The Visit Movie (2015) Original Title

➥ Click Here to Play Now

✵ Storyline:
The terrifying story of a brother and sister who are sent to their grandparents’ remote Pennsylvania farm for a weeklong trip. Once the children discover that the elderly couple is involved in something deeply disturbing, they see their chances of getting back home are growing smaller every day.

⇗ Details :
Release Date : 2015-09-10
Category : Thriller, Horror
Casts : Shelby Lackman, Deanna Dunagan, Benjamin Kanes, Peter McRobbie, Sajida De Leon, John Buscemi, Jon Douglas Rainey, Ed Oxenbould, Olivia DeJonge, Kathryn Hahn, Dave Jia, Erica Lynne Marszalek, Richard Barlow, Brian Gildea, Shawn Gonzalez
Runtime : 94 minutes

( Visit Movie Visit streaming

My Re-Updated List of Favorite Directors

Cinema Variety’s Favorite Directors
(in no particular order)

  • Terrence Malick
    Favorite Film: The Tree of Life
    Next Best: The Thin Red Line

  • Paul Thomas Anderson
    Favorite Film: The Master
    Next Best: Magnolia

  • Andrei Tarkovsky
    Favorite Film: Solaris
    Next Best: Andrei Rublev

  • Larry Clark
    Favorite Film: KIDS
    Next Best: Bully

  • Darren Aronofsky
    Favorite Film: Requiem for a Dream
    Next Best: Black Swan

  • Quentin Tarantino
    Favorite Film: Pulp Fiction
    Next Best: Death Proof

  • Christopher Nolan
    Favorite Film: Interstellar
    Next Best: The Dark Knight

  • Sofia Coppola
    Favorite Film: The Virgin Suicides
    Next Best: Marie Antoinette

  • Rob Zombie
    Favorite Film: Halloween
    Next Best: House of 1,000 Corpses

  • Alfonso Cuaron
    Favorite Film: Children of Men
    Next Best: Gravity

  • Xavier Dolan
    Favorite Film: Laurence Anyways
    Next Best: I Killed My Mother

  • Harmony Korine
    Favorite Film: Mister Lonely
    Next Best: Spring Breakers

  • Lars Von Trier
    Favorite Film: Dancer in the Dark
    Next Best: Melancholia

  • David Lynch
    Favorite Film: Eraserhead
    Next Best: Mulholland Drive

  • Nicolas Winding Refn
    Favorite Film: Drive
    Next Best: Valhalla Rising

  • Stanley Kubrick
    Favorite Film: 2001: A Space Odyssey
    Next Best: The Shining

  • Derek Cianfrance
    Favorite FilmBlue Valentine
    Next Best: The Place Beyond The Pines

  • Joel & Ethan Coen
    Favorite Film: No Country For Old Men
    Next Best: Fargo

  • Judd Apatow
    Favorite Film: Knocked Up
    Next Best: The 40 Year Old Virgin

  • Gaspar Noe
    Favorite Film: Irreversible
    Next Best: Enter The Void

  • Spike Jonze
    Favorite Film: Her
    Next Best: Being John Malkovitch

  • Alejandro González Iñárritu
    Favorite Film: 21 Grams
    Next Best: Amores Perros

  • Ingmar Bergman
    Favorite Film: The Silence
    Next Best: Wild Strawberries

  • Carlos Reygadas
    Favorite Film: Post Tenebras Lux
    Next Best: Silent Light

  • Lukas Moodysson
    Favorite Film: Mammoth
    Next Best: Together

  • Ben Wheatley
    Best Film: Kill List
    Next Best: A Field in England

  • Mike Cahill
    Best Film: Another Earth
    Next Best: I Origins

  • Steve McQueen
    Best Film: 12 Years a Slave
    Next Best: Shame

  • Denis Villenueve
    Best Film: Polytechnique
    Next Best: Enemy

  • Cate Shortland
    Best Film: Lore
    Next Best: Somersault

  • Shane Carruth
    Best Film: Upstream Color

  • Ron Fricke
    Best Film: Samsara
    Next Best: Baraka

  • Godfrey Reggio
    Best Film: Koyanisqatsi / Powaqqatsi
    Next Best: Visitors

  • William Eubank
    Best Film: The Signal
    Next Best: Love

  • François Truffaut
    Best Film: The 400 Blows
    Next Best: Shoot the Pianist

  • Jonathan Glazer
    Best Film: Under the Skin
    Next Best: Birth

  • Alejandro Jodorowsky
    Best Film: The Holy Mountain
    Next Best: Santa Sangre
  • Nicolas Roeg
    Best Film: Walkabout
    Next Best: The Man Who Fell to Earth


  • Lynne Ramsay
    Best Film: Ratcatcher
    Next Best: Morvern Callar
  • Andrea Arnold
    Best Film: Wuthering Heights
    Next Best: Fish Tank


  • Kelly Reichardt
    Best Film: Old Joy
    Next Best: Night Moves
  • Lenny Abrahamson
    Best Film: Frank
    Next Best: Room


  • Krzysztof Kieślowski
    Best Film: Three Colors: Red
    Next Best: The Double Life of Veronique
  • Werner Herzog
    Best Film: Aguirre: The Wrath of God
    Next Best: Rescue Dawn


  • Francis Ford Coppola
    Best Film: The Godfather
    Next Best: Apocalypse Now
  • Richard Kelly
    Best Film: Donnie Darko
    Next Best: The Box


  • Don Hertzfeldt
    Best Film: It’s Such a Beautiful Day
    Next Best: World of Tomorrow
  • Cary Fukunaga
    Best Film: Jane Eyre
    Next Best: Beasts of No Nation

  • Sebastian Silva
    Best Film: Magic Magic
    Next Best: Crystal Fairy & The Magical Cactus

anonymous asked:

What are your views on giving foreign/humanitarian aid? (Sorry if you have this question three times in your inbox. My phone was playing up)

I generally prescribe by the views expressed by Richard Lynn in IQ and the Wealth of Nations. This view is that the intelligence of a population largely determines its economic wealth.

As humanitarian aid does not raise intelligence it’s utterly pointless, and as aid has failed to cause Africa to blossom this is one of the countless examples of the Cultural Marxist egalitarian worldview being incorrect.

Neither do I believe that education raises intelligence, this is another Cultural Marxist fantasy, one it shares with classic communism, as Stalin and his buddies believed that educating the underclasses was going to turn Russia into a nation of super people. It didn’t work then, and it will not work now.

It’s also immoral to give aid while the nation is in debt, it’s a sure sign of anti-nationalism and suicidal humanism whenever that happens.

The Idea of Large Penises and Low IQ and Crime

The Penile Economics of Ethnicity

See Race Realism page for more.

Tatu Westling (2011) has proposed a new spin on the old IQ-crime link. In the old rendition, ethnic groups with the lowest IQs have more testosterone which predispositions one to criminal activity. Testosterone, however, would produce a larger than average penis. This view is chiefly employed by Canadian psychologist J.P Rushton whose work is freely available online. Rushton (2000) claims that his unique thesis explains the high crime rate, low IQ, and larger penile sizes of African males. It is then quite simple to infer that a country with testosterone driven criminals would have low GDPs and GDP growth rates as Westling proposes. To understand the correlation between the ideas of Westling and Rushton, a more expansive discussion of Rushton is required.

Rushton uses intelligence and genital size to typecast Africans and ʻOrientalsʼ as being the victims of nature. As an African, one might have large genitalia but will be doomed to higher levels of testosterone, promiscuity, and sexual disease. These would shorten your life and you would also not be as intelligent as non-Africans. As an Asian, you would be the most intelligent but somewhat socially retarded by extra ʻcautiousnessʼ and ʻpassivity.ʼ While you would live the longest, your testosterone level would be lowest and thus your penis, the smallest. As a ʻWhiteʼ however, you would have all the required social and physical traits to be the ideal — intelligent enough for high ʻcultural achievementsʼ but with enough testosterone to be normal. You would not have grossly enlarged or shrunken penises. Graham Richards (1997) aptly describes Rushtonʼs central thesis:

His [Rushtonʼs] position may be summed up as a kind of Goldilocks story— Orientals have big brains but small genitalia, Africans have small brains but big genitalia, but Europeans Are Just Right.

Goodman (1996) agrees:

Rushton’s key contribution to science, I suggest, is a thermodynamic theory of evolution. One can either have sexual potency or smarts; it is either a big brain or a big penis.

However Goldman is only partially correct since Rushton also proposes that Europeans have just enough brain to not stunt their genitalia. It is for this reason that Westling has added fuel to the racist debate by publishing a discussion paper for an economic think tank adding legitimacy to Rushtonʼs claims. Westling has thus nuanced Rushtonʼs old claims by connecting penile lengths with GDP growth rates.


Westling states that he began this research article half-heartedly but was surprised to find that there was high correlation between GDP growth rates and penile size. However, this is premised upon his assumptions and data set. I propose to show that both are of questionable status. As per his assumptions, he writes:

The data regarding the physical dimensions of male organs is openly available online and has been compiled [by an unknown party] from an extensive number of sources. Large part of the data has been collected by health authorities but some observations are self-reported. Due to the sensitive nature of the subject matter, self-reported data might be biased, supposedly upwards. However, a moment of reflection with the global penile length distribution map and anecdotal ʻInternet-sourced evidenceʼ reveals that the self-reported figures are in-line with anticipated patterns. Still, measurement errors can not be ruled out. The physical dimension of male organ varies considerably across countries, the average being 14.5 centimetres. For example, South Korea and Zaire [now Dem. Rep. of the Congo] have average sizes of 9.66 and 17.93 centimetres, respectively.

A data source is only as trustworthy as the measurement methodology and source. Penis size studies are scarce and varied in methodology (Promodu et al. 2007) so that it is surprising that a ʻlargeʼ number of data would be collected by health authorities but only ʻsomeʼ self-reported. The use of affirmative ʻInternet-sourced evidenceʼ, which Westling does not list, is almost a sure sign of confirmation bias possibly rendering this work unscientific. The language used is also unscientific. Having one or even ten studies for an average national penile length does not warrant a firm matter-of-fact statement such as “The physical dimension of male organ varies considerably across countries, …” At most, all that could be legitimately stated is that one study found an average value for a specific country. Westling continues:

In many respects male organ can be considered quite convenient a variable. First, it represents a well defined and concrete object. Second, it is relatively easy to measure – erect length is used. Third, it is largely free from cultural connotations that might hound complex institutional variables, in particular. Hence in many ways male organ stands in contrast to other, more contentious variables such as indices of political institutions, IQ, social or economic indicators each of which might be subject to biases and measurement errors of multitude sorts.

The male organ is not a ʻwell definedʼ or ʻconcreteʼ object; it is more flexible (pun intended). There are differences in the methods used such as the conventional stretched method, erection by manual/visual stimulation, and erection by intravenous injection. Others use constant force devices for a stretched value and one French researcher stretched three times which produced a larger than expected value. The stretched length in some studies closely estimates the erect length but not in all. In most cases the stretched length is smaller than the erect length. Some researchers measure from the pubo-pelvic junction to the meatus and others from the pubic bone to the meatus (also called bone pressed) to accommodate the decrement caused by the pubic fat pad. While Westling states that the erect lengths are used (and it is for the U.S. at 12.9 cm), this is not the case for South Korea where the stretched bone pressed length (9.66 cm) is provided. The data are also not free of ʻculturalʼ connotation since the unknown Internet source will be shown to use data conveniently.

Comparing Data Sets

The table below displays only those nations which have peer-reviewed male organ studies. Granted, the bias here would be studies I could find online. However, it shows that the purported sizes promote a distinct organ size deflation against Asian nations (India and South Korea) while inflating those of South American, North African, and West Asian nations. To aid in analysis, the following terms have been used:

Multiplication Factor (MF) = purported/actual size [a measure of the purported size inaccuracy]
Conventional stretched method (CS)
Conventional stretch three times (CS3)
Erect length (E)
Non-bone pressed erect length (NBPEL)
Non-bone pressed stretched length (NBPSL)
Bone pressed erect length (BPEL)
Bone pressed stretched length (BPSL)
Self measured length (SeM)
Staff measured length (StM)

COUNTRY PURPORTED SIZE (cm) PEER REVIEW SIZE(cm) SAMPLE SIZE, METHODOLOGY NOTES SOURCE(S) Egypt 15.59 12.90 949, CS, BPSL MF = 1.21 Kamel et al. 2009 Nigeria 15.50 13.37 115, CS MF = 1.16 Orakwe, Ogbuagu & Ebuh 2006, Orakwe & Ebuh 2007 India 10.24 10.88 301, CS, NBPEL MF = 0.94, unreliable source: Jacobus X, Promodu et al. 2007 India 10.24 13.01 93, E, SeM, NBPEL Biased sample: from sex dysfunction clinic, MF = 0.79, most accurate value, self-reported value only +8 mm, SMP = 84.1% as above India 10.24 12.93 41, E, StM, NBPEL as above as above Israel 14.38 12.50 55, CS, BPEL, StM
Chen et al. 2000 Israel 14.38 13.60 55, E, BPEL, SeM MF = 1.06,
SMP = 91.9% as above South Korea 9.66 9.60 123, CS, NBPSL, StM NBPSL value is always used (even in peer-reviewed articles) even though BPEL is easily computed from data. Possible bias if samples suffered from urological problems Son et al.
2000 and
Son et al.
2003 South Korea 9.66 10.70 123, CS, BPSL, StM as above as above South Korea 9.66 14.06 287, E, BPEL MF = 0.69 Park et al. 1998 South Korea 9.66 13.42 150, E MF = 0.72 Yoon, Lee & Chang 1998 South Korea 9.66 9.60 156, CS, StM, NBPL Possible bias if samples suffered from urological problems. SMP = 80.67% Son 1999 10.80 156, E, StM, NBPEL 11.90 156, E, StM, BPEL South Korea  9.66 11.90 156, E, StM, BPEL Researchers admit sample bias as all were about to undergo urological surgery Choi et al. 2011 South Korea  9.66 11.70 144, CS, StM, BPL as above as above France 16.01 16.74 905, CS3 Large study but method is controversial (Sepowitz 2006) Bondil et al. 1992 as mentioned in Mondaini 2002 Germany 14.48 14.48 111, BPEL, SeM Samples less than 20 years old, older comparison sample too small (n = 32) Schneider et al. 2001 and Dillon, Chama & Honig 2008 Greece 14.37 12.18 52, CS MF = 1.21 Spyropoulos
et al. 2002 Italy 15.74 12.50 3300, CS, StM MF = 1.26 Ponchietti et al. 2001 and Dillon, Chama & Honig 2008 Italy 15.74 16.80 33, E Sample too small and biased by prostatectomy Briganti et al. 2007 USA 12.90 12.45 80, CS, NBPSL MF = 1.00 Wessells, Lue & McAninch 1996 12.89 80, E, NBPEL 15.74 80, E, BPEL USA 12.90 16.74 2770, CS, SeM Biased sample, measured to nearest 0.25 inch. Kinsey, Pomeroy & Martin 1948 Australia 13.31 15.99 156, E, SeM
Richters, Gerofi & Donovan 1995 as mentioned in Mondaini 2002 Turkey 14.11 8.98 200, CS MF = 1.11 Sengezer, Ozturk & Deveci 2002 12.70 200, E Turkey 14.11 13.44 42, CS
Savas et al.
2009Brazil16.1014.50150, EMF = 1.11da Ros et al. 1984 as mentioned in Mondaini 2002 and Dillon, Chama & Honig 2008Guatemala15.6715.0050, EMF = 1.04Granados-Loarca et al.2005Colombia17.0313.90130MF = 1.23Acuna and Villalba 2001


One point to note is that peer-reviewed only attests to the science in methodology not necessarily the conclusion. The conclusion until replicated, can be considered to be pending validation. For a study to qualify as scientific, it has to be repeated under the same conditions or variables. Another point is that there are differing measuring methodologies so that the MF is an inexact measure of the deviance of the purported value from the peer-reviewed values. Now, excluding biased and small samples (<100) as well as unconventional and self-measured methodologies, the inflated nationalities with MF values are Egypt (1.21), Colombia (1.23), Nigeria (1.16), Brazil (1.11), Italy (1.26), Turkey (1.11), and Israel (1.06). These countries are in South America, West Asia and North Africa. Deflated national organs include India (0.79) and South Korea (0.69), i.e. South and East Asia. A racial bias can be justifiably applied because the data did not include two previous 1998 South Korean studies with larger values. For India, the source (Jacobus X) proposes: “The average size appeared to me to be about 5 inches long, by 1¼ in diameter” which would be 12.70 cm not 10.24 cm as claimed.

The data for India is NBPEL (12.93 cm) indicating (slightly) longer penises than Americans (12.89 cm NBPEL). The Indian sample was chosen from a sexual dysfunction clinic. In said article, the authors state: “Previous studies on phallic dimensions (Table 1) are limited and there is a wide difference in methodology. So far no study has been reported on this topic from India.” Since this 2007 study is the most recent, why is the Jacobus data given? Jacob Sutor (also known as Jacobus X) was a supposed French army surgeon, claiming to have traveled extensively measuring both male and female ethnic genitalia. Cernovsky (1995) refers to this book as a “nonscientific semipornographic book.” Brace (1996) and MacEachern (2006) also question its validity. The bookʼs most famous proponent is J. P. Rushton whose claims are routinely used on non-scientific websites (e.g. penis size surveys and forums).

The American study (Wessells, Lue & McAninch 1996) only consisted of 10 Asians in the sample of 80 (Mondaini & Gontero 2005). This means that if Americans have Kinseyʼs purported 16.74 cm NBPEL penises, the Asians in the Wessel study would have negative 14.06 cm organs when stretched (assuming erect = stretched which is not necessarily valid, see entry at 2012-08-17 below). Clearly, the data from the two U.S. studies do not match. Not surprisingly, the self-reported data collated by a psychologist offered greater lengths than the measured study performed by urologists. South Korea has the smallest correlation with actual measured values. If one argues that this is cherry picking of data because there are three sources with possibly unbiased values for South Korea (Park et al. 1998, Yoon, Lee & Chang 1998, Son 1999), the value for the average of these studies (n = 593) is 13.33cm for an MF of 0.72, still less than India. Using all five South Korean studies changes the MF to 0.76 (n = 860).

The purported value of 9.66 cm is actually close to the value of 9.60 cm found in one infamous study. This study (Son et al. 2003) is routinely used to show how South Koreans and all East Asians by stereotypical extension (all [East] Asians are the same [even down there]). Son et al. (2003) is a replica of Son et al. (2000), which is a continuation of Son (1999). In both the 2003 and 1999 studies, the stretched length remains the same (9.60 cm). However, this is the non-bone pressed stretched length and not the non-bone pressed erect length, which would be closer to 11.70 cm (Son et al. 2003) or 10.80 cm (Son 1999). Given that there were studies with larger values, why was an average not used? Perhaps the ʻunknown partyʼ who collected the results did not know of their existence. In looking at peer-reviewed urological studies (e.g. Wylie & Eardley 2006, Mehraban, Salehi & Zayeri 2007, Promodu et al. 2007) however, the same 9.6 cm value study is consistently used as the sole representative of South Korea studies. Additionally, some peer-reviewed studies used Internet Surveys (Awwad et al. 2005, Granados-Loarca et al. 2005) and Rushtonʼs data (Granados-Loarca et al. 2005). Thus, one cannot expect that peer review would adequately filter out questionable and unscientific sources even when ethnic genitalia is involved.

The South Korean sample descriptions would indicate that the men were suffering from poor self-image due to their perceived size. For instance, 25% of the sample in Son (1999) considered themselves “small” or “very small” while over 24% considered themselves similarly in Son et al. (2003). Thus, Son (1999) is named Normal Penile Size and Self Esteem about Penile Size of the Third Decade Men in Korea, Son et al. (2000) is The Psychological Study on the Self Esteem about Penile Size of the Third Decade Men in Korea and Son (2003) is Studies on self-esteem of penile size in young Korean military men. All three studies were focused on self-esteem and this could have skewed the data. This is likely since Choi et al. (2011) is said to be sample biased but recorded CS lengths some 2.1 cm longer than Son (2003). Park et al. (1998) also found stretched lengths of 12.30 cm with a range of 8.5 to 17 cm.

Turkish studies also present a South Korean type problem in that one study finds a smaller value for average stretched length than another. Sengezer, Ozturk & Deveci (2002) found an average of 8.68 cm for stretched and 12.70 cm for erect length (n = 200) while Savas et al. (2009) found a stretched average of 13.44 cm (n = 34) even though all had erectile dysfunction. It is thus better to use larger studies with unbiased samples. Yet another problem is the flat values given for different male organs. Instead of the average erect value, penile dimensions should be given in the following format: The average <insert country> effective (i.e. BPL) erect (not stretched) penile length is x ± a cm with a median of y ± b cm with a range of c to d cm for a sample of n normal healthy randomly sampled males using the intravenous injection (most accurate) measurement method. Only when a study can offer this level of detail (and none has yet), can science make proper pronouncements about the penis from which Westling can then perform his analysis.


Using Internet data can be useful but the sources need to be verified and the data normalized. In the case of the male organ, some studies have sample bias (samples have urological issues), others are self-reported (inflated), and some are measured differently so that extrapolations on the GDP growth rate would not be possible unless only scientific sources are available. Care must also be taken to not use peer-reviewed referenced data that has similarly been sourced from an Internet poll or survey. Westling (2011) has not done this but has explained away the problematic and contentious racial/ethnic issues using unscientific Internet anecdotes. Clearly there is a data bias (perhaps unintentional) against South and East Asians. However, the use of Rushton-like commentary by Westling does not bode well for the masses looking to validate their ethnic hegemonic masculinities through loose scientific veneers.

Top 5 Fantasy Series That Deserve To Be On TV

Top 5 Fantasy Series That Deserve To Be On TV

External image

Have you ever come across a book that’s so rich in world detail and character that you think to yourself, “Oh my gosh, I can totally picture this on HBO.” Brotha, you ain’t alone in that regard. I seem to pick a lot of my choice reads (and rereads) based on how cinematically written the work is, which is partially why I do all those dream casting blogs too! But thanks to the success of “Game of…

View On WordPress

ELECTRIC LIGHT ORCHESTRA Unexpected Messages (1996 UK AUTOGRAPHED 382-page softback book by Patrick Guttenbacher, Marc Haines and Alexander Von Petersdorf. It tells the story of ELO, The Move, Jeff Lynne, Roy Wood and Bev Bevan, including all members of ELO past and present and their respective solo careers. Fully illustrated throughout with complete world discography. The title page has been signed by the three authors and various members of ELO related bands including Bev Bevan, Danny King, Dave Pritchard, Greg Masters, Richard Tandy, Michael D'Albuquerque, Mik Kaminski, Louis Clark, Dave Morgan, the late Kelly Groucutt, Eric Troyer, Phil Bates, Trevor Burton and the late Carl Wayne. A superb collector’s item - packed with signatures from Birmingham’s finest!).

Just another night… Favourite room ever designed by Richard Ohrbach and Lynn Jacobson and featuring the Edward Fields carpet of my dreams. Photo by Shig Ikeda for Viva, October 1975. 💛❤️💜 This room was also included in a Vogue, November 1973 editorial by Kourken Pakchanian. 💛❤️💜
(at Clinton Hill Historic District)

SBHM Guest: Lynn Balabanos on Lesser Known Heroes & Heroines of Black History Month

SBHM Guest: Lynn Balabanos on Lesser Known Heroes & Heroines of Black History Month

External image

Hi friends! So we’re doing this! Celebrating Smithsonian Heritage Months again! I’ve been asking anyone and everyone to participate, and today we have a contribution from Lynn Balabanos. :D I hope you’ll check out what she has to say! The numerous contributions the Black community has made to the fabric of our country are inspiring and instrumental. Most of us learn about the heavy hitters in…

View On WordPress

[NEW RELEASE | REVIEW] Love On The Jersey Shore by Richard Natale
External image

Can new love stand the trials and tribulations of the world? That’s what Frank and Anthony Ragucci try to understand and come to terms with in this enjoyable tale of “Love on the Jersey Shore” by Richard Natale. The story is told in a 3rd person point of view of Frankie and Anthony’s growing up together as cousins and trying to navigate the land mines of love. Anthony is an out and proud gay man…

View On WordPress
Mold Your Success With These Three Keynote Speakers for National Mentoring Month! | Eagles Talent Speakers Bureau
In case you haven’t heard, January is National Mentoring Month.

Mentors have a special place in the hearts of many. As you may know, mentors do the honor of cultivating success in the lives of others through a mutually beneficial and rewarding professional relationship. Similar to friendships, mentorships grow organically as one party sees potential in another, and seeks to help that person succeed. At Eagles Talent Speakers Bureau, we are honored to have many successful keynote speakers on our site, and a lot of these speakers have prevailed with the help of someone there to guide them. Here are three keynote speakers who have had tremendous success with their mentors:

1. Mark Thompson

When it comes to mentoring, Mark Thompson knows just how important it can be. Together with Sir Richard Branson, Thompson created Virgin United, a network that creates executive coaching and entrepreneurial innovation. This organization, along with Thompson’s keynote presentations, inspires individuals to reexamine their professional goals, while providing adequate advice and insight on how to achieve your dreams.

2. Kwame Jackson

Love him or hate him, it’s undeniable that Donald Trump is one of America’s most successful businessman. That’s why it’s no secret that his apprentice, Kwame Jackson became successful in his own right. As a contestant on NBC’s The Apprentice, Jackson quickly rose to the top, capitalizing on business skills that he learned from Wall Street, and The Donald himself. As a keynote speaker, Jackson emphasizes his unique business skills as he encourages audience members to go out and capitalize their entrepreneurial skills.

3. Dr. Traci Lynn

It’s not hard to feel inspired after hearing Dr. Traci Lynn speak. After all, she has accomplished a great deal of success in her lifetime. However, Traci soon found her calling after hearing motiavational speaker Les Brown light up an entire room with his fiery, yet, passionate rhetoric. Since then, Traci Lynn has become a dynamic keynote speaker in her own right, as Les Brown and other industry greats continue to embrace her messages of courage, determination, and success.

If you are ready to start searching for your next speaker for an up and coming event, Contact Eagles Talent Speakers Bureau today

slave’s new name

I’ve given my slave whore a new name, she is now only referred to as “bitch” she has no other name. who and what she once was ceases to exist now. there is no more tyrissa lynn richards

External image

Crianças só poderão ver o filme acompanhadas dos pais

Depois de divulgada a imagem de Charly (Sheri Moon Zombie) lutando com Sick Head (Pancho Moler) no filme 31, outras duas fotos foram lançadas. Uma mostrando Sick Head tapando a boca de uma Sheri Moon Zombie assustada (abaixo), talvez se relacionando com a foto divulgada anteriormente, e outra mostrando o personagem Levon (Kevin Jackson) em um beco sem saída (acima). Será que ele vai sobreviver ao jogo?

31 chegará aos cinemas com classificação R, ou seja, menores só poderão entrar no cinema acompanhados pelos pais. Zombie precisou editar o filme três vezes para evitar a classificação etária máxima, mas já afirmou que a versão sem cortes será lançada em home video.

O elenco de 31 inclui ainda Meg Foster, Judy Geeson, Jeff Daniel Phillips, Jane Carr, Richard Brake, Ginger Lynn, Malcolm McDowell, David Ury, Daniel Roebuck, Lawrence Hilton-Jacobs, Tracy Walter, E.G. Daily, Torsten Voges, Lew Temple, Bari Suzuki e Devin Sidell.

31 é a história de cinco funcionários de uma feira de diversões sequestrados na véspera do Dia das Bruxas e mantidos reféns em um galpão secreto chamado Murder World. Uma vez lá, eles terão doze horas para sobreviver a um jogo assustador chamado 31, no qual os The Heads, maníacos assassinos vestidos de palhaços, são libertados para caçá-los e matá-los.

Será que Levon sobreviverá ao jogo 31? Depois de divulgada a imagem de Charly (Sheri Moon Zombie) lutando com Sick Head (
The oceanfront tree house

A couple spent $20 000 on an oceanfront tree house.

What Richard Hazen calls his ‘childhood dream’ is now a nightmare.

Richard Hazen and his wife Lynn Tran built their tree trunk hideaway overlooking the Gulf of Mexico.

The couple has been told to tear the tree house down or prepare to face fines of $500 a day because they didn’t get planning permission.

Richard and Lynn say they had permission from the council but that it wasn’t given in writing.

An official working at the time told them such a document wasn’t necessary.

The official smiled, ‘go ahead, no permit is required, just make it safe so no one falls out,’ and so Richard began to build.

The couple and the tree house are not going down without a fight.

They have hired an attorney to help them sort through codes and confusion. They have also reached out to the community for support.

An online petition to save the tree house had more than 1,000 signatures.