not because it is loud. Because it is effective. And because it is almost impossible to name while you are standing inside it. History keeps producing the same man. Robert Maxwell looted his employees’ pension funds while they trusted him completely. Hundreds of millions. He knew the whole time. There is no evidence he experienced this as a problem. Silvio Berlusconi governed Italy like a man who had confused the country with his personal property. Laws bent to fit his legal situation. Courts were hollowed out when they became inconvenient. People who spent time close to him reported the same thing afterward: you left the conversation certain you had agreed to something. You just could not remember what. Charm makes you feel good about yourself. This makes you feel good about him. There is a difference. It takes most people years to locate it. The pattern has a shape. Once you see it you cannot unsee it. It begins with grandiosity so complete it functions as a worldview. Other people exist in one of three categories: instruments, obstacles, or audiences. He is perfectly pleasant to all three, for exactly as long as they remain useful. The moment that changes, so does he. The switch is not gradual. It is a door closing. It continues with a specific relationship to truth. He does not lie the way ordinary people lie, defensively, to avoid consequences. He lies the way a chess player moves pieces. If I can make you accept a false thing, I have demonstrated power over your reality. If you push back, I do not retreat. I escalate. The goal was never the fact. The goal was always the submission. It sustains itself by dismantling anything capable of judgment. Independent courts. A free press. Rival centers of power. These feel to him not like inconveniences but like attacks. The structure that can judge him is the structure that must be broken. This is not calculated. It is reflexive. It is as automatic as flinching. The frightening thing is not that these men exist. The frightening thing is the gap between when the room starts rearranging itself and when anyone names what they are watching. That gap can last years. Decades. Sometimes it outlasts the man entirely, and the next generation inherits the rearranged room and calls it normal. By the time someone says it plainly, the furniture is long gone. And he is already in the next room. Gandalv

The clinical term is malignant narcissism. There is a specific kind of man who walks into a room and immediately begins rearranging it. Not the furniture. The people. By minute four, he has forgotten the names of half of them. That is not a flaw in the system. That is the system. The clinical term is malignant narcissism. It sits at the intersection of four things: narcissistic personality disorder, antisocial features, paranoia, and sadism. The sadism part is what people miss. He does not simply lack empathy. He has inverted it. He reads your emotional state with the precision of a surgeon, then uses that information like a scalpel. Maximum discomfort. Minimum legal risk. Otto Kernberg, the psychiatrist who formalized the concept, called it one of the most dangerous personality structures a human being can carry. Not because it is loud. Because it is effective. And because it is almost impossible to name while you are standing inside it. History keeps producing the same man. Robert Maxwell looted his employees’ pension funds while they trusted him completely. Hundreds of millions. He knew the whole time. There is no evidence he experienced this as a problem. Silvio Berlusconi governed Italy like a man who had confused the country with his personal property. Laws bent to fit his legal situation. Courts were hollowed out when they became inconvenient. People who spent time close to him reported the same thing afterward: you left the conversation certain you had agreed to something. You just could not remember what. Charm makes you feel good about yourself. This makes you feel good about him. There is a difference. It takes most people years to locate it. The pattern has a shape. Once you see it you cannot unsee it. It begins with grandiosity so complete it functions as a worldview. Other people exist in one of three categories: instruments, obstacles, or audiences. He is perfectly pleasant to all three, for exactly as long as they remain useful. The moment that changes, so does he. The switch is not gradual. It is a door closing. It continues with a specific relationship to truth. He does not lie the way ordinary people lie, defensively, to avoid consequences. He lies the way a chess player moves pieces. If I can make you accept a false thing, I have demonstrated power over your reality. If you push back, I do not retreat. I escalate. The goal was never the fact. The goal was always the submission. It sustains itself by dismantling anything capable of judgment. Independent courts. A free press. Rival centers of power. These feel to him not like inconveniences but like attacks. The structure that can judge him is the structure that must be broken. This is not calculated. It is reflexive. It is as automatic as flinching. The frightening thing is not that these men exist. The frightening thing is the gap between when the room starts rearranging itself and when anyone names what they are watching. That gap can last years. Decades. Sometimes it outlasts the man entirely, and the next generation inherits the rearranged room and calls it normal. By the time someone says it plainly, the furniture is long gone. And he is already in the next room. Gandalv

Gandalv

23,407 просмотров • 6 месяцев назад

Murder, Transgenderism, and the Objective Standard of Satanic Evil Ladies and gentlemen, let us strip away the smokescreens and evasions. We are not dealing here with a matter of opinion, preference, or private taste. We are dealing with evil—real, objective, and knowable. The modern skeptic loves to pretend that evil is subjective—that murder is a matter of circumstance, that mutilating one’s body is a matter of personal expression, that words like Satanic are nothing more than medieval insults hurled by the ignorant. This is false, cowardly, and beneath the dignity of serious men. The Catholic standard is not opinion. It is not relative. It is objective truth, revealed by God, reasoned by the Church, and confirmed by the bloody consequences of rebellion played out before our eyes. Murder is not a “choice.” It is not a “right.” It is the deliberate destruction of innocent life. Christ Himself declared the devil “a murderer from the beginning.” When children are slaughtered in schools, in churches, or in the womb, we are not witnessing a “social issue.” We are seeing Satan’s hand at work. Transgenderism is not harmless. It is not compassion. It is mutilation of the body, desecration of God’s image, and rejection of creation itself. To say “I can change my sex” is to spit in the face of the Creator and to echo the serpent’s first lie: “You shall be as gods.” It is anti-Christic at its core because it denies Christ, who is Truth and who is Logos, order itself. You may sneer and call this rhetoric. You may flatter yourself with relativism. But relativism is not sophistication; it is rebellion dressed up as philosophy. The Church has never wavered: murder and the willful defacement of God’s creation are grave offenses, condemned not by my opinion, but by eternal law. They are Satanic because they participate in the same rebellion that cast Lucifer from heaven and continues in every age to drag souls into hell. To call murder and transgender ideology Satanic is not an exaggeration. It is accuracy. It is fidelity to the truth that does not bend to fashion, ideology, or your skepticism. If this offends you, it is not because the standard is false. It is because you are standing against it. Evil exists. Its fruits are visible. Its rebellion is named. The only question left is whether you will recognize it and stand against it, or excuse it and be consumed by it.

Murder, Transgenderism, and the Objective Standard of Satanic Evil Ladies and gentlemen, let us strip away the smokescreens and evasions. We are not dealing here with a matter of opinion, preference, or private taste. We are dealing with evil—real, objective, and knowable. The modern skeptic loves to pretend that evil is subjective—that murder is a matter of circumstance, that mutilating one’s body is a matter of personal expression, that words like Satanic are nothing more than medieval insults hurled by the ignorant. This is false, cowardly, and beneath the dignity of serious men. The Catholic standard is not opinion. It is not relative. It is objective truth, revealed by God, reasoned by the Church, and confirmed by the bloody consequences of rebellion played out before our eyes. Murder is not a “choice.” It is not a “right.” It is the deliberate destruction of innocent life. Christ Himself declared the devil “a murderer from the beginning.” When children are slaughtered in schools, in churches, or in the womb, we are not witnessing a “social issue.” We are seeing Satan’s hand at work. Transgenderism is not harmless. It is not compassion. It is mutilation of the body, desecration of God’s image, and rejection of creation itself. To say “I can change my sex” is to spit in the face of the Creator and to echo the serpent’s first lie: “You shall be as gods.” It is anti-Christic at its core because it denies Christ, who is Truth and who is Logos, order itself. You may sneer and call this rhetoric. You may flatter yourself with relativism. But relativism is not sophistication; it is rebellion dressed up as philosophy. The Church has never wavered: murder and the willful defacement of God’s creation are grave offenses, condemned not by my opinion, but by eternal law. They are Satanic because they participate in the same rebellion that cast Lucifer from heaven and continues in every age to drag souls into hell. To call murder and transgender ideology Satanic is not an exaggeration. It is accuracy. It is fidelity to the truth that does not bend to fashion, ideology, or your skepticism. If this offends you, it is not because the standard is false. It is because you are standing against it. Evil exists. Its fruits are visible. Its rebellion is named. The only question left is whether you will recognize it and stand against it, or excuse it and be consumed by it.

Joe McBride

184,871 просмотров • 1 год назад

OFFICIAL: It has been 134 days since the release of Totenreich, which is longer than the search for both Samantha's Drawing, and Gong COMBINED. With the release of s6 next week, it felt fitting to use our platform to get as many eyes on it as possible. As a quick disclaimer, just because things have been 'tested' does not mean it is not the solve. This post is also not an invitation to share your personal thoughts on datamining/leaks. This relic, by everything shown in the game files, can NOT be datamined: "Even in the current state of the game, relics are a lot harder to solve via datamining and ingame hack tools... For relics, only the sequential item ones (like Dancing Arnie and Agarthan device) are incredibly easy. Agarthan device with the helmet, radio, and mr peeks is actually the easiest. Dancing Arnie becomes hard due to it becoming a kill challenge for the lobster and you cant datamine that". Because of that, the leading theory is that the missing piece has to be something kill condition related, or player action related. Below is literally all of the information I could find on the belt that I thought was worth mentioning, to try and help the community solve this together. CONFIRMED: There is a magazine with a sticker of Mr Peeks holding a Geiger Counter that has a pickup interaction, and is located at the top of the lighthouse while you are picking up the Jotunn Star. This only appears in cursed mode, and appears without any relics active. Considering the only other grim relic (power switch) is solved, we know this mag fits in with the wrestlers belt in some way. The sticker comes directly from intel located on Paradox Junction. THEORIES: Treyarch Dev Tweet - One Treyarch dev tweeted out: "It feels very fitting this is the final unsolved relic given the reward... good luck" Coda Wallbuy Sounds - In a video, a user hears a distinct ding sound when buying ammo off of the coda wall buy in spawn. This has been difficult to replicate, but has been replicated by the original user. Disappearing Boxes - There are 7 boxes around the map that have a hit box, and disappear when hit/shot (they disappear fast with melee macchiato). Currently it is believed by the majority of the community that this is nothing Clocks - There are five clocks near Richtofen's office. Dataminers have said "The hour, minute and second hands are all separate individual models stacked on top of the base model. lol I mean it could mean something or it could just be nothing. Their design choices on some stuff is weird But it is a model without a script and isn’t setup to move in any way" Swordfish - The mag located at the top of the lighthouse is the same model of a mag from the Swordfish A1. Some people believe that is a hint for the swordfish being needed from the box in order to complete the relic. Here are links to a spreadsheet managed by one community member that has things that community members have tested directly. Feel free to look through it, and see if you have an idea that has not already been tested: If you are interested in hunting this with other community members, please feel free to join the Mystery and ZoneX discords, as many of the community is hunting throughout there regularly. You can also feel free to comment under this post anything you might have found interesting.

OFFICIAL: It has been 134 days since the release of Totenreich, which is longer than the search for both Samantha's Drawing, and Gong COMBINED. With the release of s6 next week, it felt fitting to use our platform to get as many eyes on it as possible. As a quick disclaimer, just because things have been 'tested' does not mean it is not the solve. This post is also not an invitation to share your personal thoughts on datamining/leaks. This relic, by everything shown in the game files, can NOT be datamined: "Even in the current state of the game, relics are a lot harder to solve via datamining and ingame hack tools... For relics, only the sequential item ones (like Dancing Arnie and Agarthan device) are incredibly easy. Agarthan device with the helmet, radio, and mr peeks is actually the easiest. Dancing Arnie becomes hard due to it becoming a kill challenge for the lobster and you cant datamine that". Because of that, the leading theory is that the missing piece has to be something kill condition related, or player action related. Below is literally all of the information I could find on the belt that I thought was worth mentioning, to try and help the community solve this together. CONFIRMED: There is a magazine with a sticker of Mr Peeks holding a Geiger Counter that has a pickup interaction, and is located at the top of the lighthouse while you are picking up the Jotunn Star. This only appears in cursed mode, and appears without any relics active. Considering the only other grim relic (power switch) is solved, we know this mag fits in with the wrestlers belt in some way. The sticker comes directly from intel located on Paradox Junction. THEORIES: Treyarch Dev Tweet - One Treyarch dev tweeted out: "It feels very fitting this is the final unsolved relic given the reward... good luck" Coda Wallbuy Sounds - In a video, a user hears a distinct ding sound when buying ammo off of the coda wall buy in spawn. This has been difficult to replicate, but has been replicated by the original user. Disappearing Boxes - There are 7 boxes around the map that have a hit box, and disappear when hit/shot (they disappear fast with melee macchiato). Currently it is believed by the majority of the community that this is nothing Clocks - There are five clocks near Richtofen's office. Dataminers have said "The hour, minute and second hands are all separate individual models stacked on top of the base model. lol I mean it could mean something or it could just be nothing. Their design choices on some stuff is weird But it is a model without a script and isn’t setup to move in any way" Swordfish - The mag located at the top of the lighthouse is the same model of a mag from the Swordfish A1. Some people believe that is a hint for the swordfish being needed from the box in order to complete the relic. Here are links to a spreadsheet managed by one community member that has things that community members have tested directly. Feel free to look through it, and see if you have an idea that has not already been tested: If you are interested in hunting this with other community members, please feel free to join the Mystery and ZoneX discords, as many of the community is hunting throughout there regularly. You can also feel free to comment under this post anything you might have found interesting.

COD: Zombies News

45,414 просмотров • 24 дней назад

A person who converted to Islam in Japan was offered a job by a company in Osaka because he knew Arabic. The company’s business was connected to the Middle East. However, they could not reach an agreement on two issues before he started the job. First, he would have to attend business parties where alcohol was also served. Second, there would need to be an arrangement between his prayer times and his office working hours. Because of this, he refused the job. Later, he became the imam of a mosque in Kobe. For some people, it is so easy to say, “Religion is more important than a job.” Such employees also tend to face more conflicts because they want to bring religious rules into the workplace, which is not possible. Here, the question is not just about the job, but about priorities. Was it the right decision to give up such a job opportunity because of his religious beliefs?

A person who converted to Islam in Japan was offered a job by a company in Osaka because he knew Arabic. The company’s business was connected to the Middle East. However, they could not reach an agreement on two issues before he started the job. First, he would have to attend business parties where alcohol was also served. Second, there would need to be an arrangement between his prayer times and his office working hours. Because of this, he refused the job. Later, he became the imam of a mosque in Kobe. For some people, it is so easy to say, “Religion is more important than a job.” Such employees also tend to face more conflicts because they want to bring religious rules into the workplace, which is not possible. Here, the question is not just about the job, but about priorities. Was it the right decision to give up such a job opportunity because of his religious beliefs?

Alpha Wolf 🐺

96,601 просмотров • 13 дней назад

This video is from a country where there is just 𝟭 𝗽𝗼𝗹𝗶𝗰𝗲 𝗼𝗳𝗳𝗶𝗰𝗲𝗿 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘆 𝟳𝟮𝟬 𝗽𝗲𝗼𝗽𝗹𝗲 , but 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘆 𝗩𝗜𝗣, 𝗮𝗻 𝗮𝘃𝗲𝗿𝗮𝗴𝗲 𝗼𝗳 𝟯 𝗼𝗳𝗳𝗶𝗰𝗲𝗿𝘀 are assigned. We’re talking about India, which has one of the 𝗹𝗼𝘄𝗲𝘀𝘁 𝗽𝗼𝗹𝗶𝗰𝗲-𝘁𝗼-𝗰𝗶𝘁𝗶𝘇𝗲𝗻 𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝘀 in the world. And yet, time and again, 𝗹𝗼𝗻𝗴 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝘃𝗼𝘆𝘀 𝗼𝗳 𝗽𝗼𝗹𝗶𝗰𝗲 𝘃𝗲𝗵𝗶𝗰𝗹𝗲𝘀 are seen escorting not just elected leaders, but also their family members, even those who hold no official position or public duty. One of the most recent examples came just a few months ago, when 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘂𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗿𝗮𝗴𝗲 𝘀𝗼𝗻 of Rajasthan’s Deputy Chief Minister was seen filming a reel, sitting in an open jeep, 𝘄𝗵𝗶𝗹𝗲 𝗮 𝗽𝗼𝗹𝗶𝗰𝗲 𝘃𝗲𝗵𝗶𝗰𝗹𝗲 𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗶𝗹𝗲𝗱 𝗯𝗲𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗱. The very officers who should’ve been 𝗽𝗮𝘁𝗿𝗼𝗹𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘀𝘁𝗿𝗲𝗲𝘁𝘀 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝘁𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗰𝗶𝘁𝗶𝘇𝗲𝗻𝘀 were instead following a 𝘁𝗲𝗲𝗻𝗮𝗴𝗲𝗿 𝗳𝗹𝗮𝘂𝗻𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗽𝗿𝗶𝘃𝗶𝗹𝗲𝗴𝗲. Sadly, such misuse of state machinery is not rare. Senior advocate Harish Salve once recounted that he saw 𝗳𝗶𝘃𝗲 𝗛𝗮𝗿𝘆𝗮𝗻𝗮 𝗣𝗼𝗹𝗶𝗰𝗲 𝘃𝗲𝗵𝗶𝗰𝗹𝗲𝘀 𝗽𝗮𝗿𝗸𝗲𝗱 𝗼𝘂𝘁𝘀𝗶𝗱𝗲 𝗮 𝗽𝗼𝘀𝗵 𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗶𝗱𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲 in his neighbourhood. Upon inquiry, he discovered they weren’t there for a minister, 𝗯𝘂𝘁 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗮 𝗿𝗲𝗹𝗮𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲 of a Chief Minister. Yes, a relative. Not an elected official. Not even a bureaucrat. 𝗝𝘂𝘀𝘁 𝗮 𝗿𝗲𝗹𝗮𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲. This is how public institutions get hollowed out from within. To be clear, yes, certain positions absolutely require security, and no one disputes that. For instance, presidents and Prime Ministers around the world do receive protection, and rightly so. But their security is tied to the 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝘀𝘁𝗶𝘁𝘂𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗼𝗳𝗳𝗶𝗰𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝘆 𝗵𝗼𝗹𝗱, not to who they are as individuals. In India, however, that crucial line between 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝘀𝘁𝗶𝘁𝘂𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗽𝗼𝗻𝘀𝗶𝗯𝗶𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗽𝗲𝗿𝘀𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗽𝗿𝗶𝘃𝗶𝗹𝗲𝗴𝗲 has been dangerously blurred. And unless we begin to 𝗾𝘂𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝗰𝘂𝗹𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗲, it will keep growing, unchecked, unchallenged, and unpunished. -------------------------------------- As Acharya Prashant often says: "In a democracy, 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗹𝗲𝗮𝗱𝗲𝗿 𝗱𝗼𝗲𝘀 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗹𝗲𝗮𝗱 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗽𝗲𝗼𝗽𝗹𝗲, 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗽𝗲𝗼𝗽𝗹𝗲 𝗹𝗲𝗮𝗱 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗹𝗲𝗮𝗱𝗲𝗿. Which means, the real transformation begins with the 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗺𝗼𝗻 𝗺𝗮𝗻." Leaders simply mirror the collective consciousness of the public. If the public is 𝗶𝗻𝗱𝗶𝗳𝗳𝗲𝗿𝗲𝗻𝘁, 𝘂𝗻𝗮𝘄𝗮𝗿𝗲, 𝗼𝗿 𝗲𝗮𝘀𝗶𝗹𝘆 𝗱𝗶𝘀𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗰𝘁𝗲𝗱, the leadership will reflect the same. That’s why it’s not enough to blame politicians or institutions — the public must first awaken to its responsibility. So raise tough, informed questions now — before the cost of silence becomes too high.

This video is from a country where there is just 𝟭 𝗽𝗼𝗹𝗶𝗰𝗲 𝗼𝗳𝗳𝗶𝗰𝗲𝗿 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘆 𝟳𝟮𝟬 𝗽𝗲𝗼𝗽𝗹𝗲 , but 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘆 𝗩𝗜𝗣, 𝗮𝗻 𝗮𝘃𝗲𝗿𝗮𝗴𝗲 𝗼𝗳 𝟯 𝗼𝗳𝗳𝗶𝗰𝗲𝗿𝘀 are assigned. We’re talking about India, which has one of the 𝗹𝗼𝘄𝗲𝘀𝘁 𝗽𝗼𝗹𝗶𝗰𝗲-𝘁𝗼-𝗰𝗶𝘁𝗶𝘇𝗲𝗻 𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝘀 in the world. And yet, time and again, 𝗹𝗼𝗻𝗴 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝘃𝗼𝘆𝘀 𝗼𝗳 𝗽𝗼𝗹𝗶𝗰𝗲 𝘃𝗲𝗵𝗶𝗰𝗹𝗲𝘀 are seen escorting not just elected leaders, but also their family members, even those who hold no official position or public duty. One of the most recent examples came just a few months ago, when 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘂𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗿𝗮𝗴𝗲 𝘀𝗼𝗻 of Rajasthan’s Deputy Chief Minister was seen filming a reel, sitting in an open jeep, 𝘄𝗵𝗶𝗹𝗲 𝗮 𝗽𝗼𝗹𝗶𝗰𝗲 𝘃𝗲𝗵𝗶𝗰𝗹𝗲 𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗶𝗹𝗲𝗱 𝗯𝗲𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗱. The very officers who should’ve been 𝗽𝗮𝘁𝗿𝗼𝗹𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘀𝘁𝗿𝗲𝗲𝘁𝘀 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝘁𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗰𝗶𝘁𝗶𝘇𝗲𝗻𝘀 were instead following a 𝘁𝗲𝗲𝗻𝗮𝗴𝗲𝗿 𝗳𝗹𝗮𝘂𝗻𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗽𝗿𝗶𝘃𝗶𝗹𝗲𝗴𝗲. Sadly, such misuse of state machinery is not rare. Senior advocate Harish Salve once recounted that he saw 𝗳𝗶𝘃𝗲 𝗛𝗮𝗿𝘆𝗮𝗻𝗮 𝗣𝗼𝗹𝗶𝗰𝗲 𝘃𝗲𝗵𝗶𝗰𝗹𝗲𝘀 𝗽𝗮𝗿𝗸𝗲𝗱 𝗼𝘂𝘁𝘀𝗶𝗱𝗲 𝗮 𝗽𝗼𝘀𝗵 𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗶𝗱𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲 in his neighbourhood. Upon inquiry, he discovered they weren’t there for a minister, 𝗯𝘂𝘁 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗮 𝗿𝗲𝗹𝗮𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲 of a Chief Minister. Yes, a relative. Not an elected official. Not even a bureaucrat. 𝗝𝘂𝘀𝘁 𝗮 𝗿𝗲𝗹𝗮𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲. This is how public institutions get hollowed out from within. To be clear, yes, certain positions absolutely require security, and no one disputes that. For instance, presidents and Prime Ministers around the world do receive protection, and rightly so. But their security is tied to the 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝘀𝘁𝗶𝘁𝘂𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗼𝗳𝗳𝗶𝗰𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝘆 𝗵𝗼𝗹𝗱, not to who they are as individuals. In India, however, that crucial line between 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝘀𝘁𝗶𝘁𝘂𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗽𝗼𝗻𝘀𝗶𝗯𝗶𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗽𝗲𝗿𝘀𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗽𝗿𝗶𝘃𝗶𝗹𝗲𝗴𝗲 has been dangerously blurred. And unless we begin to 𝗾𝘂𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝗰𝘂𝗹𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗲, it will keep growing, unchecked, unchallenged, and unpunished. -------------------------------------- As Acharya Prashant often says: "In a democracy, 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗹𝗲𝗮𝗱𝗲𝗿 𝗱𝗼𝗲𝘀 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗹𝗲𝗮𝗱 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗽𝗲𝗼𝗽𝗹𝗲, 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗽𝗲𝗼𝗽𝗹𝗲 𝗹𝗲𝗮𝗱 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗹𝗲𝗮𝗱𝗲𝗿. Which means, the real transformation begins with the 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗺𝗼𝗻 𝗺𝗮𝗻." Leaders simply mirror the collective consciousness of the public. If the public is 𝗶𝗻𝗱𝗶𝗳𝗳𝗲𝗿𝗲𝗻𝘁, 𝘂𝗻𝗮𝘄𝗮𝗿𝗲, 𝗼𝗿 𝗲𝗮𝘀𝗶𝗹𝘆 𝗱𝗶𝘀𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗰𝘁𝗲𝗱, the leadership will reflect the same. That’s why it’s not enough to blame politicians or institutions — the public must first awaken to its responsibility. So raise tough, informed questions now — before the cost of silence becomes too high.

PrashantAdvait Foundation

180,602 просмотров • 8 месяцев назад