30
Sep
15

๐Ÿ”ด Scribblings Oct-Dec 2015

 

๐Ÿ”ด Scribblings and Scuttlebutt Oct-Dec 2015

 
This is where I post my thoughts and reblog stuff from other sites I find interesting or topical, mostly topics from Twitter, Tumblr and blogs. Mostly discussion in Scribblings in the past has tended to be about the story, characters, their relationships, the timeline plus various controversies in the fandom. โ€“ Lightly edited. Reverse chronological.
โ€“ LizzieB90


Permalink for this page: http://wp.me/pDKwi-1Hz Comments on this page are open. It’s set up so you have to provide a name and email, but you don’t have to register. No “anonymous”es, please. It’s set for nesting comments three levels deep. ( Hope it works. ) OR just email me at LizzieB90@yahoo.com or tag me on Twitter @BlacklistDCd.

 

เผบ โ™ค โŠฐ ๐Ÿ”ด โŠฑ โ™ค เผป
========================

โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”
11:00 am CST December 9, 2015
LizzieB90 wrote:

By now, you’ve probably noticed all the reconstruction and house-keeping going on. I hope you are able to find everything. I’ve been experimenting with new types of navigation, some of it rather whimsical. I do think you might enjoy the Storybook feature, which is intended to be like a โ€ฆ storybook, or graphic novel.

If you encounter problems, you can send me an email at LizzieB90@yahoo.com or tag me in a Tweet (@BlacklistDCd.) There’s also a form to fill out at the bottom of the Black Sites section. That too is a feature you might like.

I was proud when this site reached 100,000 hits a week or so ago โ€“ almost exactly a year after I started it up, having no idea what would be involved. It’s been so much fun! I was thrilled to learn #TheBlacklist is a go for a fourth season. Thank you to everyone who visits here. I only hope to increase in some small way your appreciation of this incredible show. โ™ก เฝฒโ€ขฬฎอกโ€ข เซ‚ เพ€ โ™ก

โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”
1:55 pm December 4, 2015
WSJ Tessa wrote:
So Red graduates by 1983. The cabal is supposed to have started by 1985. and the cold war went from 1947-1991. So Red caught spies at least from 1883 to the end of 1990, when he disappeared. Possibly, if he was already catching spies while in the academy from 1979-1983. But for sure from 1983-1991
It is possible that in the years he disappeared he was still working, until 1994, when the documents showed up.
However, in 1992, according to the comic Red was already in contact with Sebastian Royce and they were stealing diplomatic bags and having adventures in Asia trying to make his fortune. It is possible that the whole of Royce adventure was an undercover job to get to Royce. Apparently Royce family was killed because the FBI failed to protect them. Royce was an FBI agent undercover. The FBI erased any record that he ever existed.

But in the seven years he was in the counterintelligence he became KGB’s biggest enemy. He met Liz’s mother , he attended Ballerina girl’s performance of Swan Lake in the ballet school, he lived in the blue house, and he married Carla. After 1985, but before 1989 the fulcrum came into play and was stolen, by then he knew Fitch. The fulcrum was stolen and the fire happened. A lot of things have happened in those 7 years.

โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”
12/5/2015
by LizzieB90
BlacklistDeclassified.net Volume Stats for The Blacklist
Season 3, Episodes 1-8 (up to Winter Hiatus)
 
image
 
Highest week highlighted in orange (with stats) was week of Enioch Cain, followed by Sir Crispin Crandall and the Season Finale, Kings of the Highway.

โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”
12/3/2014 Posted as plain links on WSJ

Table of Contents to TessalTheorist’s Tumblr Site

Understanding Red-speak
The trick box of TB
Liz changes about Red (This is from Liz’s perspective)
IS Red Liz father (This from the audience point of view)
Liz’s mom
Who is Carla (1)
Who is Carla (2)
Bubble girl connections
Understanding the fire scenes
Who is bubble girl. Liz?

 
โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”

Below: Some of the more thoughtful ideas from WSJ blog ld stripped of most of the shipper-bashing which makes the blog so unpleasant. LizzieB90

========================
WSJ CES2 wrote:
@Blonde Anon

is this the basis of “Liz being a clone of Katrina” theory? The blacklist generally takes more interesting breakthroughs in science and puts its own spin on them

(1986) A mouse was successfully cloned from an early embryonic cell. Soviet scientists Chaylakhyan, Veprencev, Sviridova, and Nikitin had the mouse “Masha” cloned. Research was published in the magazine “Biofizika” volume ะฅะฅะฅII, issue 5 of 1987

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloning#Species_cloned

โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”
WSJ 8:38 pm December 4, 2015
WSJ Anonymous wrote:

Maybe Liz was a child conceived in a “warrior gene project” — the genes of several individuals known to have the warrior gene were mixed, re-combined to create the perfect “warrior child,” to see if perfect agents/spies could be engineered. Red could have been one of the individuals whose DNA was used in this project — so he’s sort of Liz’s father, but it’s not that simple because he’s not her only father, she has many. Katarina may have supplied DNA as well. Maybe Naomi was a surrogate, who carried the warrior babies. Maybe Tom is a result of that same engineering — that’s why Red knew of Tom’s background as well. Maybe that’s why Red made that comment about Tom and him being alike in many ways (can’t remember the exact words). Maybe that’s why he was trying so hard to keep Liz and Tom apart — combining the uber warrior genes into an uber warrior child could result in one dangerous kid. And, Liz and Tom would be a tad brother and sister. Just trying to come up with a theory on the Liz Red connection that works with what seems painfully obvious — father/daughter — but might constitute: we haven’t even begun to touch upon their true relationship. โ€ฆ

 
โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”
WSJ 5:46 pm December 4, 2015
WSJ A.B. wrote:
Tessa, I like your timeline. The start of cold war fall started around 1986. Cabal being build in 1985 makes perfect sense, but I think it was even earlier. Time to get things ready. Them getting around in the USSR’s bussiness soon after, accelarating the fall of the whole comunist easter block seems right. They infiltrating to bring down not only USSR, even thought is the culmination, again fits. Starting with Berlin’s wall, Romanian Revolution and USSR’s fall in a very short time. They prepared the ground and hit all at once. They helped a lot.
What I dont get is Katarina and her age. Just like you said lot happened in 7 years. If we asume Katarina is the same age as Red and Liz was born indeed in 1984, then Katarina was 24 and by the looks of it, she gave up being a spy or fully a spy after Liz was born. So while Red in a short time became KGB’s bigget enemy, Katarina got her fame ina short time also? Hard to believe. The OREA agent was speaking of KR as a fully achivied agent with many years of service.
Btw, I believe Red becamea spy around 1981.

 
โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”
1:55 pm December 4, 2015
WSJ Tessa wrote:
So Red graduates by 1983. The cabal is supposed to have started by 1985. and the cold war went from 1947-1991. So Red caught spies at least from 1883 to the end of 1990, when he disappeared. Possibly, if he was already catching spies while in the academy from 1979-1983. But for sure from 1983-1991
It is possible that in the years he disappeared he was still working, until 1994, when the documents showed up.
However, in 1992, according to the comic Red was already in contact with Sebastian Royce and they were stealing diplomatic bags and having adventures in Asia trying to make his fortune. It is possible that the whole of Royce adventure was an undercover job to get to Royce. Apparently Royce family was killed because the FBI failed to protect them. Royce was an FBI agent undercover. The FBI erased any record that he ever existed.

But in the seven years he was in the counterintelligence he became KGB’s biggest enemy. He met Liz’s mother , he attended Ballerina girl’s performance of Swan Lake in the ballet school, he lived in the blue house, and he married Carla. After 1985, but before 1989 the fulcrum came into play and was stolen, by then he knew Fitch. The fulcrum was stolen and the fire happened. A lot of things have happened in those 7 years.

 
โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”
1:26 pm December 4, 2015
WSJ Tessa wrote:
Belle,

Thanks, my pages are meant to be informative. But I do like your theory #4. very messed up, but satisfying in a way. I do think also some of Reddy Bear ideas have merit.

About the Stewmaker: I do think there was a change in direction there. I think originally the girl was supposed to be a girl, and then they added the idea that she fell in love with a dissident. Although I was plenty in love at 12. And in Russia or Germany at that time even the mildest things were transgressions. That world seems far now, but it was awful. I think the girl was supposed to be dead then, and there was a change.
I think whenever we see a change os scene, and the characters are in a different position assume there has been a scene you have not seen. For example in the hospital scene between Red and Sam. In the cabin scenes between Carla and Red. In the car scene at the end of Connolly between Red and Liz. the missing scene between Red and Tom after the shooting. Lots of scenes between Red and Liz in season 3.

Now the cabal started, acceding to Red 30 years ago. That basically coincides with the ending of the Soviet Union. I think the cabal stated as a good thing. trying to keep the world balanced, and eventually became about power and money and influence. I have always said that in the cold war the intelligence agencies had more in common with one another than with the people they were supposed to keep safe. That makes it about 1985, the year the regime of Gorbachev started. so the cold war was not most of it kept or made by the cabal, as the cold war started after the end of the WWII in 1945, mostly agreed on by 1947. In 1991 the Soviet Union was dissolved. The Berlin wall was opened at the end of 1989, and demolished in 1990. The cold war thus lasted from 1947 to 1991.

 
โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”
7:48 am December 4, 2015
WSJ Tessa wrote:
Fair enough Reddy Bear. You are very eloquent in your description.
I imagine that even if TPTB do acknowledged in some details (I think they do, the proof to me is the child drawing of the family in the fire house, the look Liz gives a woman with a baby in The Freelancer, etc, etc., and a series of other small clues that are only seen in subsequent consecutive re watches) the series is probably planned with the non-over-analysing fans in mind, so eventually things will be revealed.
So it is like a Russian nesting doll. layers and layers of clues.
But as far as the Raymond let go. I hear it even without the clean audio.
But the fun is in sharing ideas. I enjoy sharing my extremely analyzed ones, at le

 
โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”
10:17 am December 4, 2015
WSJ Belle wrote:
I heard “Raymond let go too,” Tessa, using my headphones. And most people that watch online do use headphones.

I’m so glad that you are sharing your ideas, Tessa. Because you are doing a great deal of work, contributing your time and effort, and making it easier for the rest of us. When I have a question about any details,. I can use your tumblr page as a resource. Thanks so much.

About the way clues are given in the show, there is something else that bothers me. It was the way they handled the resolution to the Stewmaker photo and how it connected to Berlin.

In the case of the Stewmaker’s picture, we had no way of knowing that Red found the picture of the girl on the body of a dead associate, that happened off screen. We had no way of knowing that Red had talked to the Stewmaker about the picture, right before he killed him. That happened off screen. I don’t care how closely anyone paid attention to details leading up to that episode, until Red told Berlin the story, no viewer would have figured that one out. (To make matters worse, in โ€œThe Stewmakerโ€ episode,we saw Red enter the cabin, we heard him tell the parable of the farmer, and we saw him dump the Stewmaker into the acid… but we never heard Red ask the Stewmaker questions about the picture of the girl.) Those were two very important off screen details that played a role in the solution to the Berlin arc.

But the writers did not give us any clues in any way shape or form to help us. Instead we labored over the story Berlin told to Ressler and Liz in the hospital about a dissident, and bones and tried to figure out how all that fit into Red’s timeline (or any timeline!). In fact, I know several theorists that quit watching the show over this, because they felt it was now a waste of time to ever pay attention to clues anymore. The writers had cheated in a way, giving us a solution by using something that occurred off screen that we were not privy to. They had also stretched the revelation of that clue (the picture) from episode 1.3 all the way to episode 2.8. A long time to wait for an unsatisfying resolution.

So this bothers me to think that they may once again use details withheld from the audience as solutions to ongoing mysteries. And they certainly can’t even be considered “clues” if they were never provided to the audience for consideration. It seems a little unfair, as if there was a missing chapter in a mystery novel.

@Reddy Bear, I like your theory much better than my dire number 4. . You have taken all of Red admirable qualities and made them fit into a very plausible scenario. I also have always liked the traditional “hero who lost his family and is seeking justice” theme. But I was not sure the writers would take the traditional route that some other shows have.

James Spader also said (2014) that even if the solution to the mystery of their connection was the simplest and most obvious one (daddy?), that the journey getting there would be enjoyable. But more recently, Megan Boone said that the reason for Red and Liz’s connection would be even more surprising than we imagined. How can a solution be both obvious and simple on one hand, yet surprising on the other? I’m not sure anymore that we can trust what is said in interviews.

Reddy Bear, I keep forgettting about the Warrior gene, but I do agree it may play an important role, because it sure does seem like there is something wrong with Liz, and I don’t think it is merely Post Traumatic Stress from trauma. She is an adult now, and has had special training as a federal agent to deal with stress. But so many things that have happened to her in the last two years are identical to those triggers that Dr. Creel spoke of. But was someone intentionally causing all these life changes and stressors… or were they unintentional and just fate? (Another reason to suspect Red I suppose, if he has always known that Liz carried the gene.)

I believe that James Spader recently said that they have not yet begun to explain why Red is in Liz’s life, or what Red is really up to. Perhaps all the clues from season one and two that seem out of place (Red’s search for the truth about what happened to his family and his conversation with Diane before he killed her, or the annual Swan Lake ballet), will deal directly with Red’s agenda, and everything else has been a tangent, one of those side roads off the true path to the truth. Red had to deal with Berlin, and Berlin led to Tom being shot and Liz’s problems with the Harbormaster’s death, and the introduction of Connolly. Perhaps things are not going as planned for Red, and these are all unexpected “distractions.” Perhaps the Fulcrum also is secondary to what Red is really up to. I’m not even sure that Katerina is important to the present, perhaps only to the past.

But I agree with you Tessa. As long as it’s still fun to play with the clues, I’ll keep watching and speculating about the possibilities.

 
โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”
5:45 am December 4, 2015
WSJ Reddy Bear wrote:
Belle,

Very nice work to put down all your theories! And oh my… your forth theory is my fav but not really what I thought. Because I don’t think Red is that bad. It’s quite the opposite in fact. What I think is that he has never been bad, he has been cheated.

I just make a break here, by not bad I mean he’s not a diabolic character. He has a bad side because of what I call his criminal past, which is the period between his disapearance and now. He admit it himself, most of the crimes he’s been accused of are real.

So, for me he was working for the US intelligence, as a Russian spy hunter during the Cold War (which could explain how he met Katarina, and why he has this mysterious/weird sort of great admiration). My guess is that he may have been close to a specific program, involving this warrior gene. He was doing that in a good way, the way all Americans have been taught, “reds/communists are the big bad”. Then he learned or realized that all (the Cold War) was planned and built by the Alliance, a fake war for their own interests. In an attempt to make it public, the Cabal started to be after him.

And his relationship with Liz is either hasard through the warrior gene program or/and through friendship with her dad or mom. He also has a natural bond with kids, moreover innocent kids used in whatever bad program, this has been demonstrated in several cases, Dembe is the greatest example. Which could explain why he saved her. Also what I explained yesterday, I think he saved her also to save himself. And never planned to meet her again.

He can’t be that bad otherwise he would have forced Liz to give him the Fulcrum since the day he knew for sure she had it. And he never did that, even when he was threatened to death. (also his “Lizzy” just before Yabaari tried to kill him)

The whole FBI surrendering is totally out of his bigger plan. And him being with Liz all the time, even more. All what he’s doing since the Pilot is “on the fly” planning, because of Berlin/Tom and then the Alliance that started to doubt he was reliable (= working silently on his own business, with no interference with the Alliance) as he was suddenly working with the FBI. But his bigger plan is not linked to that and we may not have a single bit of what it is all about, yet. But it’s all very well planned and can exist without him and Mr Kaplan is aware of it.

I remember James Spader’s reaction about Red’s redemption. Mabye he meant that he can’t redempt himself because he’s been too far? The sin eater “I absorb the misdeeds of others, darkening my soul to keep theirs pure”, could well explain why there’s no possible redemption. That would be too easy.

 
โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”
5:35 am December 4, 2015
WSJ Reddy Bear wrote:
Tessa,

>So the man fighting with the woman was called Raymond. this is the man Liz shot. Then she says she shot her father. A man called Raymond. So are you suggesting then that Red is not Red. Not clear here

I’m not suggesting anything like that.
For the simple reason this “Raymond” that some hear in the reccording is far from being clear enough to be taken as a proof or anything.

All the very detailed analysis of the memory recovery session means nothing for me and can’t be taken as proof unless it’s thrown big in the viewers face. Like the rabbit was for the Fulcrum. Like the red ring, certainly.

It’s a TV show not meant to be over analysed screen by screen, and a cleaned version of the memory recovery dialogues is not what is shown on screen.

I just laughed when people spent time playing with the Katarina photo, saying it was a guy and lots of theories all around. It just ended up being what could be seen by normal viewer in the very short time it appeared on screen: a woman with no face, with a girl, on a swinger.

This is how I take this show. Unless it proofs we should dig deeper, I’m alligned with what Belle said:

“So I’m not sure that the writers are targeting an audience of detail orientated diehard Blacklist fans. If the writers believe that the ordinary viewer is not paying attention to each and every (possible) clue, they may not bother to offer subtle hints that might be overlooked. ”

It doesn’t mean I don’t love over analising like you all do here. I just take a step back with this, between the fun of the detective game, and being realistic. And I just don’t go against people like you do, taking these over looked details for proof and pretending what they say makes no sense.

There’re plenty of details of that kind (Tom’s scars that disapeared, Hudson, just to list the most famous) that show they are not playing that card to build this TV show mystery.

Also, Jon Bokenkamp himself called Pepper’s key “a little Easter egg”. This set the level of what they call details. They are playing with “big detail”s (Pepper’s key, the rabbit), and with the way it’s filmed, it’s acted, the emotions and dialogues. These are very important. At least, it’s my point of view and how I try to understand the show.

 
โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”
8:49 pm December 3, 2015
WSJ Belle wrote:
Surprise: Theory four. (This one is simliar to Reddy Bear’s theory)

What I fear most is the following theory, that may be the route the show runners take to provide the most bang and shock as their final reveal. It goes against everything I have come to believe (and admire) about Red, but it’s very possible. (They’ve already gone for the shock value when they revealed that Red had hired Tom to enter Liz’s life, even though the first season led us to believe it was Berlin.) I used to joke that if Red was not Liz’s father, then an exciting alternative would be that he has just been a master manipulator all along, and has been playing everyone, including Lizzie.

I used to believe that every โ€œbadโ€ thing Red did was for a greater good, but a cast event in New York City in 2014 changed my mind. When the moderator asked if Red was a villain who did heroic things, or if he was a good man who did bad things, producer John Fox listed all Red’s possible motives. Red’s agenda was possibly revenge, self preservation or perhaps Red was seeking redemption. But hearing the word โ€œredemption,โ€ James Spader spoke up and laughed and said โ€œGod I hope not!โ€ He insisted that Red was a bad man. A very bad man. So Red was not seeking redemption, if James Spader had anything to say about it. (That always bothered me, because I always wanted to believe that Red had good intentions, a noble motive and there was a very good reason for everything he has ever done, and that the end justified the means.)

It’s possible that every single expression of affection or concern for Liz has all been part of an elaborate long term agenda, to manipulate and control Liz, in order to use her in some way. He had to protect her as part of his own self preservation. Perhaps he has always been a deep cover operative himself and has never had any family, or perhaps he is seeking to get revenge for the death of his family. Red may only need Liz and the task force in order to do battle with a powerful adversary. He needed to grow close to her and earn her trust, so he systematically removed every source of emotional support from her life. First he killed her adoptive father Sam, then forced her husband Tom to disengage from his mission, and finally he made sure she would lose the support of the task force. He cares nothing for Liz, except that she will serve to be the weapon he needs to rid himself of a life long threat. It’s possible that his true ultimate adversary, number one on the Blackliist, is Liz’s biological father. It’s possible that just as Fitch and Diane Fowler argued, Red may end up being the threat, and not the patriot.

(But gee I hope not!)

 
โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”
8:41 pm December 3, 2015
WSJ Belle wrote:
Theory two and three.

-It’s possible that Red followed in his father’s footsteps when he joined Naval Intelligence, by serving in the military. Because Red told Liz that he was not her father, and because he seems to have a familial connection to her, perhaps Liz and Red had the same father, but different mothers. The hand of the man that put Liz into the closet and gave her the rabbit seems to be the hand of an older man. It’s possible Red’s father was the one who hid the Fulcrum and Liz from Katerina, the mother of his late in life child. There was also a photo of a man in a World War II uniform displayed in Red’s apartment. Perhaps this was Red’s father, and the ring that was seen in Liz’s memories could have either been an Army or Navy Ring. Red may have been present at the fire to help his father and to save his step sister, but the man heard in the argument may have been his father. His father (also named Raymond) may have been shot, and Red believes that he died the night of the fire.

-Red is not really Raymond Reddington. But as a well trained operative, (perhaps Russian), he had been given the assignment or mission (by the government ) to take on that identity. It may have been a plan by the US government to keep the Cabal’s power in check, to infiltrate their hierarchy. Or it may have been a plan by the Cabal to use a fake Raymond Reddington to do their bidding, place one of their assets into a position of power to steal intelligence. People like Fitch or Diane Fowler may have been his handlers. The night that Raymond Reddington disappeared on Christmas eve 1990, was the night that the man we know as Red began to transform into that new identity. The length of time until he resurfaced was long enough to undergo plastic surgery and extensive preparation in order to take on his new identity. But something happened to change Red’s allegiance, and he wanted out of the mission. So he used the theft of the Fulcrum as an insurance policy to escape from them (he may not originally have taken the fulcrum, only the other components that he stowed away with several Blacklisters for safe keeping, the key and the case). Perhaps Katerina was the one that hid the bubble module in the bunny. He secretly placed Liz with Sam and began to use his talents and abilities as a criminal to amass wealth, and global associates and allies. He built a reputation among the criminals and earned their trust and respect. Red had to pretend to be a highly regarded Naval intelligence officer who had dropped off the radar and come back three years later to sell government secrets to the highest bidder. So Liz is not Raymond Reddington’s daughter, she is the daughter of the man that Red used to be, his original identity.

-Just an afterthought: Is it possible that if Red was placed in the US as a Russian operative to take on the identity of Raymond Reddington, that Katerina was the operative that was placed with him, as his wife to take on the identity of Carla Reddington? If the real Carla (Naomi) was safely put into protective custody, perhaps Katerina took her place as Mrs. Reddington? Perhaps Katerina used her own daughter to play the role of Jennifer.

 
โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”
8:33 pm December 3, 2015
WSJ Belle wrote:
Theories I tend to favor: Number one.

-It’s possible that Red was assigned a mission to spy on Katerina Rostova, but then inadvertently fell in love with his target. Maybe he was given the task to escort her to Washington if she decided to defect in the mid 80s. It’s possible that she told Red that she was pregnant with her husband’s child, but in fact there may have been several men that could have been the biological father, due to multiple partners (including Red). But perhaps in an effort to protect herself and her unborn child, Katerina told everyone that her husband was the biological father. He may have been a powerful and important Russian politician who had been in intelligence.

Red may have spent more and more time with Katerina, and when the child was born, he may have moved them into a house to live together as a family. That may be why Naomi seemed to be bitter, especially about Red’s connection to Liz, and about the cabin in the woods where Red brought Naomi to stay after he rescued her from Berlin. Perhaps Katerina was the one that stole the Fulcrum originally, and Red took it from her in an effort to protect himself and the 4 year old girl he had come to love as his own daughter. But Katerina’s powerful husband tracked them down, and confronted them on the night of the fire, demanding the Fulcrum to be returned to the Cabal, and demanding to know the location of his daughter. (Liz was told that she may mix up the participants or their roles in the events of the fire, so perhaps the male and female voices were interchanged at times in her memory.)

This is the theory that I tend to believe the most, that Red was present at Liz’s birth (Red played this song โ€œYou Were Bornโ€ by Cloud Cult

when Liz was recovering in the hospital in โ€œThe Front.โ€)

Red may not have the correct DNA to ever prove that he was her step father, and he may not be her biological father, but Red has always shown that he considers himself her father with every word, every deed, and every expression on his face. In every sense of the word, he is her father, he loves her as a father loves his child. And as I explained in an earlier post, his words to Sam โ€œYou will always be her father, Sam. I can only hope to love and care for her as you have,โ€ tell me that Red is thanking Sam for raising Liz, for doing what Red was unable to do, because he had to keep her safe. He told Sam he would now take over that role, and be a father to Liz. If this was not exactly what Sam believed, he would have spoken up, but he did not.

 
โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”
8:31 pm December 3, 2015
WSJ Belle wrote:
โ€ฆ
Like most people that post here at WSJ (and on other forums), I admit I probably over-analyze and try to remember every single detail of every single episode. I probably see clues where there aren’t any, or give too much importance to things that just aren’t important. But that is all part of the challenge, to try to decide what is a genuine clue, and what is a red herring. Most ordinary everyday viewers are not like us. Most do not watch every episode several times, study script and screen caps, or live and breathe all things Blacklist. Most ordinary viewers may not remember what happened in the last episode, or in the first season. Most are not emotionally invested in any particular character and most probably watch the show for what it is… 43 minutes of entertainment. (Someone joked on reddit that the best way to enjoy The Blacklist is not to pay attention. They may have a point…)

So I’m not sure that the writers are targeting an audience of detail orientated diehard Blacklist fans. If the writers believe that the ordinary viewer is not paying attention to each and every (possible) clue, they may not bother to offer subtle hints that might be overlooked. They would target the ordinary viewer and make the important clues very obvious, very repetitive and easy to pick up on. That may be why the show runners expect us to be surprised by their reveals, they have given us such huge misdirects. But here at WSJ, have talked about the show so much that we usually are not easily led astray and anything they can come up with has probably already been mentioned several times (like Tom being behind the door in Liz’s โ€œsecretโ€ room last season).

 
โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”

2:22 pm December 1, 2015
WSJ Tessa wrote:
Jean Alica, I doubt the old team could be re-assembled at the Post office As Red pointed out to Liz, even if she is exonerated of the OREA bombing and the senator’s death, and even if the undercover cop she shot would be found to have been a cabal agent or a for-hire bounty hunter or killer (“Raymond Reddington.
You got any idea how many people want to see you dead? “), even so Liz went over a threshold “Yes. And when you did that you crossed a threshold, leaving your world, entering mine. Bad things are gonna find you now, Lizzy. This life has a mind and a momentum of its own. That’s a reality you need to accept.”
Liz is now by nature and by her actions not able to be a FBI agent. Samar I suspect did what she came to do. The realization that her life devoted to avenge her better had been a travesty of justice will not be easy for her to accept. Deep changes would come from that. Red can no longer have the anonymity that allowed season 1 and 2 format to exist. Ressler is on a collision course with the cabal. He would either be used or sacrifice as a pawn. Unless he deals deeply with the core problems. And Aram has now become officially a damaged character. The structure is over, the work is now fluid and perpetually changing. Cooper is far more skilled at bending the book to acomplish what he wants. But it all depends of how much pressure they put on him. He could easily become the next Red.
Katarina is, I agree with you the next big arc, unless they have another arc before her.

&nbsp
โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”
6:49 pm November 29, 2015
WSJ Curious1 wrote:
@anonymous 4:37 it is unfortunate and sad. Who would have thought the “fans” would become so hateful and crazy? It is only a TV show. The “shipping” thing has always been strange to me. Maybe it was just a few of these people who are not playing with a full deck?
I never knew one of the writers wanted to get rid of one of the creators of the show. Is she still part of the show? Interesting.

@anonymous 5:11 this blog was filled with Lizzingon people (or person with multiple names) when I staarted reading and commenting. They wish me gone because I felt Red was father and still do. They called anyone who wanted Red to be Liz’s father daddy gates. I think most people suspect that will be true in the end. It is a TV show and we want the show to be entertainng.
For the most part I think the show is above average when it comes to TV shows. I have never liked the Tom character/storyline after season 1. The show lost its way in season 2 with Tom/Liz soap opera garbage.

Looks as if the Lizzington crowd is going down in flames.

Was there some major shift away from balancing on the edge of the Sword of Lizzington/Daddygate that I missed? lol โ€“ LB90

โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”
4:37 pm November 29, 2015
WSJ Anonymous wrote:
It’s unfortunate that Bokenkamp, a few of the writer/producers as well as Megan Boone have strung the Lizzington camp along. They enjoyed the enthusiasm of the very vocal fandom that helped to support ratings.. Megan Boone especially fed their fantasy, tweeting with them and praising their artistic fanfic pics. They photoshopped Red lifting Liz up in his arms like the Bodyguard, or Liz snuggling up to Red as he sat on the couch. She was their leading lady and Boone loved the praise and attention. It must have been a rude awakening for the Lizzingtons to hear Megan Boone finally confess that the Lizzington camp had misunderstood her comment about “a love story.” She said that this love was not romantic, and that Red and Liz did not have a romantic relationship.

It did not help that people like Kat Goodson and Dainiel Knauf got caught up in the Lizzington fervor and seemed to support them. But now Daniel Knauf has expressed regret, that he is sorry he ever heard of Lizzington. It almost sounded as if Kat Goodson was saying that once they got rid of Eisendrath, then the writers would be able to go the romantic route. How terrible to think that one of their own writers would want to remove one of the creators of the series, just so she could change the direction the show runners chose.

Jon Bokemkamp has once again spoken loud and clear in a reputable medium. He isn’t tweeting, he isn’t posting a humorous comment that may be misunderstood. He once tweeted “sexy” during the episode when Liz had her dream, and the Lizzingtons cemented that in stone as if it was show canon. I wonder if Jon Bokemkamp regrets doing that now? Was it a tongue in cheek joke, making light of the Lizzington camp?

Jon Bokenkamp: “Itโ€™s really hard in a show that has โ€” whether heโ€™s her father or not โ€” a parental core to it,โ€ Bokenkamp continues, referencing the dynamic between Liz and Red (James Spader). โ€œIn a show that has a father-daughter type relationship, itโ€™s incredibly difficult to ignore the fact that our lead actress is pregnant. Itโ€™s still being figured out exactly what that means.โ€

It’s now time to ask who in the fandom is in denial? Who in the fandom is attacking the creator of the series for explaining the core relationship of his own show? Red may be her father or he may not be her father, but one thing is very clear. The creators of this series keep reminding us that Red and Liz have a father-daughter relationship, which clearly implies that they will never have a romantic relationship.

It’s time to face facts Lizzington, and stop the hate.

Seems to be reading a lot of drama into s few tweets โ€“ Lb90
 
โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”
Some interesting details:
From WSJ Blog
10:10 am December 1, 2015
Tessa wrote:
What is The Blacklist about?
The Blacklist to me is first and foremost a tale of love. A family love story. And what happened to families and love when placed in the morally ambiguous world of spies and operatives.

Second, The Blacklist is a story about sin eaters. The people who keep the general public safe and in high moral positions and in doing so they face each day morally daunting choices. Choices that affect their lives, their families and their families. In Redโ€™s words: “George Orwell wrote, โ€œThose who abjure violence can do so “only because others are committing violence on their behalf.โ€ What a visionary, but, Good Lord, his books are a downer.โ€œ. We all live in a somehow safe world because the people in intelligence, and law enforcement make us safe by themselves choosing to walk a moral tightrope every day.

Third, The Blacklist is a story about the real meaning of morals. Is the Law moral, or is it moral to have own own moral code and live by it. What happens when the ones in power, making and enforcing the laws are themselves corrupt and in service of third parties. What happens when the ones in power are willing to kill and steal for what they consider to be the โ€œuniversal goodโ€. All characters are killers. they all kill for different and somewhat justifiable reasons. There are no good and bad characters, only good and bad in the context where they place their own north, their own Polaris.
And lastly, The Blacklist has shades of The Tempest. A story of a father and a daughter and the magic books (the fulcrum) that gave power to Prosperos . A story about revenge, righting wrongs, about love and greed. The value of loyalty above all else. There is no way to keep oneself in the โ€œabsolute goodโ€, there is only doing the least evil and the more good in the circumstances one faces.
โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”

More details

From WSJ BLOG:
7:45 am October 30, 2015
WSJ Tessa wrote:
anon 1124. Yes it was Leonard Caul.

So far the list of dangling ends (have faith in the writers people, they will connect the dots) is:
– Pepper and the key to the fulcrum
– Ballerina Girl
– Bubble girl (home movie, memory in the Tacoma Park house & photo in the cabin)
– Jennifer
– Peter K. relationship to Katarina Rostova
– Katarina Rostova real identity & allegiance
– Real events of the night of the fire
– events in the Christmas tree lot
– real identity of Sam Milhoan and his relationship to Red or Katarina
– real identity of Carla Reddignton/ Naomi Hyland
– more on Alan & Margaret Fitch
– from the comic book: Red’s relationship to the FBI (also from first line and imagery of Ranko Zamani)
– from the comic book: What was in the thumb drive Red left for Liz
– Cooper background and relationship to Red

Remember: The blacklist writers are great. do not doubt them. For every answer we get 3 more question. Loving it.

 
โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”
By LizzieB90 at 6:30am on 10/29/2015

Order in which I do episode updates:

โ— Script
โ— Storybook
โ— Highlights in “Clues” (collages, GIFs, slideshows)
โ— Links in About/Index (+ Blacklister List), Season Scripts, All Scripts
โ— Easy-Search Scripts
โ— Update Open Questions / Status of Major Issues
โ— Slides for Twitter show on Thursday
โ— Twitter robo-collage
โ— Clean-up and archive
Setup for next episode

 
โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”
9:58 am November 26, 2015 WSJ
WSJ True blacklist insider wrote:
James Spader isn’t leaving the show, Megan Boone is. She’s been unhappy with the way her character has been handled for a very long time now., and has been ready to move on and start a family with her boyfriend. Elizabeth Keen will be killed off in the season finale.

Bokenkamp didn’t want Boone to leave but he was overruled by the other producers, the network, the studio, and even Spader himself who all feel that killing off the Elizabeth Keen character would be a shot in the arm for the show creatively, and help generate buzz that has been lost since the move to Thursday night.

There are no plans to replace Keen with a new female character (though there is talk that Jennifer, Reddington’s daughter, could be introduced in some capacity later on.) instead Ryan Eggold, Diego Klattenhoff, and Mozhan Marno’s roles will be expanded considerably as Tom, Ressler, and Samar join Red on his quest to avenge Elizabeth Keen’s death which will be the driving force of the fourth season.

I can’t tell you how I know this, and I don’t expect you to believe me. All I can say is stay tuned.

 
โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”
:58 am November 26, 2015
WSJ True blacklist insider wrote:
James Spader isn’t leaving the show, Megan Boone is. She’s been unhappy with the way her character has been handled for a very long time now., and has been ready to move on and start a family with her boyfriend. Elizabeth Keen will be killed off in the season finale.

Bokenkamp didn’t want Boone to leave but he was overruled by the other producers, the network, the studio, and even Spader himself who all feel that killing off the Elizabeth Keen character would be a shot in the arm for the show creatively, and help generate buzz that has been lost since the move to Thursday night.

There are no plans to replace Keen with a new female character (though there is talk that Jennifer, Reddington’s daughter, could be introduced in some capacity later on.) instead Ryan Eggold, Diego Klattenhoff, and Mozhan Marno’s roles will be expanded considerably as Tom, Ressler, and Samar join Red on his quest to avenge Elizabeth Keen’s death which will be the driving force of the fourth season.

I can’t tell you how I know this, and I don’t expect you to believe me. All I can say is stay

No idea how seriously to take this. โ€“ LB90

 
โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”
4:37 pm November 29, 2015 WSJ
WSJ Anonymous wrote:
It’s unfortunate that Bokenkamp, a few of the writer/producers as well as Megan Boone have strung the Lizzington camp along. They enjoyed the enthusiasm of the very vocal fandom that helped to support ratings.. Megan Boone especially fed their fantasy, tweeting with them and praising their artistic fanfic pics. They photoshopped Red lifting Liz up in his arms like the Bodyguard, or Liz snuggling up to Red as he sat on the couch. She was their leading lady and Boone loved the praise and attention. It must have been a rude awakening for the Lizzingtons to hear Megan Boone finally confess that the Lizzington camp had misunderstood her comment about “a love story.” She said that this love was not romantic, and that Red and Liz did not have a romantic relationship.

It did not help that people like Kat Goodson and Dainiel Knauf got caught up in the Lizzington fervor and seemed to support them. But now Daniel Knauf has expressed regret, that he is sorry he ever heard of Lizzington. It almost sounded as if Kat Goodson was saying that once they got rid of Eisendrath, then the writers would be able to go the romantic route. How terrible to think that one of their own writers would want to remove one of the creators of the series, just so she could change the direction the show runners chose.

Jon Bokemkamp has once again spoken loud and clear in a reputable medium. He isn’t tweeting, he isn’t posting a humorous comment that may be misunderstood. He once tweeted “sexy” during the episode when Liz had her dream, and the Lizzingtons cemented that in stone as if it was show canon. I wonder if Jon Bokemkamp regrets doing that now? Was it a tongue in cheek joke, making light of the Lizzington camp?

Jon Bokenkamp: “Itโ€™s really hard in a show that has โ€” whether heโ€™s her father or not โ€” a parental core to it,โ€ Bokenkamp continues, referencing the dynamic between Liz and Red (James Spader). โ€œIn a show that has a father-daughter type relationship, itโ€™s incredibly difficult to ignore the fact that our lead actress is pregnant. Itโ€™s still being figured out exactly what that means.โ€

It’s now time to ask who in the fandom is in denial? Who in the fandom is attacking the creator of the series for explaining the core relationship of his own show? Red may be her father or he may not be her father, but one thing is very clear. The creators of this series keep reminding us that Red and Liz have a father-daughter relationship, which clearly implies that they will never have a romantic relationship.

It’s time to face facts Lizzington, and stop the hate.

 
โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”
11:34 am November 23, 2015 WSJ
WSJ Nan wrote:
@Red Hot – This is a partial list of names of government agencies and headlines from 25 years ago that appear throughout the fulcrum file. Each represent where the Cabal exerted influence to direct, effect or change an outcome.

1. World Bank plans $1.5 billion in new Aid to Latin Debtor
2. Equal Opportunity Employment Commission
3. Special Asst. to the President for Legislative Affairs
4. Environmental Protection Agency
5. Federal Aviation Administration
6. Federal Bureau of Investigation – Deputy Director
7. National Security …(unknown) had Served in CIA with Man Directing Aid Flights
8. Close Aide to Bush Linked to Figure Helping โ€˜Contradโ€™?
9. Energy Report 1979
10. REVE… (unknown) …OWBACK ACTION (assume it is Revelations … Throwback Action)
11. UnderSecretary โ€“ Do…(unknown)
12. Laird Discounts Big Arms Savings
13. Reaction to Pact in …(unknown) Mostly Favorable b…(unknown) Conservatives are
14. Projection 1986 โ€“ 2020
15. World Energy Production 1980 โ€“ 2020
16. Lawmakers Ban Actions on …
17. US Trade Deficit Big Again in …
18. FCC โ€“ Federal
19. Federal Depo…(unknown – assume it is Insurance Commission)
20. (unknown)..wo of Program – Offers No Plan
21. Stalemate Star Wars
22. Reagan Wounded – Outlook โ€˜Goodโ€™ A…(unknown) In Emergency Surgery
23. Libya โ€“ map with Tripoli (invasion plan?)
24. Robert B. Semple Jr., To: New York Times
25. False Flag
26. Accounting Officer
27. Administration
28. Bruxelles – … SCALE… (unknown)
29. โ€˜TERR… (unknown – assume it refers to Terrorists)
30. Special Agent (unknown)

 
โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”
More great detail: WSJ

11:21 am November 23, 2015
WSJ Nan wrote:
@Stormy – I for one appreciate that I don’t have to register on this site. Otherwise I wouldn’t post.

@RedHot – Here’s something to get the conversation started. It’s a partial list of Cabal members from the fulcrum file that Red showed the investigative journalists. I’ll post in two sections to avoid losing the post.

Greenberg CEO
Rod…(unknown)
Minister Owens
General Eichhart
Secretary Battier
Officer Halabi
Cardinal Moreau
Reverend Ki
Judge Akiyama
Sir Holt
Travers CEO
Mikkelson CFO
Duke Richards
Archbishop Falcone
Rabbi Boskowitz
High Lama Ghoegyal
Captain Peretti
Minister Columbro
Pastor Mitchell
Lord Stoneburner
Commander …Aradotte?
Ambassador Morokov
Advisor Panko
Colonel Williams
Senior Advisor Green
General Chao
Judge Fulbury
(unknown)… CEO
Captain …(unknown)
High … (unknown)
(unknown)…ng (Journalist)
(unknown)…d Harper
(unkown)…an Assaf
Reverend Michaels

A classified memo about Irving, Raskin, Levind, a law firm?, dated 7/22/57, about a phone call from New York City, relayed from the USSR, sending well wishes on his recent marriage, with the name, RASKIN, redacted several times in the memo.

The FSB Chief Intelligence Officer for Washington DC who was “intimately acquainted with every Russian intelligence asset in North and South America, active and inactive – including Katarina Rostova – was Alexander Raskovitch. Any connection to the redacted name in the classified memo?

 
โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”
Some input for Unanswered Questions:> WSJ

9:21 am November 23, 2015
WSJ RedHot wrote:
@Belle 10:12
Thanks! Like I said………the story arcs are all over the place….No resolution of season 1 or 2 and now more arcs in season 3.

So many comments on what was in the suitcase. Of all the mysteries of this show…why is this a mystery? Can we just have one thing wrapped up within an episode. Leaving folks to provide theories of what was in the box. Really??? Gheezzzzzzz
I too…..like the others hope that Ressler comes to his senses “everything is NOT black and white” and goes after Hitchens to kill her (in similar Red fashion)

Yes, Liz in the box (rest for her real pregnancy) also this gives Red a HUGE break from her doing things on her own; when he tells her not to do them. Also, will give “us” the posters some rest from her dumb mistakes.

Yes, some folks have left this site and I started to leave too. But, I came back for Season 2 and it has been interesting. I am going to see this out even if there is a Season 4.

I still believe we will find out what happened to Red’s family the night of the fire…..what happened to Liz’s family the night of the fire (so we don’t have to continue to speculate). Where is Jennifer, Naomi, what’s in the fulcrum, etc. I just hope the writers help us out!!!

 
โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”โ”
By LizzieB90 at 6:30 on 10/15/2015

I use the main WordPress site for this blog. This site does not allow for the use of plugins to enhance WordPress functionality. One function I wish were available is the ability to use tags with “Pages.” The way it’s set up now, tags โ€“ which allow for discovery by search engines like Google โ€“ can only be applied to “Posts,” which are the traditional blog entries. “Pages” are permanent knowledge structures, which are updated, unlike the blog posts which are added one after another. I have labeled these Pages under “Blog Structure” in the righthand column.

So, I have created an awkward workaround in using a blog “Post” with the full table contents, to which I have added tags for all of the content in the Pages. It is here: http://wp.me/pDKwi-1Jr. The idea is the search engine will deliver you to that Post and allow you to use the Table of Contents to link to the Psge you are looking for. You can use your browser to re-key in your search term using your browser’s page search function (keeping it short will help) because the full Table of Contents is quite long. Like I said, it’s awkward. But it is there and it does work.

WordPress has a Search function (at right, near top), but I think you might have better luck with your page search.

Something you can do that is kind Of cool is go to the Index Page http://wp.me/pDKwi-1Jr and use the alphabetical tag list at the top to find all the Pages with that tag. Just press the tag.

 
 

เผบ โ™ค โŠฐ ๐Ÿ”ด โŠฑ โ™ค เผป
 
 



Blog Stats

  • 364,670 hits

Google Translate

Thank you, everyone โ™กโ™คโ™ก

๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡ฝ๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡ฑ๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ฟ๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡ด๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡ท๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡ฒ๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡ผ๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡น๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡ฟ๐Ÿ‡ง๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ง๐Ÿ‡ญ ๐Ÿ‡ง๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ง๐Ÿ‡ง๐Ÿ‡ง๐Ÿ‡พ๐Ÿ‡ง๐Ÿ‡ช๐Ÿ‡ง๐Ÿ‡ฟ๐Ÿ‡ง๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ง๐Ÿ‡ฒ๐Ÿ‡ง๐Ÿ‡น๐Ÿ‡ง๐Ÿ‡ด๐Ÿ‡ง๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡ง๐Ÿ‡ผ๐Ÿ‡ง๐Ÿ‡ท๐Ÿ‡ง๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฐ๐Ÿ‡ญ๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ฒ ๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡ง๐Ÿ‡ถ๐Ÿ‡ฐ๐Ÿ‡พ๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ฑ๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ด๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ท๐Ÿ‡ญ๐Ÿ‡ท๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ผ๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡พ๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ฟ๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ฐ๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ด ๐Ÿ‡ช๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ช๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ป๐Ÿ‡ช๐Ÿ‡ช๐Ÿ‡ช๐Ÿ‡น๐Ÿ‡ช๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ด๐Ÿ‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ท๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ต๐Ÿ‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ช๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ช๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ญ ๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ท๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ต๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡น๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡พ๐Ÿ‡ญ๐Ÿ‡น๐Ÿ‡ญ๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ญ๐Ÿ‡ฐ๐Ÿ‡ญ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ท ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ถ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ช๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ฒ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ฑ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡น๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ฒ๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ช๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ด๐Ÿ‡ฐ๐Ÿ‡ฟ๐Ÿ‡ฐ๐Ÿ‡ช๐Ÿ‡ฐ๐Ÿ‡ผ๐Ÿ‡ฑ๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡ฑ๐Ÿ‡ป๐Ÿ‡ฑ๐Ÿ‡ง ๐Ÿ‡ฑ๐Ÿ‡พ๐Ÿ‡ฑ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ฑ๐Ÿ‡น๐Ÿ‡ฑ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ฒ๐Ÿ‡ด๐Ÿ‡ฒ๐Ÿ‡ฐ๐Ÿ‡ฒ๐Ÿ‡ผ๐Ÿ‡ฒ๐Ÿ‡พ๐Ÿ‡ฒ๐Ÿ‡ป๐Ÿ‡ฒ๐Ÿ‡ฑ๐Ÿ‡ฒ๐Ÿ‡น๐Ÿ‡ฒ๐Ÿ‡ถ๐Ÿ‡ฒ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ฒ๐Ÿ‡ฝ๐Ÿ‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ฒ ๐Ÿ‡ฒ๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ฒ๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ฒ๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฒ๐Ÿ‡ช๐Ÿ‡ฒ๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡ฒ๐Ÿ‡ฟ๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ต๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฑ๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฟ๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ฒ๐Ÿ‡ต๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ด ๐Ÿ‡ด๐Ÿ‡ฒ๐Ÿ‡ต๐Ÿ‡ฐ๐Ÿ‡ต๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ต๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡ต๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ต๐Ÿ‡พ๐Ÿ‡ต๐Ÿ‡ช๐Ÿ‡ต๐Ÿ‡ญ๐Ÿ‡ต๐Ÿ‡ฑ๐Ÿ‡ต๐Ÿ‡น๐Ÿ‡ต๐Ÿ‡ท๐Ÿ‡ถ๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡ท๐Ÿ‡ช๐Ÿ‡ท๐Ÿ‡ด๐Ÿ‡ท๐Ÿ‡บ ๐Ÿ‡ท๐Ÿ‡ผ๐Ÿ‡ผ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ท๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ฝ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ฐ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ด๐Ÿ‡ฟ๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡ฐ๐Ÿ‡ท๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ช๐Ÿ‡ธ ๐Ÿ‡ฑ๐Ÿ‡ฐ๐Ÿ‡ฐ๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฑ๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ป๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ท๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ช๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ญ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡พ๐Ÿ‡น๐Ÿ‡ผ๐Ÿ‡น๐Ÿ‡ฟ๐Ÿ‡น๐Ÿ‡ญ๐Ÿ‡น๐Ÿ‡น๐Ÿ‡น๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡น๐Ÿ‡ท ๐Ÿ‡น๐Ÿ‡ฒ๐Ÿ‡ป๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡ช๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡พ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ฟ๐Ÿ‡ป๐Ÿ‡ช๐Ÿ‡ป๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡พ๐Ÿ‡ช๐Ÿ‡ฟ๐Ÿ‡ฒ๐Ÿ‡ฟ๐Ÿ‡ผ

โ™ค Blog Structure (๎Š= update)