Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community  

Go Back   Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community > The Academy > Tilted Politics


 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 06-12-2005, 10:28 PM   #41 (permalink)
Pissing in the cornflakes
 
Ustwo's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Mephisto
Where does the figure of 110 million come from? And to which country (USSR or PRC) are you referring?


Mr Mephisto
110 million is the estimated number of people killed by their own communist government world wide. Links on it are easy to find.

http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/COM.ART.HTM
__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.
Ustwo is offline  
Old 06-12-2005, 11:16 PM   #42 (permalink)
Junkie
 
RJ Rummel, eh?

I wouldn't rely upon his conclusions.

Thanks for the link though. I think we can both agree that absolutist tyrannies, be they communist, fascist, despotic or theocratic, are terrible and the source of many millions of criminal deaths.


Mr Mephisto
Mephisto2 is offline  
Old 06-13-2005, 04:20 AM   #43 (permalink)
Pissing in the cornflakes
 
Ustwo's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Mephisto
RJ Rummel, eh?

I wouldn't rely upon his conclusions.

Thanks for the link though. I think we can both agree that absolutist tyrannies, be they communist, fascist, despotic or theocratic, are terrible and the source of many millions of criminal deaths.


Mr Mephisto
If you don't like his conclusions take your pick, its not like there is only one source for it.

And no I don't equate communism with other tyrannies, as communism has proven far more deadly to its own people than any other form of government. Its like comparing the flu to the plague. Both may kill a lot of people, but which would you rather have?
__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.
Ustwo is offline  
Old 06-13-2005, 07:05 AM   #44 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ustwo
If you don't like his conclusions take your pick, its not like there is only one source for it.
I'd never heard the figure 110 million before. To be honest, it seems a bit high.

Quote:
And no I don't equate communism with other tyrannies, as communism has proven far more deadly to its own people than any other form of government.
I didn't ask you to equate communism to anything. I simply stated that all tyrannies are terrible. If you "prefer" one over the other, then so be it.

Oh, and for the record, I'd rather have communism over Nazism any day.

Mr Mephisto
Mephisto2 is offline  
Old 06-13-2005, 07:57 AM   #45 (permalink)
Pissing in the cornflakes
 
Ustwo's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Mephisto
Oh, and for the record, I'd rather have communism over Nazism any day.

Mr Mephisto
Whats the difference? Both are founded on slave labor, lack of freedom, and fear of the government. My guess is the overall standard of living is higher under the Nazis, and the Nazi's never had the mass starvations, but it didn't survive long enough as a form of government to say for sure.

As for the figure, you may have never heard of it, but the people went 'somewhere'. Its something worth looking into.

Edit:You may find this link interesting.
http://www.unwatch.org/speeches/demcat.html
__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

Last edited by Ustwo; 06-13-2005 at 08:03 AM..
Ustwo is offline  
Old 06-13-2005, 08:03 AM   #46 (permalink)
Junkie
 
biznatch's Avatar
 
Location: France
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ustwo
This is one of those 'if only' moments.

There were American generals who thought the right thing to do after the fall of Germany was keep heading to Moscow.

It would have saved 10's of millions of lives in the long run which in retrospect would have been worth the cost. The chinese communists would have fallen as well had we done this.
That's the same type of reasoning as: "if America had been less or more harsh in punishing Germany(the huge debt they had to pay), things would have been much better:
if they had been less harsh: Germany would have not been in the same kind of economical slump, the people would have been less desperate and would not have elected Hitler as chancellor in 1933
if they had been more harsh: there wouldn't have been the possibility of the creation of a regime because of the complete deprivation of resources and money."

I don't think you can make conclusions so easily... Maybe there would've been something even worse than the 3rd reich...and maybe if the course of history had been different, China would've been the equivalent of North Korea...who knows, really...
__________________
Check it out: The Open Source/Freeware/Gratis Software Thread
biznatch is offline  
Old 06-13-2005, 08:13 AM   #47 (permalink)
Junkie
 
biznatch's Avatar
 
Location: France
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ustwo
Whats the difference? Both are founded on slave labor, lack of freedom, and fear of the government. My guess is the overall standard of living is higher under the Nazis, and the Nazi's never had the mass starvations, but it didn't survive long enough as a form of government to say for sure.

As for the figure, you may have never heard of it, but the people went 'somewhere'. Its something worth looking into.

Edit:You may find this link interesting.
http://www.unwatch.org/speeches/demcat.html
Communism over Nazism?? I disagree. Communism started as an idea of utopy, and that state was obviously never attained. Tyrants took advantage of it and would mass kill all the disagreeings..Nazis would do the same thing, in addition to killing all non white people, jews, gypsys, and more. And try conquering the world, killing everyone in its way.
While I'm not a fan of the current applications of communism (I used to live in Miami, and I met Cubans with horrible stories, like a teacher who had spent 20 years in jail over there), I don't think they got as bad as Hitler's regime(which I think in general opinion was historically the worst regime ever).
__________________
Check it out: The Open Source/Freeware/Gratis Software Thread
biznatch is offline  
Old 06-13-2005, 09:25 AM   #48 (permalink)
Junkie
 
powerclown's Avatar
 
Location: Detroit, MI
Quote:
Originally Posted by stan the man
the states will never say they have commited human right violations
You need to look more carefully. Some American media outlets are only too happy to point the finger at themselves. This could be one example putting to rest the notion of a conservative-dominated media:


New York Times Streak of Page One Stories on Abu Ghraib ends at 32 Days

Quote:
06/01/2004

32 successive New York Times front page articles on Abu Ghraib. Since May 1 the New York Times has had a front page article every day, until today.

April 29: TREATMENT OF PRISONERS; G.I.'s Are Accused of Abusing Iraqi Captives

May 1: CAPTIVES; Bush Voices 'Disgust' at Abuse of Iraqi Prisoners

May 2: DETAINEES; OFFICER SUGGESTS IRAQI JAIL ABUSE WAS ENCOURAGED

May 3: PRISONERS; COMMAND ERRORS AIDED IRAQ ABUSE, ARMY HAS FOUND

May 4: PUNISHMENT; ARMY PUNISHES 7 WITH REPRIMANDS FOR PRISON ABUSE

May 5: INMATE; Iraqi Recounts Hours of Abuse By U.S. Troops

May 6: THE PRISON GUARDS; Abuse Charges Bring Anguish In Unit's Home

May 7: THE SOLDIER; From Picture of Pride to Symbol of Abuse

May 8: COMBAT; G.I.'S KILL SCORES OF MILITIA FORCES IN 3 IRAQI CITIES
[NOTE: Abu Ghraib mentioned in first paragraph ]

May 9: THE MILITARY; In Abuse, a Portrayal of Ill-Prepared, Overwhelmed G.I.'s

May 10: PROSECUTION; FIRST TRIAL SET TO BEGIN MAY 19 IN ABUSE IN IRAQ

May 11: THE REPORT; Head of Inquiry On Iraq Abuses Now in Spotlight

May 12: Afghan Gives Own Account Of U.S. Abuse

May 13: PRISON POLICIES; General Took Guantánamo Rules To Iraq for Handling of Prisoners

May 14: THE WHISTLE-BLOWER; Accused Soldier Paints Scene of Eager Mayhem

May 15: MISTREATMENT; Earlier Jail Seen as Incubator for Abuses in Iraq

May 16: THE COURTS-MARTIAL; ACCUSED G.I.'S TRY TO SHIFT BLAME IN PRISON ABUSE

May 17: PRISONERS; SOME IRAQIS HELD OUTSIDE CONTROL OF TOP GENERAL

May 18: INTERROGATIONS; M.P.'s Received Orders to Strip Iraqi Detainees

May 19: ABU GHRAIB; Officer Says Army Tried to Curb Red Cross Visits to Prison in Iraq

May 20: THE COURT-MARTIAL; G.I. PLEADS GUILTY IN COURT-MARTIAL FOR IRAQIS' ABUSE

May 21: THE INTERROGATORS; Afghan Policies On Questioning Landed in Iraq

May 22: THE WITNESSES; Only a Few Spoke Up on Abuse As Many Soldiers Stayed Silent

May 23: SUSPECT; Translator Questioned By Army In Iraq Abuse [Page 12]

May 24: ABUSE; Afghan Deaths Linked to Unit At Iraq Prison

May 25: ARMY SHIFTS; No. 2 Army General to Move In As Top U.S. Commander in Iraq

May 26: INVESTIGATION; ABUSE OF CAPTIVES MORE WIDESPREAD, SAYS ARMY SURVEY

May 27: Three Accused Soldiers Had Records of Unruliness That Went Unpunished

May 28: U.S. Releases More Prisoners From Abu Ghraib

May 29: Cuba Base Sent Its Interrogators to Iraqi Prison

May 30:Scant Evidence Cited in Long Detention of Iraqis

May 31: Army Is Investigating Reports of Assaults and Thefts by G.I.'s Against Iraqi Civilians
[NYT Memorial Day Special]

June 1: Searing Uncertainty for Iraqis Missing Loved Ones

June 2: Afghan Prison Review [Not on Front Page!]
As Spock would say: "Fascinating."
powerclown is offline  
Old 06-13-2005, 11:15 AM   #49 (permalink)
Pissing in the cornflakes
 
Ustwo's Avatar
 
Powerclown - Thanks for that link, I know the left wing press is out to derail the Iraq mission, but I didn't know they were being that obvious about it.
__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.
Ustwo is offline  
Old 06-13-2005, 12:34 PM   #50 (permalink)
 
roachboy's Avatar
 
Super Moderator
Location: essex ma
ah yes, ustwo, THAT would explain the number of stories about abu ghraib, wouldn't it. that and not the information about the reality of the conditions there.
clearly, it is all a function of some fifth column.

do you actually believe this kind of stuff, ustwo?
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite
roachboy is offline  
Old 06-13-2005, 12:47 PM   #51 (permalink)
Pissing in the cornflakes
 
Ustwo's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by roachboy
ah yes, ustwo, THAT would explain the number of stories about abu ghraib, wouldn't it. that and not the information about the reality of the conditions there.
clearly, it is all a function of some fifth column.

do you actually believe this kind of stuff, ustwo?
Do I believe that the NYT is a left wing biased paper?

Yep.
__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.
Ustwo is offline  
Old 06-13-2005, 12:54 PM   #52 (permalink)
All important elusive independent swing voter...
 
jorgelito's Avatar
 
Location: People's Republic of KKKalifornia
I believe the NYT to be right-leaning, and the LAT to be left-leaning. Time Magazine to be right-leaning, Newsweek to be left-leaning. But then again, we probably see "what we want to see".

To put it another way, sometimes people accuse them mods of being "biased" or "leaning one way or the other". So, if we think there may be a bias, we will look for "signs" to justify our suspicions.

The truth, IMO, is probably somewhere in the middle. Some say the media is left-biased, some say the media is right biased. It is a black-hole argument - we can't escape it! LOL! Seriously though, whether or not the media is biased one way or another is an irreconciliable debate (for the moment).

Concerning this thread, ther are plenty of media articles illustrating both the positive and the negative sides.

Cheers!
__________________
"The race is not always to the swift, nor battle to the strong, but
to the one that endures to the end."

"Demand more from yourself, more than anyone else could ever ask!"

- My recruiter
jorgelito is offline  
Old 06-14-2005, 12:53 AM   #53 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by chickentribs
Anybody else remember Kent State? McCarthyism? Segregation? Japanese Internment? Indentured servitude? Slavery? Native Americans? We have only been around as a country for 230 years and have racked up a consistant list of Human Rights violations that are apalling. It doesn't excuse the Chinese government, but we have no moral ground to stand on at all.

So they do have a point, especially recently.

I think this reasoning to be horrilbly flawed, and also rediculous. Using this "logic", there is nobody in the world with any moral ground whatsoever. All peoples have at one time or another committed acts which may be considered human right violations.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Mephisto
So called "Free Trade" is not all that it's cooked up to be.

It's a basis for globalisation and the exploitation of the Third World by the US and EU (primarily).

Nike sells shoes in the US for over $100. It takes quite a bit less than that for them to produce them in the sweatshops of South East Asia.

Mr Mephisto
Most of the blame lies with the governments of the SE Asian countries in this. The only reason people in these areas are able to be exploited for labor is because their gov'ts allow it, where it's not allowed in western countries.

Last edited by alansmithee; 06-14-2005 at 12:59 AM..
alansmithee is offline  
Old 06-14-2005, 03:11 AM   #54 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by alansmithee
Most of the blame lies with the governments of the SE Asian countries in this. The only reason people in these areas are able to be exploited for labor is because their gov'ts allow it, where it's not allowed in western countries.
So it's THEIR fault they're poor and being exploited...

Right.

It's got nothing to do with large multi-nationals.


Mr Mephisto
Mephisto2 is offline  
Old 06-14-2005, 06:59 AM   #55 (permalink)
Tilted
 
Location: United States, East Coast, New Jersey
I just became physically ill when I read about china. I mean I have actually have been overcome with nauesea.

I know I am one of the americans that live in a bubble. I live in a bubble because I don't how how to deal with something that I can't exert my single will and affect.
__________________
Life is meaningless.
How awesome is that?
Rock On! Now I can do whatever the hell I want
and give my own life meaning to myself.
Axiom_e is offline  
Old 06-30-2005, 08:42 PM   #56 (permalink)
Cunning Runt
 
Marvelous Marv's Avatar
 
Location: Taking a mulligan
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrSelfDestruct
In an effort to improve cost-efficiency, Chinese provincial authorities are beginning to introduce so-called mobile execution vans. These are intended to replace the traditional method of execution by firing squad in which prisoners are taken to an execution ground and made to kneel with hands cuffed before being shot in the head. Officials in Yunnan province explained that only four people are required to carry out the execution in the mobile vans: the executioner, one member of the court, one official from the procuratorate and one forensic doctor.
Where the hell are the insurgents with IEDs?

Maybe that's where we could release all of the prisoners currently held at Guantanamo.

They'd have blown up all of those vans in a week.
Marvelous Marv is offline  
Old 06-30-2005, 09:15 PM   #57 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Mephisto
So it's THEIR fault they're poor and being exploited...

Right.

It's got nothing to do with large multi-nationals.


Mr Mephisto
In a way, yes. The large corps have one purpose-maximizing profits. By using cheap labor and bad working conditions, they are doing this. And the gov'ts are allowing this, and the people aren't getting rid of their exploitave gov'ts. So yes, it is their fault. It isn't up ot a company to go into a country and force good working conditions upon people.
alansmithee is offline  
Old 07-01-2005, 05:43 AM   #58 (permalink)
Junkie
 
sapiens's Avatar
 
Location: Some place windy
Quote:
Originally Posted by alansmithee
In a way, yes. The large corps have one purpose-maximizing profits. By using cheap labor and bad working conditions, they are doing this. And the gov'ts are allowing this, and the people aren't getting rid of their exploitave gov'ts. So yes, it is their fault. It isn't up ot a company to go into a country and force good working conditions upon people.
So, corporations have no moral responsibility? They can do whatever they want as long as they're not stopped by a government?
sapiens is offline  
Old 07-01-2005, 06:11 AM   #59 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by sapiens
So, corporations have no moral responsibility? They can do whatever they want as long as they're not stopped by a government?
Yes. It's not their job to be a moral authority, its a corporation's job to make profit. If it is judged that doing things considered by some to be amoral is the way to make greater profits, and no gov't puts a limit on those actions, then it's wholly in their rights to do it.
alansmithee is offline  
Old 07-01-2005, 06:30 AM   #60 (permalink)
 
roachboy's Avatar
 
Super Moderator
Location: essex ma
i always find the equation of capitalism with political freedom to be amusing.

particularly if you actually take seriously anything alansmithee just said--which is a nice summary of what you would read about in almost any introduction to capitalist ideology textbook.

his post provides a nice snapshot of the central argument against any possible equation of capitalist modes of production and any particular legal or political regime.

left to themselves, captialist firms will reinvent the bottom in terms of wages, in terms of quality of life, in terms of social stability (if you view your workers as interchangeable extensions of the machinery they run, what do you care about social reproduction--fact is, you dont--this despite it being self-defeating in the longer run--but in the contemporary capitalist context, there need be no longer run at the level of production--relocate whewn shit gets ugly. no problem. profits uber alles.)

china has had among the fastest growing capitalist economies in the world for the past 15 years or so. production facilities are located there in huge numbers--apparently, it is ok for these firms to see in political repression--opposition to union activity for example--a kind of externalization of costs. and apparently alansmithee would be able to do nothing but justify this position.


capitalism is not a liberating force--was never, never will be. it is a system of economic activity that assumes human being can be treated like things and that freedom is something top be bought by holders of capital.

it is a revolutionary force--marx was right about that--and one of the explanations for the rise of the modern nation-state is as a political formation set up to mitigate the destruction visited upon regions that are integrated into this system.
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite
roachboy is offline  
Old 07-01-2005, 06:41 AM   #61 (permalink)
Junkie
 
sapiens's Avatar
 
Location: Some place windy
Quote:
Originally Posted by alansmithee
Yes. It's not their job to be a moral authority, its a corporation's job to make profit. If it is judged that doing things considered by some to be amoral is the way to make greater profits, and no gov't puts a limit on those actions, then it's wholly in their rights to do it.
First, thanks for the response.

Second, I think that the ability to perform an act because of an absence of laws to the contrary, does not necessarily make that act a right.

Third, could you clarify a few things?
If there are no existing laws governing whatever morally reprehensible act they want to commit, they are free to do so? It was legal for German companies to use slave labor during Nazi rule. So, it was fine for the companies to do so because they have no moral responsibility? I disagree, but this is your position, correct?

What if the government is unable limit those acts despite laws (inadequate enforcement)? If a corportations only motive should be profit, are they within their "rights" to perform those acts?

Because corporations are made up of people, people make the decisions, etc., does the same logic apply to people? (If there are no laws governing an act, you have a "right" to commit that act?)
sapiens is offline  
Old 07-01-2005, 07:56 AM   #62 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by sapiens
First, thanks for the response.

Second, I think that the ability to perform an act because of an absence of laws to the contrary, does not necessarily make that act a right.
I don't understand this at all. I can see something not being right, but how isn't it "a" right? Who decides what things are rights and not in the absence of law, besides personal whim?

Quote:
Third, could you clarify a few things?
If there are no existing laws governing whatever morally reprehensible act they want to commit, they are free to do so? It was legal for German companies to use slave labor during Nazi rule. So, it was fine for the companies to do so because they have no moral responsibility? I disagree, but this is your position, correct?
In Germany, it most certainly was. And if no other country where that company did business enacted laws forbidding countries doing business there who used slave labor, it would also be fine in those countries. Now, this might not be most profitable, however. A competitor could easily point out that company's use of slave labor, and if the business lost due to this was greater than the profit gained by using slave labor, it wouldn't make much sense for them to use slave labor.

Quote:
What if the government is unable limit those acts despite laws (inadequate enforcement)? If a corportations only motive should be profit, are they within their "rights" to perform those acts?
Not if it's illegal. Just because a gov't can't enforce laws now, doesn't mean that that situation will always remain. And if a gov't is so inept that they are wholly unable to enforce laws for corporations, the corporation in essence becomes the gov't and makes their own laws.

Quote:
Because corporations are made up of people, people make the decisions, etc., does the same logic apply to people? (If there are no laws governing an act, you have a "right" to commit that act?)
Homicide (the willful act of unlawfully killing a person) is illegal, and assumedly wrong. People are made up of cells, cells give people life, etc. So should it be illegal to "murder" cells?

A corporation does have people in charge, true. But it is something entirely separate from the people in charge of it. Now, the people themselves might balk at doing something that is legal but immoral, but then that employee is not doing his job properly.

And if there is no laws governing an act, people/corporations/whatever certainly do have a right to do it.
alansmithee is offline  
Old 07-01-2005, 08:26 AM   #63 (permalink)
Junkie
 
sapiens's Avatar
 
Location: Some place windy
Quote:
Originally Posted by alansmithee
I don't understand this at all. I can see something not being right, but how isn't it "a" right? Who decides what things are rights and not in the absence of law, besides personal whim?...

And if there is no laws governing an act, people/corporations/whatever certainly do have a right to do it.
I understand that as a conceptual and legal entity, a corporation, that which is on paper, does not in itself have moral responsibility. (Any more than a rock has moral responsibility). I also understand that if there is no legislation barring a particular act, a corporation can perform that act. But in my view, a corporation is also composed of people. In my view, those people have moral resposibility that runs above and beyond their duty to turn a profit. I think that even if it was perfectly legal to perform a particular act- to enslave an ethnic group, for example- it wouldn't be my "right" to do so even if it might be a "legal right".

I shouldn't be able to inflict unreasonable costs on you regardless of the legality. I want to use the term "natural law" because that's what it seems like - a violation of natural law. I'm hesitant to do so because: 1) natural law may be to take inflict costs on others and reap benefits; and 2) just because something is natural doesn't make it right.

I suppose laws are created based on moral consensus. That moral consensus is composed of different individuals' personal morality. I also suppose that in the absence of law, personal morality (or personal whim), does dictate what is a right and what is not. Personal morality is a murky topic for discusion, but I suppose that is what this interaction boils down to...
sapiens is offline  
 

Tags
human, rights, violations


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:20 AM.

Tilted Forum Project

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
© 2002-2012 Tilted Forum Project

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