|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
rapier
Joined: 16 Feb 2003
|
 Posted: Mon Oct 24, 2005 4:13 am Post subject: Rioting in Birmingham |
 |
|
Birmingham riots again..Looks like multicultural Britain is having teething problems again. Saw an interview with a black guy, he said "The muslims came here a few years ago and have totally taken over the area. We live side by side but have nothing in common. they don't respect us".
Tried to find an Asian viewpoint to balance this post but haven't been able to so far.
I also think that city has far too many bored and unemployed types. I certainly wouldn't want to live there. I see it rated the "least polite/ most aggressive" British city in a survey 2 weeks back.
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/24102005/140/plea-calm-birmingham-riots.html
Police in Birmingham have described another night of violent clashes as "entirely unacceptable". One man was shot dead during the disturbances and about 20 people were injured.Rival black and Asian gangs gathered in the Lozells area of the city and there was a stand-off with police in riot gear.
An 18-year-old man died from gunshot wounds a mile away in Newtown but police said it was "too early" to link it to the weekend of rioting.
Saturday night's violence erupted after residents attended a public meeting addressing concerns about an unconfirmed sex attack on a 14-year-old Jamaican girl, said to be an illegal immigrant.
The hotly-debated rumour at the centre of the trouble, which remains unsubstantiated, is that the girl was raped after shoplifting from a beauty product store owned by Asians.
The alleged assault sparked a week of mounting tension among the area's black and Asian communities, culminating in the outbreak. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
bigverne
Joined: 12 May 2004
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 24, 2005 4:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
I saw this story reported on the BBC last night, and they failed to mention the ethnicity of any of the people involved, even though this was central to why the riots took place. It was Blacks against Asians. The BBC only referred vaguely to 'youths'. I am guessing that they did not mention the race of those involved because it would have undermined their liberal position that racial tension only happens between whites and minorities, and not between the minorities themselves.
As mass immigration continues apace, such incidents are likely to escalate. The government and those in the liberal media seem to think that creating inner city Bosnias is a good idea. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hypnotist
Joined: 04 Dec 2004
Location: I wish I were a sock
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 24, 2005 5:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
The ethnicities are mentioned in paragraph 3 of the online BBC News report.
I don't think anyone claims creating inner city Bosnias is a good idea, so let's get rid of that strawman right away too. Liberals are just as - more - concerned about the lack of integration (just as we were after the Black/police riots of the 80s).
Britain has a long way to go before immigration can be described as 'mass'. Birmingham has its grim parts, though. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Leslie Cheswyck
Joined: 31 May 2003
Location: University of Western Chile
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 24, 2005 5:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Can't they all just...get along? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bigverne
Joined: 12 May 2004
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 24, 2005 5:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| The ethnicities are mentioned in paragraph 3 of the online BBC News report. |
I was talking about the report on the BBC1 news on Sunday night which failed to mention race at all. Another demonstration of the hopeless liberal bias of a once great public institution.
| Quote: |
| I don't think anyone claims creating inner city Bosnias is a good idea |
So, why have we allowed hundreds of thousands of people into the country over the last 10 years creating those exact conditions? Of course, most liberals prefer to think they are creating some multicultural utopia, rather than the ethnic ghettoes that are often the reality. Birmingham may well just be the tip of the iceberg. There is also considerable tension between Whites and Asians in Northern towns, between Somalis and Indians in West London and between asylum seekers and the indigeneous population in towns up and down the country.
| Quote: |
| Liberals are just as - more - concerned about the lack of integration |
You say you are, but almost everything you propose and all the policies you adopt work in precisely the opposite direction. Liberals embrace not integration, but multiculturalism, even though many of them are now starting to abandon this contradictory doctrine. Liberals have done everything to block effective integration by encouraging minorities to cling onto their cultures and by thwarting attempts to control mass immigration. Large scale immigration, of the type we have had for the last decade is creating large self-sustaining communities, reducing integration pressures on those communities.
| Quote: |
| Britain has a long way to go before immigration can be described as 'mass'. |
We have a net immigration rate of something like 200,000 per year. This is the highest rate of inward migration ever. The population of the UK is predicted, by the government, to increase by 5 million, to 65 million by 2025. It is sheer lunacy to do this in such a densely populated country. Almost all of this increase will be due to immigration. How many more immigrants would we need before it became 'mass' immigration, because it sure seems like a lot to me. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hypnotist
Joined: 04 Dec 2004
Location: I wish I were a sock
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 24, 2005 5:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
When the right (and particularly the right-wing media) shout that immigrants shouldn't be allowed to work (and take "our jobs"), is it any wonders you get pockets of unemployment forming? No, don't go blaming the left for that.
Liberals embrace both multiculturalism and integration. They are two sides of the same coin. The problem comes when immigrants are forced due to poverty to overcrowd into houses and neighbourhoods. And that hardly creates multiculturalism.
Race riots have been going on a long time, so less of the "tip of the iceberg" crap - we heard it all before. 1958 at Notting Hill, 1981 in Brixton...
I've not seen figures for 04-05 but previously it was around 170k per year. That compares to 15 years ago where the population increase due to births was 150k per year. The existing population is getting older, too.
Nevertheless, 200,000 per year entering a population of 60 million, or 0.3% of the population - that hardly counts as mass to me. Mass would be 10%+.
And what Leslie said. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rapier
Joined: 16 Feb 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 24, 2005 5:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I think the enduring separateness of muslim communities in British cities is quite a stark feature. Very closed societies. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bigverne
Joined: 12 May 2004
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 24, 2005 6:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| When the right (and particularly the right-wing media) shout that immigrants shouldn't be allowed to work |
When have any of the 'right-wing press' said that immigrants shouldn't be allowed to work. What they have said is that levels of immigration are too high and that failed asylum seekers should be deported. Now who's making strawmans?
| Quote: |
| is it any wonders you get pockets of unemployment forming? No, don't go blaming the left for that. |
If you import largely poor, uneducated immigrants from places like Pakistan, Bangladesh and Somalia, don't be surprised that they form poor immigrant ghettoes. That's what poor immigrants do. Better not to import them in the first place and instead encourage skilled immigrants and people from culturally similar nations.
| Quote: |
| Liberals embrace both multiculturalism and integration. They are two sides of the same coin. |
No, they are in direct opposition to each other. Multiculturalism opposes any notion of a shared identity, or the idea of 'when in Rome'. It is the doctrine of multiculturalism that encourages immigrants to cling on to their identities and languages. It is why local councils in major cities produce public information in numerous different languages, when such money would be better spent on English classes. If you want integration, you have to ditch multiculturalism. Even the head of the Commission of Racial Equality is starting to realise this.
| Quote: |
| The problem comes when immigrants are forced due to poverty to overcrowd into houses and neighbourhoods. |
As long as you have hundreds of thousands of immigrants from poor countries coming into the country, how are you going to solve that problem?
| Quote: |
| Nevertheless, 200,000 per year entering a population of 60 million, or 0.3% of the population - that hardly counts as mass to me. Mass would be 10%+. |
200,000 is the net immigration rate. The actual number coming in is around 350,000 migrants per year. That is a huge number, and adds up to around 2 million extra people per decade. You may not want to say it, but that is mass immigration, and it is unprecedented in British history.
And immigration as 10% of the population per year would not be mass immigration, but the largest wave of immigration to any country, ever! That would amount to 6 million immigrants per year! The immigration we have at the moment is very large and unsustainable. It is creating self-sustaining ethnic ghettoes separate from the mainstream, vastly reducing integration and fostering ethnic and racial divides. Any attempt to reduce this massive inflow of people is inevitably chouted down as racist by liberals who then have nerve to turn around and say that we need to integrate, despite the fact that they created such problems in the first place. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hypnotist
Joined: 04 Dec 2004
Location: I wish I were a sock
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 24, 2005 9:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| bigverne wrote: |
| When have any of the 'right-wing press' said that immigrants shouldn't be allowed to work. |
Constantly. Do you read them? The "don't let Eastern Europeans here to work" line was widespread. Only the Guardian is pushing for asylum seekers to be allowed to work. Yes, they also say "reduce immigration" - but their policy is to make it as awful as possible for those who do come to the UK. And that leads to ghettos.
| Quote: |
| If you import largely poor, uneducated immigrants from places like Pakistan, Bangladesh and Somalia, don't be surprised that they form poor immigrant ghettoes. That's what poor immigrants do. Better not to import them in the first place and instead encourage skilled immigrants and people from culturally similar nations. |
So what happened when the US imported largely poor, uneducated immigrants from Europe? Or when Australia imported largely poor, uneducated immigrants from the UK?
The poor can work to become rich, and the uneducated can learn. That's why most of them want to come to the UK in the first place! It's when they are denied those opportunities that they form ghettos.
Anyway, I'd be willing to bet the education level is better than you think. For example, over a third of new immigrants in Scotland hold a higher education qualification.
| Quote: |
| No, they are in direct opposition to each other. Multiculturalism opposes any notion of a shared identity, or the idea of 'when in Rome'. |
What crap.
| Quote: |
| It is the doctrine of multiculturalism that encourages immigrants to cling on to their identities and languages. |
Or the Welsh to cling to theirs? Do you think that Welsh and Gaelic should be killed by denying them a place in schools or on public service TV?
| Quote: |
| It is why local councils in major cities produce public information in numerous different languages, when such money would be better spent on English classes. |
How good is your Korean, exactly? You are able to read everything the Labor board writes, eh?
It is simple good sense that if you are seeking to reach people with information, you should present it in the best way possible.
| Quote: |
| If you want integration, you have to ditch multiculturalism. Even the head of the Commission of Racial Equality is starting to realise this. |
Again, utter bollocks. He said, "The UK must enforce "equality, participation and interaction". That's about as good a description of perfect multiculturalism as I can think of.
| Quote: |
| As long as you have hundreds of thousands of immigrants from poor countries coming into the country, how are you going to solve that problem? |
Get them acting as proper, productive members of a multicultural society.
| Quote: |
| 200,000 is the net immigration rate. The actual number coming in is around 350,000 migrants per year. |
Sure, but they're hardly all poor (or non-white). Large numbers come from South Africa and Australia, for example. And those you probably think of as immigrants leave too - the Caribbean-born community declined by 12,000 between 1991 and 2001.
| Quote: |
| That is a huge number, and adds up to around 2 million extra people per decade. You may not want to say it, but that is mass immigration, and it is unprecedented in British history. |
It's not mass immigration. And in terms of proportion of the population it's not unprecedented either - think back to 1066.
| Quote: |
| And immigration as 10% of the population per year would not be mass immigration, but the largest wave of immigration to any country, ever! That would amount to 6 million immigrants per year! |
The 10 countries with the highest % of migrants (2000)
Country - Percent of total population
United Arab Emirates - 73.8%
Kuwait - 57,9%
Jordan - 39,6%
Israel - 37,4%
Singapore - 33,6%
Oman - 26,9%
Estonia - 26,2%
Saudi Arabia - 25,8%
Latvia - 25,3%
Switzerland - 25,1%
In raw numbers 10% would be high, but it'd take nearly 5 years just to get to a level where a majority of the country were immigrants.
And 6 million in a year is hardly unprecedented either. 8 million were uprooted by the partition of India and Pakistan for example.
| Quote: |
| The immigration we have at the moment is very large and unsustainable. It is creating self-sustaining ethnic ghettoes separate from the mainstream, vastly reducing integration and fostering ethnic and racial divides. Any attempt to reduce this massive inflow of people is inevitably chouted down as racist by liberals who then have nerve to turn around and say that we need to integrate, despite the fact that they created such problems in the first place. |
The liberals you're so fond of blaming weren't even in power during some of the largest movements of people into the UK. We could sustain the current level of immigration - it's only more or less maintaining the level of population growth we had in the 90s - if we enabled immigrants to be properly educated, fed and housed.
And yes, I do find it racist to seek to deny people entry to the UK based on race. So many people calling that (white) Zimbabweans should get entry to the UK having campaigned for years to make sure the blacks from that country couldn't stay... disgusting.
I wonder what this board would be saying if the same attitudes were being found in Korean newspapers about us. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bigverne
Joined: 12 May 2004
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 24, 2005 11:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| The "don't let Eastern Europeans here to work" line was widespread. |
That's a little different from your blanket statement of 'don't let immigrants work'. They were arguing that they shouldn't have been let in in the first place. I don't think anyone has argued that immigrants legally resident in the UK should not be allowed to work.
| Quote: |
| And that leads to ghettos. |
No, importing people from poor, culturally very different third world countries leads to ghettoes.
| Quote: |
| So what happened when the US imported largely poor, uneducated immigrants from Europe? |
The US was an expanding, continental power that needed immigrants to drive forward its industrial development. Moreover, the US has always been a nation of immigrants, and despite the propaganda the UK has not been, until recently. A little different from a tiny, overpopulated island with very large numbers of people unemployed. Moreover, the immigrants to the US were all from Europe, mostly Christian and were all encouraged to become Americans and indeed were proud to do so. There was no question of the US government funding programmes for them to hang on to their language and traditions.
| Quote: |
| Or when Australia imported largely poor, uneducated immigrants from the UK |
Well, since most Australians are descended from people from the British Isles there was little problem of the British forming ghettoes, as culturally they were almost identical. A tad different from Somali muslims coming to live in Birmingham. Different language, culture and religion.
| Quote: |
| The poor can work to become rich, and the uneducated can learn. |
Why not just encourage skilled immigrants in the first place. Moreover, unemployment levels in the Bangladeshi and Pakistani community, who have been here for some time would seem to refute your suggestion that the poor can become rich. It's not that simple. The unemployment rate in the Somali community is something close to 80%, a fantastic contribution to modern Britain I think you'll agree.
Fantastic argument, and quite indicative of the fact that you have no idea of what multiculturalism actually means, as a doctrine and as a government policy. There are plenty of books that have been written on multiculturalism, and they all eschew integration as tantamount to imperialism.
| Quote: |
| Or the Welsh to cling to theirs? Do you think that Welsh and Gaelic should be killed by denying them a place in schools or on public service TV? |
Sorry to tell you this but Welsh and Gaelic are indigeneous languages to the British Isles, and as such should be supported, by government bodies in Wales and Scotland. However, I do not see why Welsh or Scottish taxpayers should have to support government programmes to teach Afghan children, for example, about their native language. I do not want my tax money going towards supporting immigrant culture. If they are so keen to pass on their traditions to their kids, then they could have always stayed at home.
| Quote: |
| How good is your Korean, exactly? You are able to read everything the Labor board writes, eh? |
Most foreigners in Korea are only there temporarily, unlike immigrants to the UK, many of whom stay for decades or permanently. I have no problem with central government websites giving information in a number of languages. What I do have a problem with is local councils spending my tax money on 'community' centres for specific ethnic groups, and to produce leaflets and literature in every conceivable language on every issue, because some immigrants can't be bothered to learn English.
| Quote: |
| "The UK must enforce "equality, participation and interaction". That's about as good a description of perfect multiculturalism as I can think of. |
It sounds like the kind of vague, meaningless garbage that politicians like himself are so fond of, but it is not a definition of multiculturalism. Multiculturalism, as a political doctrine, is a rejection of the idea that a nation has a dominant culture that immigrant groups should assimilate into. Instead, they should be encouraged to hold onto their culture, language and traditions. This doctrine puts people into distinct groups, based on their race or ethnicity, and sets them against each other. As Trevor Philips has said, it is no longer useful, and it is time we moved to a society where people are treated on the basis of their individual talents, and not their membership of an assigned group. Moreover, there should be an increased emphasis on British norms, values and traditions.
| Quote: |
| Get them acting as proper, productive members of a multicultural society. |
More vague, idealistic platitudes. What does this actually mean, in terms of actual policy, and why should we go through the inevitable cost and effort of making them 'productive members of society', when such costs could be avoided if;
A) They weren't let in, in the first place, or
B) We encouraged immigration of highly skilled immigrants, and from countries where they would be unlikely to form ghettoes.
People have been trying to solve this problem for many years, but as long as you have hundreds of thousands of immigrants arriving every year from the third world your efforts to solve this problem will be futile.
| Quote: |
| Large numbers come from South Africa and Australia, for example. |
In the context of a debate about ethnic ghettoes, I hardly think Aussies and South Africans are relevant. They do not form ghettoes and they integrate pretty seamlessly into society, which only underlines my point about the importance of culture when formulating immigration policy. Encouraging immigration from rural Pakistan and Somalia, and then expecting people to just 'get along' is wishful thinking of the worst order.
| Quote: |
| And in terms of proportion of the population it's not unprecedented either - think back to 1066. |
How many Normans 'invaded' (interesting that you should compare immigration to an invasion) and what percentage of the population did they makeup. I doubt it was anywhere close to 10%, as the Normans did not come in large numbers but simply ousted the aristocracy and took over the running of the country. The vast majority of people were still Anglo-Saxon peasants.
| Quote: |
| In raw numbers 10% would be high, but it'd take nearly 5 years just to get to a level where a majority of the country were immigrants. |
You say 'nearly 5 years' as if it's a long time. You quoted 10% a year, as a proportion of population, which was an absurd figure.
| Quote: |
| And 6 million in a year is hardly unprecedented either. 8 million were uprooted by the partition of India and Pakistan for example. |
That was a bloody ethnic conflict, not legal immigration! Why are you presenting such extreme examples. Whether you want to argue over the use of the word 'mass', what cannot be argued is that the UK is experiencing record levels of immigration. Immigration on such a scale makes integration far more problematic and makes the likelihood of the kind of inter-racial conflict we have seen the past weekend far more likely.
| Quote: |
| We could sustain the current level of immigration - it's only more or less maintaining the level of population growth we had in the 90s - if we enabled immigrants to be properly educated, fed and housed. |
Well, I, like many other Britons don't fancy living in so crowded a country with ever growing immigrant ghettoes. The SE of England is second only to Holland in population density. You have no problems about adding to that population, to the tune of 2 million extra people a decade? You have no problems about concreting over huge areas of countryside so that we can build houses to accomodate this population growth?
Immigrants are already properly educated, fed and housed. I don't see any pressing reasons to make this country any more crowded so that we can educate, feed and house a few million more, just to satisy the liberal guilt of a tiny minority of Guardian readers.
| Quote: |
| I do find it racist to seek to deny people entry to the UK based on race. |
Who said anything about denying people entry to the UK based on race? Do you people ever back up any of your wild accusations of racism with evidence? My reason for curtailing immigration is based largely on selfishness. I simply don't want to share this crowded island with anymore people, and I see no reason to add to the growing ethnic ghettoes we already have. That means reducing immigration substantially, although not eliminating it altogether.
| Quote: |
| The liberals you're so fond of blaming weren't even in power during some of the largest movements of people into the UK. |
Both Tories and Labour were in power from the 1950 to the 1990s. However, I am talking about current immigration, which is the largest on record, and which has increased substantially since Labour came to power.
Last edited by bigverne on Mon Oct 24, 2005 11:26 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bigverne
Joined: 12 May 2004
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 24, 2005 11:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| I wonder what this board would be saying if the same attitudes were being found in Korean newspapers about us. |
Korea, wisely, has not allowed hundreds of thousands of people to enter the country and fraudulently claim 'asylum', and support from the state so that again, is a silly comparison. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hypnotist
Joined: 04 Dec 2004
Location: I wish I were a sock
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 24, 2005 7:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I don't want to get into tit-for-tat quoting, cos it gets far too boring.
You seem to have a complete misunderstanding of multiculturalism as desired by those who disagree with you. I can't blame you for this - Civitas (who should know better) say exactly the same thing. But it is completely wrong.
You can find a good discussion of just this here:
| Quote: |
| Those who say multiculturalism means separatism clearly are not talking about the multiculturalism that is found in the main texts of academics or public policy practitioners. |
It clearly suits your purposes to state that multiculturalism = separatism but it's simply not true. You almost got it right with your definition, but it wasn't ultimately correct because you missed the difference between integration and assimilation. Cultures can (and do!) integrate without becoming assimilated. Look at gay culture in the UK if you want one good example.
You can't avoid the fact that "highly skilled immigrants" means (in public perception) "white", and "poor immigrants from different cultures" means "non-white". And you tell me that isn't granting immigration rights based on race?
Britain certainly was built on immigration. It may have happened over a period of several hundred years ending a thousand years ago, but I'm willing to bet your ancestors were immigrants.
Ultimately if we want to reduce immigration we need to work on improving the lives of people in their own countries (including stopping stealing their best educated healthcare workers, which is something you seem to be all in favour of). Still, I believe that immigration is good for both the host country and the people who come - particularly if they're going to be valuable members of the workforce (and that means I believe in training them to be so). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rapier
Joined: 16 Feb 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 24, 2005 8:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The immigration avalanche would stop if wealth was more evenly distributed around the world.
The ruination of the environment would stop if we didn't consume more than we need.
But I don't think its going to happen, because humans are ruled by egotistical greed. I heard today that under 5% of all money raised at that Bono "abolish poverty" concert is actually reaching the people it was intended to help. The rest is pocketted left right and centre by the bandwagon.
Anyway..back to Birmingham:
Call for calm in Birmingham
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/24102005/356/call-calm-birmingham.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bigverne
Joined: 12 May 2004
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 25, 2005 12:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| You can't avoid the fact that "highly skilled immigrants" means (in public perception) "white", and "poor immigrants from different cultures" means "non-white". And you tell me that isn't granting immigration rights based on race? |
So, simply because something is 'perceived' to be racist, that makes it so? What absurd logic. Moreover, a great many skilled migrants will in fact be people from places like India, China and Korea, and I am certainly not advocating not letting them in because they're not white.
| Quote: |
| Britain certainly was built on immigration. It may have happened over a period of several hundred years ending a thousand years ago, but I'm willing to bet your ancestors were immigrants. |
No, it was not. Modern Britain was largely built by the ancestors of people who had arrived a millenia or more ago. They were invaders, not immigrants. My ancestors were not immigrants, but likely, judging by my name, to have been Anglo-Saxon invaders who arrived in England over 1,000 years ago. After 1066, the movements of people into Britain were sporadic and small in number, save for a few isolated events. Large scale, continuous migration to Britain, started after WW2. Britain was not built on immigration. In fact, Britain managed to become the foremost industrial power in the world, without serious inward migration. I am not saying that immigration has played no part in the history of this island, but to say that Britain was 'built on immigration' is simply not true. If you were to go by that definition, almost every country in the world could be said to be 'built on immigration', since everyone at some point in history came from somewhere else. The Koreans came from the plains of central Asia a few thousand years ago, but nobody would put them in the same bracket as the USA or Australia as 'nations of immigrants'.
| Quote: |
| Ultimately if we want to reduce immigration we need to work on improving the lives of people in their own countries (including stopping stealing their best educated healthcare workers, which is something you seem to be all in favour of). |
I quite agree, and I think we should be improving the conditions of British doctors and nurses, rather than poaching doctors from Mali and the Phillipines. Of course, if we had a decent education system, we would have no need to import so many skilled workers.
| Quote: |
| Still, I believe that immigration is good for both the host country and the people who come |
If it is strictly controlled, in small numbers and not open to abuse. Unfortunately, none of these things can be said for present UK immigration policy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
waggo
Joined: 18 May 2003
Location: pusan baby!
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 25, 2005 7:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Hypnotist you may think youre smart and your liberal theories may make you feel good about yourself but basically youre a *beep*.And its twats like you who have F*cked our country. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
