Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Poll Poll
Question: most effective attacks on our freedom of speech?

Muslims preventing people from mocking Muhammed    
  11 (55.0%)
Journalists not reporting some ASIO intel ops    
  4 (20.0%)
Something else    
  5 (25.0%)




Total votes: 20
« Created by: freediver on: Oct 9th, 2014 at 12:43pm »

Pages: 1 ... 17 18 19 20 21 ... 59
Send Topic Print
Is Islam against free speech? (Read 157386 times)
polite_gandalf
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 20023
Canberra
Gender: male
Re: Is Islam against free speech?
Reply #270 - Oct 10th, 2014 at 2:41pm
 
I think I'm beginning to understand FD's frame of mind regarding the muslim communities in the west. To him they are a akin to a 'state within a state', who are not represented by the countries' leaders - as any other citizen of that country would be assumed to be. Why else would he make the point that "Barak Obama stood up for freedom - what did the muslims do??" Clearly non-muslims (regardless of the demonstrated attitudes towards freedoms) get a free pass because they are "represented" by Obama, Abbott and whatever other non-muslim western representatives FD can think of. ie as soon as they say they support freedoms, the "mainstream" is automatically spoken for - which is fine, but curiously, the muslim community - despite demonstrably being overwhelmingly as integrated, and law abiding as the rest of society - are not considered represented by their country's leaders. No, they must stand up separately and make their own representations, because being a fully integrated, law abiding citizen of their country isn't enough - even though its enough for everyone else, regardless of what their 'freedom credentials' are.

The irony of course being that for all his talk about the importance of muslims integrating and accepting "our" values, here he is insisting that the muslims remain unintegrated - by not allowing them to be represented like everyone else by the state's representatives, and insisting they represent themselves separately - just like a state within a state. Thus FD's circular logic is complete: muslims here are slammed for being foreign and alien to our culture - because of the barriers FD himself constructs around them.
Back to top
 

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:
Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.
 
IP Logged
 
Soren
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 25654
Gender: male
Re: Is Islam against free speech?
Reply #271 - Oct 10th, 2014 at 5:44pm
 
polite_gandalf wrote on Oct 10th, 2014 at 2:41pm:
I think I'm beginning to understand FD's frame of mind regarding the muslim communities in the west. To him they are a akin to a 'state within a state', who are not represented by the countries' leaders - as any other citizen of that country would be assumed to be. Why else would he make the point that "Barak Obama stood up for freedom - what did the muslims do??" Clearly non-muslims (regardless of the demonstrated attitudes towards freedoms) get a free pass because they are "represented" by Obama, Abbott and whatever other non-muslim western representatives FD can think of. ie as soon as they say they support freedoms, the "mainstream" is automatically spoken for - which is fine, but curiously, the muslim community - despite demonstrably being overwhelmingly as integrated, and law abiding as the rest of society - are not considered represented by their country's leaders. No, they must stand up separately and make their own representations, because being a fully integrated, law abiding citizen of their country isn't enough - even though its enough for everyone else, regardless of what their 'freedom credentials' are.

The irony of course being that for all his talk about the importance of muslims integrating and accepting "our" values, here he is insisting that the muslims remain unintegrated - by not allowing them to be represented like everyone else by the state's representatives, and insisting they represent themselves separately - just like a state within a state. Thus FD's circular logic is complete: muslims here are slammed for being foreign and alien to our culture - because of the barriers FD himself constructs around them.

You state but do not demonstrate that Muslims are integrated.
Integrated itself is a word used to avoid the concept of assimilated.


Islam is incompatible with Western secular civil society. Islam's aim is to supplant Western secular civil society. Islam has absolutely no interest in maintaining a democratic, secular, enlightened culture, legal system, education, cultural norms - anything. Islam is opposed to every aspect of Western secular democracy, of enlightened humanism, art, music, and all the rest of what makes the West what it is now.

Muslims recognising that they cannot change any of this while they are are such a minority does not mean that they accept any of it.

I want to hear the majority of Muslims coming out in favour of the separation of civil society from religion, the endorsement of secular public life, the relegation of religion to the private sphere. I will be marching with any Muslims who comes up with that program, as I told you before.
But it is not happening because it is against everything Islam stands for.






Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Brian Ross
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Representative of me

Posts: 39383
Re: Is Islam against free speech?
Reply #272 - Oct 10th, 2014 at 6:14pm
 
Soren wrote on Oct 10th, 2014 at 5:44pm:
polite_gandalf wrote on Oct 10th, 2014 at 2:41pm:
I think I'm beginning to understand FD's frame of mind regarding the muslim communities in the west. To him they are a akin to a 'state within a state', who are not represented by the countries' leaders - as any other citizen of that country would be assumed to be. Why else would he make the point that "Barak Obama stood up for freedom - what did the muslims do??" Clearly non-muslims (regardless of the demonstrated attitudes towards freedoms) get a free pass because they are "represented" by Obama, Abbott and whatever other non-muslim western representatives FD can think of. ie as soon as they say they support freedoms, the "mainstream" is automatically spoken for - which is fine, but curiously, the muslim community - despite demonstrably being overwhelmingly as integrated, and law abiding as the rest of society - are not considered represented by their country's leaders. No, they must stand up separately and make their own representations, because being a fully integrated, law abiding citizen of their country isn't enough - even though its enough for everyone else, regardless of what their 'freedom credentials' are.

The irony of course being that for all his talk about the importance of muslims integrating and accepting "our" values, here he is insisting that the muslims remain unintegrated - by not allowing them to be represented like everyone else by the state's representatives, and insisting they represent themselves separately - just like a state within a state. Thus FD's circular logic is complete: muslims here are slammed for being foreign and alien to our culture - because of the barriers FD himself constructs around them.

You state but do not demonstrate that Muslims are integrated.
Integrated itself is a word used to avoid the concept of assimilated.


Please define the term "assimilation", Soren.
Please tell us how do you measure levels of "assimilation"?
Please tell us what is the acceptable level of "assimilation"?

In reality, it's a meaningless word.  I suspect what you mean by "assimilated" is that they wear singlets, stubby shorts and thongs, swill beer, swear like troopers, eat barbequed pork sausages and attend church every Sunday.    Roll Eyes

Quote:
Islam is incompatible with Western secular civil society. Islam's aim is to supplant Western secular civil society.


You keep repeating that claim, Soren.  Doesn't make it any truer now than when you started saying it.   The reality is that there is little in the core tenants of Islam which are incompetable with Western secular civil society.  You unfortunately continually concentrate on the circumstantial stuff.   Roll Eyes

Back to top
 

Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour.  Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe?  Tsk, tsk, tsk...   Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
WWW  
IP Logged
 
polite_gandalf
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 20023
Canberra
Gender: male
Re: Is Islam against free speech?
Reply #273 - Oct 10th, 2014 at 6:36pm
 
Soren wrote on Oct 10th, 2014 at 5:44pm:
You state but do not demonstrate that Muslims are integrated.
Integrated itself is a word used to avoid the concept of assimilated.


Muslim's successful integration into our society is self evident. Close to half a million people successfully going about their lives, working, paying tax, interacting, contributing and obeying the law. Only a very small handful have not integrated successfully - yes it may be a larger proportion than other minority groups, but it is still a tiny minority of the entire community.

FD's arguments have merely reinforced this fact - by pointing out the actions and behaviours of a tiny minority, and spectacularly failing - repeatedly - to make any sort of case that the mainstream muslim community is somehow guilty of holding values related to freedom that are any different to the rest of society. Not to mention the fact that the only examples he can come up with that supposedly demonstrate non-muslim's love of freedom - actually demonstrates the opposite (18c and holocaust denial).

Finally, integration is the correct term. Assimilationism was abandoned in the early 1970s.
Back to top
 

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:
Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.
 
IP Logged
 
Adamant
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 1892
Brisbane
Re: Is Islam against free speech?
Reply #274 - Oct 10th, 2014 at 8:48pm
 
Brian Ross wrote on Oct 10th, 2014 at 6:14pm:
Please define the term "assimilation", Soren.


Why don't you do it brian as you will tell all of us later!

Brian Ross wrote on Oct 10th, 2014 at 6:14pm:
Please tell us how do you measure levels of "assimilation


Why don't you do it brian as you will tell all of us  later!

Brian Ross wrote on Oct 10th, 2014 at 6:14pm:
Please tell us what is the acceptable level of "assimilation


Why don't you do it brian as you will tell all of us  later!

Why is it brian that you refuse to answer questions that others pose?




Back to top
 

In real life Gandalf is known as Mr 10%
 
IP Logged
 
Adamant
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 1892
Brisbane
Re: Is Islam against free speech?
Reply #275 - Oct 10th, 2014 at 9:19pm
 
polite_gandalf wrote on Oct 10th, 2014 at 6:36pm:
Muslim's successful integration into our society is self evident


Any proof of that?

polite_gandalf wrote on Oct 10th, 2014 at 6:36pm:
and obeying the law


Information regarding this claim?

polite_gandalf wrote on Oct 10th, 2014 at 6:36pm:
Only a very small handful have not integrated successfully


How many is only a small handful? Where do you gain information like that. How many "extremist's" have you named for you would have come across a few at prayers on Fridays, bloody guaranteed!



Back to top
 

In real life Gandalf is known as Mr 10%
 
IP Logged
 
Brian Ross
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Representative of me

Posts: 39383
Re: Is Islam against free speech?
Reply #276 - Oct 10th, 2014 at 11:17pm
 
Adamant wrote on Oct 10th, 2014 at 8:48pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Oct 10th, 2014 at 6:14pm:
Please define the term "assimilation", Soren.


Why don't you do it brian as you will tell all of us later!


No.  I wish to see Soren's definition, so that we can pin down what he means exactly by it.

Quote:
Why is it brian that you refuse to answer questions that others pose?


If they are sensible, I answer them, Adamant, if I am able to.   What about you, do you always answer the questions posed to you?   Roll Eyes
Back to top
 

Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour.  Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe?  Tsk, tsk, tsk...   Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Mattyfisk
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 91862
Gender: male
Re: Is Islam against free speech?
Reply #277 - Oct 11th, 2014 at 12:05am
 
Soren wrote on Oct 10th, 2014 at 5:44pm:
polite_gandalf wrote on Oct 10th, 2014 at 2:41pm:
I think I'm beginning to understand FD's frame of mind regarding the muslim communities in the west. To him they are a akin to a 'state within a state', who are not represented by the countries' leaders - as any other citizen of that country would be assumed to be. Why else would he make the point that "Barak Obama stood up for freedom - what did the muslims do??" Clearly non-muslims (regardless of the demonstrated attitudes towards freedoms) get a free pass because they are "represented" by Obama, Abbott and whatever other non-muslim western representatives FD can think of. ie as soon as they say they support freedoms, the "mainstream" is automatically spoken for - which is fine, but curiously, the muslim community - despite demonstrably being overwhelmingly as integrated, and law abiding as the rest of society - are not considered represented by their country's leaders. No, they must stand up separately and make their own representations, because being a fully integrated, law abiding citizen of their country isn't enough - even though its enough for everyone else, regardless of what their 'freedom credentials' are.

The irony of course being that for all his talk about the importance of muslims integrating and accepting "our" values, here he is insisting that the muslims remain unintegrated - by not allowing them to be represented like everyone else by the state's representatives, and insisting they represent themselves separately - just like a state within a state. Thus FD's circular logic is complete: muslims here are slammed for being foreign and alien to our culture - because of the barriers FD himself constructs around them.

You state but do not demonstrate that Muslims are integrated.
Integrated itself is a word used to avoid the concept of assimilated.


Islam is incompatible with Western secular civil society. Islam's aim is to supplant Western secular civil society. Islam has absolutely no interest in maintaining a democratic, secular, enlightened culture, legal system, education, cultural norms - anything. Islam is opposed to every aspect of Western secular democracy, of enlightened humanism, art, music, and all the rest of what makes the West what it is now.

Muslims recognising that they cannot change any of this while they are are such a minority does not mean that they accept any of it.

I want to hear the majority of Muslims coming out in favour of the separation of civil society from religion, the endorsement of secular public life, the relegation of religion to the private sphere. I will be marching with any Muslims who comes up with that program, as I told you before.
But it is not happening because it is against everything Islam stands for.



Always, absolutely, never ever.

It is a jolly world, no?
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Online


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47062
At my desk.
Re: Is Islam against free speech?
Reply #278 - Oct 11th, 2014 at 9:59am
 
Quote:
I think I'm beginning to understand FD's frame of mind regarding the muslim communities in the west. To him they are a akin to a 'state within a state', who are not represented by the countries' leaders - as any other citizen of that country would be assumed to be. Why else would he make the point that "Barak Obama stood up for freedom - what did the muslims do??"


I obviously made that point because you tried to paint me as the extremist and claimed that non-Muslims fail to speak up for freedom of speech and do not support the right to depict and mock Muhammed, in a desperate attempt to portray Muslims as 'holding hands' and being on the same page as non-Muslims on this issue. I made it because you keep insisting I have no evidence for the vast gulf between Muslims and non-Muslims on this issue, and no evidence that Islam itself is incompatible with western values.

Quote:
Clearly non-muslims (regardless of the demonstrated attitudes towards freedoms) get a free pass because they are "represented" by Obama, Abbott and whatever other non-muslim western representatives FD can think of.


They are also represented by the freedoms that the west has won and maintained for itself. We are aware of the traditional threats to our freedom. We speak out against them. We have them under control. This is not the same thing as a free pass, any more than claiming the criminals in our jails have a free pass for whatever crimes they have committed.

Quote:
which is fine, but curiously, the muslim community - despite demonstrably being overwhelmingly as integrated, and law abiding as the rest of society


On the issue of people's right to depict and mock Muhammed, they have clearly demonstrated that they are not integrated and are at best putting up with it, through lack of choice.

Quote:
No, they must stand up separately and make their own representations, because being a fully integrated, law abiding citizen of their country isn't enough


Correct. Merely obeying the law is not sufficient to maintain our rights and freedoms. There are both legal and illegal ways to destroy those rights and freedoms, as you have personally demonstrated here in this thread. Muslims are doing both. No 'good' Muslims stand in opposition to them and support for our right to depict and mock Muhammed. Not even Gandalf. You cannot say the same about any other religious or ideological group within our society. Islam is unique in the extent of it's fundamental opposition to core western values. Gandalf cannot even comprehend those values.

Quote:
The irony of course being that for all his talk about the importance of muslims integrating and accepting "our" values


I demand they support them. Merely accepting them is insufficient. They are still a threat to our rights and freedoms even if they put up with them.

Quote:
just like a state within a state


This is your fantasy Gandalf. I have clearly articulated my criticism. You have changed the subject, at every opportunity.

Quote:
Islam has absolutely no interest in maintaining a democratic, secular, enlightened culture, legal system, education, cultural norms - anything.


Accordig to Gandalf, Muhammed himself was a secular ruler and his Islamic state was a secular one. All you have to do is turn the meaning of these words on their head and Islam is completely compatible with western values.

Quote:
Only a very small handful have not integrated successfully - yes it may be a larger proportion than other minority groups, but it is still a tiny minority of the entire community.


Yes, an unreasonably large minority, and the 'majority' refuses to take an opposing stance, preferring instead to remain silent and go about their business as if the problem doesn't exist and will go away if they ignore it.

Quote:
FD's arguments have merely reinforced this fact - by pointing out the actions and behaviours of a tiny minority, and spectacularly failing - repeatedly - to make any sort of case that the mainstream muslim community is somehow guilty of holding values related to freedom that are any different to the rest of society.


I have demonstrated this repeatedly Gandalf. As usual, you cannot bring yourself to respond.

Quote:
Not to mention the fact that the only examples he can come up with that supposedly demonstrate non-muslim's love of freedom - actually demonstrates the opposite (18c and holocaust denial).


They were your examples Gandalf - attempts to change the subject, and no, they do not prove the opposite. I have produced a long list of evidence in support of my position.
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Soren
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 25654
Gender: male
Re: Is Islam against free speech?
Reply #279 - Oct 11th, 2014 at 1:11pm
 
Brian Ross wrote on Oct 10th, 2014 at 11:17pm:
Adamant wrote on Oct 10th, 2014 at 8:48pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Oct 10th, 2014 at 6:14pm:
Please define the term "assimilation", Soren.


Why don't you do it brian as you will tell all of us later!


No.  I wish to see Soren's definition, so that we can pin down what he means exactly by it.

Quote:
Why is it brian that you refuse to answer questions that others pose?


If they are sensible, I answer them, Adamant, if I am able to.   What about you, do you always answer the questions posed to you?   Roll Eyes



Assimilation is a very ordinary word. It has no special meaning. It means that people assimilate. Do you have some special, uniquely Brainian interpretation of it?  Just use it in its normal meaning, I suggest.

Migrants should assimilate.





Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
polite_gandalf
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 20023
Canberra
Gender: male
Re: Is Islam against free speech?
Reply #280 - Oct 11th, 2014 at 1:18pm
 
freediver wrote on Oct 11th, 2014 at 9:59am:
On the issue of people's right to depict and mock Muhammed, they have clearly demonstrated that they are not integrated and are at best putting up with it, through lack of choice


Thus the flawed circular logic routine continues.

freediver wrote on Oct 11th, 2014 at 9:59am:
Merely obeying the law is not sufficient to maintain our rights and freedoms.


Bullshit. Its clearly enough for everyone else, and you insult my intelligence by pretending you have argued otherwise. You haven't. You continue just obfuscating and waffling your way through the thread like you always do - desperately trying to conceal the fact that your argument entirely boils down to "I have an irrational prejudice against muslims, and I dream up freedom-loving attributes of the non-muslim community that clearly aren't there - to create an imaginary and completely unnecessary divide between the muslims and non-muslims".
Back to top
 

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:
Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.
 
IP Logged
 
Brian Ross
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Representative of me

Posts: 39383
Re: Is Islam against free speech?
Reply #281 - Oct 11th, 2014 at 1:20pm
 
Soren wrote on Oct 11th, 2014 at 1:11pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Oct 10th, 2014 at 11:17pm:
Adamant wrote on Oct 10th, 2014 at 8:48pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Oct 10th, 2014 at 6:14pm:
Please define the term "assimilation", Soren.


Why don't you do it brian as you will tell all of us later!


No.  I wish to see Soren's definition, so that we can pin down what he means exactly by it.

Quote:
Why is it brian that you refuse to answer questions that others pose?


If they are sensible, I answer them, Adamant, if I am able to.   What about you, do you always answer the questions posed to you?   Roll Eyes



Assimilation is a very ordinary word. It has no special meaning. It means that people assimilate. Do you have some special, uniquely Brainian interpretation of it?  Just use it in its normal meaning, I suggest.

Migrants should assimilate.


Soren, what is "assimilation"?   You assume we all know and understand it is.  I'm asking for a dictionary definition to ensure we ALL do know and understand what it is.

How should migrants "assimilate"?  How does one measure assimilation?  How does one one know if they have "assimilated" enough to have become "assimilated"?

You demand something of others but of course, refuse to define it or provide any means of measuring it.  Doing that, allows you to move the goalposts when ever you want which seems to be a common tactic you use whenever you find your views challenged.   Roll Eyes

I expect my attitudes towards "assimilation" and the need for it differ markedly from yours.   Does that make you right and me wrong?   Which should immigrants listen to?  You?  Why?  Who are you to determine these matters in your no doubt rather subjective and bigoted way?   Don't other Australians get any input into these contentious issues?   Roll Eyes
Back to top
 

Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour.  Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe?  Tsk, tsk, tsk...   Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Soren
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 25654
Gender: male
Re: Is Islam against free speech?
Reply #282 - Oct 11th, 2014 at 1:23pm
 
polite_gandalf wrote on Oct 10th, 2014 at 11:41am:
pithily? You do have a quaint vocabularly Soren.

So were you out on the streets defending your right to mock the Prophet? If not, why not?


Freedom of speech is not about mocking the prophet but includes that too. It is part of the established framework of society in the West and so it needs no street marches.
Limiting freedom of speech to protect Islam and the prophet, on the other hand, is an established part of islam and so its devotees do march on the streets when they they find that the protection of their sensibilities is not part of Western secularism. This is why Muslims were rioting on the streets of Sydney 2 years ago.



Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
polite_gandalf
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 20023
Canberra
Gender: male
Re: Is Islam against free speech?
Reply #283 - Oct 11th, 2014 at 1:53pm
 
Soren wrote on Oct 11th, 2014 at 1:23pm:
Freedom of speech is not about mocking the prophet but includes that too. It is part of the established framework of society in the West and so it needs no street marches.


Rubbish.

We live in a society that demonstrates its propensity to chip away at our freedoms all the time - bullying down the government's attempts to remove mere "offense" from the racial discrimination act, maintaining a ban on holocaust denial, banning anyone from visiting who might be "offensive" to certain people, the spectre of wholesale internet censorship and on it goes.

Freedom of speech needs to be constantly defended - thats FD's favourite catchphrase, yet strangely I never see it. Brandis proudly declare holocaust denial will remain 'unlawful' - no howls of protests from the freedom lovers. The word 'offense" remains on the Racial Discrimination Act - no howls of protests from the freedom lovers. Even the "threat" of the muslim protestors you whinge about constantly produced no demonstration of your love of freedom. And don't tell me our freedoms weren't affected by that - you'll be the first to argue that people are terrified to speak out against islam. Mission accomplised freedom hating muslims.

You are gutless wonders, the lot of you. Pathetic, spineless do-nothings. You, who talk endlessly about the need to keep standing up for our freedoms, do sweet f_uck all yourselves when all this chipping away at our freedoms is rampantly going on. So of course you will rationalise and give the lily-livered response you gave here "oh its all good - its "part of the established framework" - no need to do anything" to explain your limp-wristed responses.

Back to top
 

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:
Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.
 
IP Logged
 
Mattyfisk
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 91862
Gender: male
Re: Is Islam against free speech?
Reply #284 - Oct 11th, 2014 at 4:07pm
 
Soren wrote on Oct 11th, 2014 at 1:11pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Oct 10th, 2014 at 11:17pm:
Adamant wrote on Oct 10th, 2014 at 8:48pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Oct 10th, 2014 at 6:14pm:
Please define the term "assimilation", Soren.


Why don't you do it brian as you will tell all of us later!


No.  I wish to see Soren's definition, so that we can pin down what he means exactly by it.

Quote:
Why is it brian that you refuse to answer questions that others pose?


If they are sensible, I answer them, Adamant, if I am able to.   What about you, do you always answer the questions posed to you?   Roll Eyes



Assimilation is a very ordinary word. It has no special meaning. It means that people assimilate. Do you have some special, uniquely Brainian interpretation of it?  Just use it in its normal meaning, I suggest.

Migrants should assimilate.







Except for the Freudians.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 ... 17 18 19 20 21 ... 59
Send Topic Print