Stephen, especially after condemning Galloway for lionising the repulsive Castro, who do you side with: Robespierre! A vile repressive dictator, if ever there was one. Moreover, a perpetrator of genocide in the Vendee. You seem keen to match Prince Harry in the bad taste stakes.

The outrage over his Afrika Korps uniform is entirely cynical and phoney. The Afrika Korps was not the Waffen SS, as any Eighth Army veteran will testify, and was led by a brilliant military strategist who paid with his life for joining the opposition to Hitler. Somehow, I don't think all those third-rate Labour backbenchers would have been huffing and puffing if Prince Harry had dressed up as Stalin, Che Guevara or an IRA gunman.

If I were Prince Harry, I would make the following offer to my critics, in order to highlight their moral dishonesty. The politico-media circus is decamping to Auschwitz later this month to make capital out of genocide committed by the far right. Therefore, it is appropriate that publicity should also be given to genocide committed by the left, often with the approval of the liberal-left in the West. Therefore, the Prince should offer to visit one of the Gulag camps in Siberia or the Tuol Sleng extermination centre in Phnom Penh.

There's no rational defence for what Harry did - if he knew the implications of what he was wearing, then he's an offensive bigot - if he didn't realise, then he's a stupid f*****t. Take your pick...

This new scandal just proves that the apple doesn't fall far from the tree.

"The politico-media circus is decamping to Auschwitz later this month to make capital out of genocide committed by the far right."

Not just the "far right", or Nazis, or Gestapo, or even Germans. The Nazis could never have carried out their extermination of the Jews without the almost complete co-operation of the rest of Europe, a Europe that was steeped in nearly 2000 years of Jew-hatred. In Holland, for example, Jews were rounded up by Dutch police on Dutch orders, and their property was stolen by Dutch citizens and the Dutch state. In Lithuania, Jews were murdered with the full support of the Roman Catholic Church, and aided in large part by gentile "partisans". Poland, the very heartland of European anti-Semitism, which had actually introduced anti-Semitic legislation in 1935, countless millions collaborated with the Nazis; today, the gentile inhabitants of cities like Lodz and Warsaw (as in so many other cities in Europe) squat animal-like on the hundreds of thousands of residential and commercial properties that were stolen from the victims. Britain, a country that according to the opinion polls of the time was every bit as virulently anti-Semitic as Nazi Germany, did not lift a finger to save the drowning Jews of Europe; she fought a war in spite of and not because of the Jews (one only has to observe Britain's conduct at the Evian Conference, her refusal to bomb the railways tracks leading to Auschwitz, or her Nazi-like behavior in post-war Palestine to see that).

Unlike Stalin's outrages which had the support of virtually no one, the Holocaust was wildly popular with the vast majority of Europeans; and, as Melanie Phillips points out, very little has changed. Also, there are still many millions of gentile Ukrainians and Russians living in their respective countries, whereas much of Europe is nothing but a Jewish graveyard.

With millions of individuals like Harry and Michael McGowan infesting Britain with their ignorance and hatred, and with the BBC, Guardian, Independent and Labour Party pouring out their lies about Israel on a daily basis, it's about time the Jews of Britain woke up to the fact that they are no safer than the Jews of Berlin in 1932, or the Jews of Warsaw in 1938.

Toby, there seem to be some crossed wires here. If I can be accused of anything, it is of being pro-Jew, not anti. Your comments about those Europeans who aided and abetted the Holocaust are quite correct, as is Melanie Phillips. You might add to your list of accomplices the Vichy Regime in France. How this translates into me being a Jew-hater, I fail to see.

Where I do disagree with you is about Stalin's crimes. These had lots of support from the liberal-left in the West. George Bernard Shaw, co-founder of the Labour Party, went to his grave denying the existence of the Gulag. Beatrice and Sydney Webb, also co-founders of the Labour Party, justified the mass murder of the Kulaks on the grounds that "you can't make an omelette without breaking a few eggs." Their moral amnesia resembled that of the upper class appeasers who thought that Kristallnacht was all about the pushy Jews getting their come-uppance.

Sad to see this has been used as an extra argument against the royal family.

But I guess if you want to see more, dishonest politicans Stephen eradicating the monarchy and allowing them to be our figurehead is the way forward.

On the other hand, if the youthful naivety of Prince Harry is the best the Republicanists can come up with...I hazard a guess the monarchy may be around longer than you might like and we will be all the better for it.

James

It was the Queen wittering on to the 94% indigenous British population that they should adjust their lives to accommodate "diversity" that did it for me. She should have kept her trap shut - but then, she has holdings in many of those countries that are decanting "immigrants" into Britain and wouldn't like to offend anyone who has the power to nationalise them.

I was astounded that she thought 58 million Brits were going to take their instructions from her. I don't think the Queens or Holland, Denmark, Sweden or Norway act with such presumption. QE is as divorced from the real world as Prince Charles and those two ghastly princes. The whole charade should be shut down. British royalty died out when the Queen Mother died.

I suspect that the monarchy will not be abolished but scaled down considerably to something akin to Denmark or Holland.

I agree with Melanie Phillips though, the British chattering classes care only about Jews after they are dead. Unfortunately people such as A.N. Wilson, Tom Dalyell, George Galloway, Jennifer Tonge, Tom Paulin, Ken Livingstone, Harold Pinter, Robert Fisk et al would have no problem if another 5 million Jews who happen to live on the shore of the Mediterranean were to travel on The Road to Treblinka.

Not to make too fine a point about it but the Nazis stood for "National Socialist German Workers Party" which seems pretty left wing to me. Also the Red in the Nazi flag stood for Socialism.

The Nazis killed more than just Jews, y'know. I know the Jews like to think they have the sole right to be outraged by Nazi symbolism but they don't. There were other people killed too.

What Harry did was very silly and possibly intended a dark joke. Never mind now, he's apologised and that should be the end of it.

I don't like the anti-monarchy gist of this post. As revenge I will no longer be buying your new book. Instead I will read it instore and hope no one notices.

Joel, Harold Pinter is Jewish. I agree with you and Melanie, though. It's a horrible thought, but I think it's true.

Prince Harry is a spoiled, vapid little jerk. I cannot believe that the thought of wearing Nazi insignia didn't give him at least a moment's pause.

William - intended as a "dark joke"? As in "irony"? Prince Harry?

I can't see the point in having this royal family. Do you think for one instant that the Queen would save Britain by bravely refusing to sign our sovereignty away? Of course, she's an old lady now, and it would take a lot for her to do something brave. But Charles wouldn't refuse, either. They are going to protect their position and their wealth at all costs, including the cost of Britain's sovereignty if that's what it takes.

Verity

Gerald Kaufman and Will Self are Jewish too but with Jews like that .......
As a non Briton who has visited the UK too many times to remember as is soemthing of a British History buff there is a part of taht would feel sad if the monarchy disappered, however this current group seems to really believe that they are answerable only to God. By the way I also could never understand the Dianamania phenomenom. I am hoping that the UK does not adopt the Euro and that Britain will always remain Britain and not a province of the E.U.

I have read that Charles does not want the traditional title of "Defender fo the Faith" but he prefers to be called "Defender of All Faiths." Probably this is appeaement towards British Muslims.

How can we contemplate doing away with our Royalty? Nothing serves so much to unite our little nation. It's really great that Harry is keeping up the family tradition of nauseating arrogance, so that we have a focus for our mockery and supercilious disapproval.

SPQR.

What a stupid post.

I’ve no doubt had that stern Republican Adolf Hilter successfully invaded in 1940 that the abolition of a constitutional monarchy would have been somewhere the top of his on his list. Not to mention the gutting of Parliament, a massive assault on the constitution, the destruction of civil liberties, the politicisation of the civil service, massive increase in state power and interference into our private lives, social education, and the nationalisation of childhood. (sound familiar?)

Of the six longest-lasting law-governed democracies in the world, four are monarchies. However ALL the countries with gulags, torture chambers, secret police forces, censorship, closed borders, organised genocide, etc, have been republics. What's the attraction?

In any case the issue is not the personal character of the monarch (the less we see of them the better, in my view) but the nature of the monarchy itself, occupying a space politicians would like to occupy but shouldn't, like the King on a chessboard.

What would poor, starving, persecuted, downtrodden, yellow-star-wearing Melanie Phillips be without her paranoia? She tends it like a rare orchid.

Liberty - Well, you're right about the longest lasting democracies all being monarchies. Britain, Holland, Denmark, Sweden, Norway. That's five. And I don't know whether the oldest democracy in the world, Iceland, has a monarchy.

But I agree, the northern European monarchies have nurtured democracy. If the Windsors served, as the other ones do, as a national focus for bringing the country together and refrained from trying to boss their citizenries around, that would be fine.

But the Queen has been motivated, for her own purposes, to instruct the British to be - what? joyful? complicit? - regarding mass, unassimilated immigration into their country. This is arrogance and very ill-judged.

Jakob de Haan - Melanie Phillips is trying to draw attention to the eerie blind spot of the BBC and other Gramscians regarding Israel, and the subterranean current of anti-Semitism that seems to have been taken up by a substantial swathe of the chatterati in London. The Queen doesn't seem to have any opinion about this - possibly because she doesn't have any holdings in Israel. I see you have a fine Old Testament name.

Melanie Phillips discovers a new reason for the End of Civilisation As We Know It about once every ten days. She's the queen of the why-oh-why whingers. Her natural home is the Daily Mail, which flourishes by pandering to the paranoia of the petit bourgeois lace-curtain twitchers of Middle England.

And the BBC will never be beyond the pale as long as we have spectacles like 'Newsnight' on Thursday: a Jew, Gavin Essler, discussing Prince Harry's inadequacies with three other Jews.

Price Harry - spoilt, smug, ignorant, insular and stupid. But then again he is just the flagbearer of his set. Why is everyone so surprised?

Hey hey hey - this is getting a bit out of hand - Harry is a jerk, but werent we all jerks at his age? isnt the whole idea of being a young man to get the jerking out of your system? Good grief, if you cant do something stupid and offensive when you are in your early 20's when can you do it? Hands up the man who didnt do something he is ashamed of before he was 25!!

And I think you will find the Nazis were far LEFT, as was Stalin - I know it is left wing revisionist policy to brand them as just another branch of the Conservative Party, but this blog is about truth isnt it?

It doesn't warrant 12 pages (or thereabouts, I didn't count) in the Daily Mail. He's a silly boy, like most 20 year olds, but unlike most 20 year olds he's got no-one to tell him when he's being stupid.

As a Jew, I not desperately upset. As a monarchist, I despair of this particular royal family.

The Palace needs to cauterise this now or this 'photo will be showing up for evermore. Harry's best bet is to turn up at the Board of Deputies (with no cameras present). admit he was a prat and apologise. They'd love it and they'd give him a cheer. Then he can go off to Sandhurst and have some sense shouted into him by assorted WO1s.

unlike most 20 year olds he's got no-one to tell him when he's being stupid.

Which is why his so-called "advisers" are being grilled in the Commons this week, ostensibly about financial matters but at least partly to establish whether the "advice" they dish out is worth a damn. Current evidence suggests not.

The outrage over his Afrika Korps uniform is entirely cynical and phoney. The Afrika Korps was not the Waffen SS, as any Eighth Army veteran will testify, and was led by a brilliant military strategist who paid with his life for joining the opposition to Hitler.

To be fair, this comment was made before the revelation that a Waffen SS uniform was in fact Harry's first choice, and the only reason he didn't wear one was because he couldn't find one that fitted!

But I somehow doubt he thought "Oh, that's a relief, because I've now realised that this might have been a bit dodgy - tell you what, how about an Afrika Korps uniform?"

I agree with Richard Buckley and Kit. Harry's a spoiled jerk, but this is what young males are: arrogant little jerks. Then life bashes some sense and maturity into them.

I think people can wear what they like to costume parties - and it was a private party, after all, and not our business.

Like Richard Buckley, I despair of this royal family. I don't think they bring anything to the table. The Queen's urging British indigenes to appreciate "diversity", meaning "multiculturalism", meaning the destruction of a coherent civil society. Charles breaks plates at the dinner table at Highgate if something goes wrong at a dinner party. (Although again, it's his own home and his own plates, so it's not really our business.) And he's more lefty than the Archbishop of Canterbury, and that's going it some. Harry's a jerk. William's has that preachy, Dianesque look about him. what on earth is the point?

I read somewhere yesterday, perhaps in The Telegraph, but I don't remember, that royalty is going into meltdown all over the world. The Japanese are having their own problems. Will we get over it? I wonder.

Prince Harry's costume was sick.

But then show me a Twenty Year Old that isn't. Its only normal for people of his age to do silly things, thats why we have the word mature in the English language. It means those who are old enough to think before they act.

I agree with Melanie Phillips. Although in Belgium, right-wing Vlaams Belang (Flemish Interest) is internationally spoken perhaps not the party that incites most sympathy, I can only notice that they support 100% the living Jews, in Antwerp and in Israel, and that nearly everybody else excels in trying to paste, so to say, a swastika on them, even when leading spirit Dewinter descends from a resistance family and that in Antwerp, compared to Amsterdam, catching a Jew was extremely difficult for the Germans. BTW, that’s the reason why they still are so many there.

Flanders

Johan Van Beek - "everyone seems to paste a swaztika on them". Yes, and they succeed. This is the eurosocialist paradigm. Tell the same lie over and over again, make the same smear over and over again, and people are so supine and unquestioning that they will believe it. This is Tony Blair's method in Britain.

The Belgian way: to cut the funding lifeline.

On Januari 12, 2005, as has been widely noted, Claude Eerdekens (http://users.skynet.be/claude-eerdekens/eerdekens1.htm) saw his bill to cut state-funding (http://www.expatica.com/source/site_article.asp?subchannel_id=24&story_id=15600&name=Vlaams+Belang+may+face+funding+cut) to Vlaams Belang pass through the Senate and onto the statute book.

In point of fact, the new law only regulates the practical implementation of a more fundamental law that dates from 1999. That one keeps things specific to parties convicted for “racism” and all evils attributed thereto. So in itself Eerdekens’ law is no surprise. The greater mystery is why a Flemish non-socialist majority party (in fact prime-minister Verhofstadt’s own conservative VLD party, which has the most to fear from Vlaams Belang) voted with their ideological enemies and, in so doing, scandalised the Flemish public. That could only ever work to Vlaams Belang’s electoral advantage. So, are the majority conservative politicians simply lemmings set upon suicide?

Bart Brinckman (http://www.standaard.be/info/contact/afdeling.asp?id=22), who leads the Wetstraat (Downing Street) redaction of the Flemish quality newspaper De Standaard, calls the Flemish parties “opportunistic chickens”. Only one party comes out of it looking better, he writes, and that’s Vlaams Belang.

Senator Marc van Peel (http://www.cdenvsenaat.be/senatoren/mvanpeel.php) of the oppositional Christian Democrats goes further. He sees a conspiracy by French-speakers to weaken the other Flemish parties. In subsequent “Villa Politica” - the politics programme broadcast on Friday - he asked, “How can the Flemish mainstream parties be so stupid?” His own conservative oppositional CD&V suffers as much from this law as does Verhofstadt’s VLD – in both cases, of course, to the advantage of Vlaams Belang. Van Peel is only too aware that Verhofstadt is dragging both parties over the cliff.

So, let’s return to where the story began.

Because of much bribery and scandal in the past Belgium has a strict party-funding system that makes private funding marginal. It is illegal for politicians and parties to accept donations from companies or accept donations from private individuals of over €125 ($164 or £87.5). All political parties are, therefore, state-dependent.

Given that, Eerdekens reasoned, and given the fact that November 2004’s banning of the Blok had been circumvented simply by founding a new party, why not give the 1999 law some real teeth? Why not starve Vlaams Belang by cutting its funding? And the rest we know.

But who precisely is this character, Claude Eerdekens? Well, in February 2001 the same Claude Eerdekens , the parliamentary leader of the Parti Socialiste, declared in Parliament that 99% of the immigrants in Brussels—historically a Dutch-speaking city — filed their naturalisation papers in French.

“We do more”, he boasted, “to turn Brussels into a Francophone city than the Flemings can ever do to prevent it.”

In such an atmosphere, then, the establishment is admitting inviting foreign immigrants - mainly French-speaking Moroccans (http://www.cfwb.be/gb/presentation/communaute/pg006.html) - to come to Belgium and apply for citizenship. The policy-aim is unambiguous: to change the ethnic balance and the spoken tongue away from Flemish.

But apprentice-wizard Eerdekens made a basic mistake with his magic kit. People are not stupid. They notice that kind of thing. In particular, the residents of Brussels and the hundreds of thousands of Flemish who commute there each day notice a fundamental change in their quality of life. To quote Eurostat (urbanaudit (http://www.urbanaudit.org/)): in London the yearly probability of getting murdered is 3/100.000, but in Brussels it is 10/100.000. I am quite certain that the picture is the same with the other crimes of the person. Certainly, Brussels’ known problem with Islamic terror would make such a proposition likely. So yes, we notice … and yes, we fully understand the racial politics of the Walloon power elite and, therefore, the evil consistency with which they label all Flemish resistance “racism”.

In this hothouse atmosphere Flemish regional politics has produced a strange paradox. In the Flemish Parliament Vlaams Belang saved its regional party funding by arguing that they are the legal successors of Vlaams Blok yet were a different party. The Flemish Parliamentary office which decides such cases, and where Vlaams Belang’s political opponents have a majority, could easily have said that this was clearly nonsense. Indeed, they did decide that Vlaams Blok and Vlaams Belang were same party and thus “guilty of racism”. But they did not cut the funding. No doubt they recoiled at the thought of the first attempt to destroy Vlaams Blok/Belang through the courts and the groundswell of sympathy for the underdog that created throughout Flanders.

However, as we have seen, in the Belgian Senate this week the Flemish majority parties did the opposite, voting in favor of the fund-cutting law. The decision was not without its detractors. Even commission president and majority Flemish socialist Ludwig Vandenhove (SP.A) called it “a tactical mistake”. But why, for heaven’s sake, go right ahead and make it?

The unspoken supposition is that, tactically, there was little immediate harm to pleasing the French-speakers at this time. That kind of thing poses more of a “long run” problem for the majority Flemish parties. Besides, they calculate that a new prosecution and conviction of Vlaams Belang would be necessary before the funding lifeline could be cut. So, they can relax … there’s no electoral need to give the French-speakers the “brush-off” just yet.

Of course, in that “long-run” the French-speakers are on a collision course with Vlaams Belang. Independence for Flanders means the death of Belgium and the end 11,3 billion Eurodollar ($14,8 or £7,9) financial transfers the French-speakers get ever year. Victory for the French-speakers in the war on Flanders means the death of Flemish nationalism. It has to be one or other: Belgium or a free Flanders. Both can’t survive. In that regard, Vlaams Belang senator Wim Verreycken did not pull any punches when he said that Vlaams Belang will have its place in history together with Eamon de Valera and Václav Havel, “who were honoured later as heroes”.

But is a new conviction really necessary before party-funding can be cut? In legalistic Belgium the controversy had begun before the new law was even passed. For sure, Vlaams Blok’s ban in 2004 dates from AFTER the principle-establishing law of 1999. We must await to see whether the appropriate court, the State Council, will really view Vlaams Belang as a new party.

The French-speaking minority holds half of the seats in the State Council. So, not much Flemish collaboration is necessary to win a majority. At the Belgian federal level, no mercy cannot be expected for Vlaams Belang.

So what a pity, then, that the Flemish mainstream in the Senate didn’t take the chance, when Eerdekens’ proposal was debated this week, to vote for an amendment banning retroactivity. The main “obstacle” to this crucial amendment was that the whole of the bill would first have had to go back to the Chamber of Deputies (Belgium has a bi-cameral system). And that would taken too much time and, of course, bestowed too much attention – once again - upon Vlaams Belang and its travails. Better a bad law than that the underdog steals away public sympathy and support from the politicians of the mainstream. But we shall see what price will have to be paid for such short-sightedness … whether Vlaams Belang is finally put to the sword through their treachery or whether it will triumph and deliver Flanders from their cowardice.

I will end with Eerdekens who, for sure, is no lemming and who isn’t going to go over the cliff with the Flemish mainstream. He is on record as saying, “The Flemish here [in the Parliament] obviously think that they are in the Flemish Parliament, but if they continue on this way Wallonia is not ashamed to live next to such a great country as France and, one day, they will find out that France will be bordering at the gates of Brussels!”

So there it is. French-speakers will run things how they want, he is saying, and the Flemish will submit to everything and pay or he, Eerdekens, will disappear into France - eventually with Brussels and all of its international institutions, too. The plan to connect Brussels via a corridor to Wallonia and thence the French-speakers’ homeland is not some vague blackmail. Walloon minister-president Van Cau (http://www.lesoir.be/rubriques/belg/page_5168_251452.shtml) calls it a “continuité territoriale”. Perhaps he never heard of the commission which was named after former French premier Edouard Balladur and which imposed respect for stable borders on the warring peoples of the Balkans. Perhaps he doesn’t care and, anyway, considers that the theft of Flanders’ capital city is all the Flemish lemmings deserve.

prince harry is a lost cause being disrespectful to all the jews and people who died in the war . he is a complete idiot but what 20 yr old person isnt

aciphex | acyclovir | albenza | aldactone | aldara | alesse | allegra | allegra d | amoxicillin | antivert | aphthasol | atarax | bentyl | buspar | butalbital apap | carisoprodol | celexa | cialis | clarinex | claritin | cleocin |

amator grup | amator nastolatki | amator porno | amatoreczka | amatorka | amatorka models | amatorka parka sex | amatorka w wannie | amatorka z | amatorke | amatorki | amatorki dojrzale | amatorki belchatow | amatorki brunetki | amatorki film | amatorki filmy | amatorki filmy free | amatorki fotki | amatorki grupowo | amatorki grupowy | amatorki i filmy | amatorki i lesbijki | amatorki i lody | amatorki i owlosione | amatorki i ponczoszki | amatorki jpg sex free | amatorki lachoci | amatorki lesb | amatorki lesbijki | amatorki masturbacja | amatorki modelki | amatorki nagie | amatorki nago | amatorki nastolatki | amatorki nastoletnie | amatorki oral | amatorki ostre | amatorki pl | amatorki po 40 | amatorki po 40 stce | amatorki po 40 tce | amatorki po czterdziestce | amatorki polka | amatorki polki | amatorki polskie | amatorki ponczoszki nastolatki | amatorki prywatne | amatorki sex | amatorki sperma | amatorki wytrysk | amatorki z bialegostoku | amatorki z bialegostoku polki 35 lat | amatorki z polski |

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. 51. 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. 61. 62. 63. 64. 65. 66. 67. 68. 69. 70. 71. 72. 73. 74. 75. 76. 77. 78. 79. 80. 81. 82. 83. 84. 85. 86. 87. 88. 89. 90. 91. 92. 93. 94. 95. 96. 97. 98. 99. 100. 101. 102. 103. 104. 105. 106. 107. 108. 109. 110. 111. 112. 113. 114. 115. 116. 117. 118. 119. 120. 121. 122. 123. 124. 125. 126. 127. 128. 129. 130. 131. 132. 133. 134. 135. 136. 137. 138. 139. 140. 141. 142. 143. 144. 145. 146. 147. 148. 149. 150. 151. 152. 153. 154. 155. 156. 157. 158. 159. 160. 161. 162. 163. 164. 165. 166. 167. 168. 169. 170. 171. 172. 173. 174. 175. 176. 177. 178. 179. 180. 181. 182. 183. 184. 185. 186. 187. 188. 189. 190. 191. 192. 193. 194. 195. 196. 197. 198. 199. 200. 201. 202. 203. 204. 205. 206. 207. 208. 209. 210. 211. 212. 213. 214. 215. 216. 217. 218. 219. 220. 221. 222. 223. 224. 225. 226. 227. 228. 229. 230. 231. 232. 233. 234. 235. 236. 237. 238. 239. 240. 241. 242. 243. 244. 245. 246. 247. 248. 249. 250. 251. 252. 253. 254. 255. 256. 257. 258. 259. 260. 261. 262. 263. 264. 265. 266. 267. 268. 269. 270. 271. 272. 273. 274. 275. 276. 277. 278. 279. 280. 281. 282. 283. 284. 285. 286. 287. 288. 289. 290. 291. 292. 293. 294. 295. 296. 297. 298. 299. 300. 301. 302. 303. 304. 305. 306. 307. 308. 309. 310. 311. 312. 313. 314. 315. 316. 317. 318. 319. 320. 321. 322. 323. 324. 325. 326. 327. 328. 329. 330. 331. 332. 333. 334. 335. 336. 337. 338. 339. 340. 341. 342. 343. 344. 345. 346. 347. 348. 349. 350. 351. 352. 353. 354. 355. 356. 357. 358. 359. 360. 361. 362. 363. 364. 365. 366. 367. 368. 369. 370. 371. 372. 373. 374. 375. 376. 377. 378. 379. 380. 381. 382. 383. 384. 385. 386. 387. 388. 389. 390. 391. 392. 393. 394. 395. 396. 397. 398. 399. 400. 401. 402. 403. 404. 405. 406. 407. 408. 409. 410. 411. 412. 413. 414. 415. 416. 417. 418. 419. 420. 421. 422. 423. 424. 425. 426. 427. 428. 429. 430. 431. 432. 433. 434. 435. 436. 437. 438. 439. 440. 441. 442. 443. 444. 445. 446. 447. 448. 449. 450. 451. 452. 453. 454. 455. 456. 457. 458. 459. 460. 461. 462. 463. 464. 465. 466. 467. 468. 469. 470. 471. 472. 473. 474. 475. 476. 477. 478. 479. 480. 481. 482. 483. 484. 485. 486. 487. 488. 489. 490. 491. 492. 493. 494. 495. 496. 497. 498. 499. 500.