Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 63 (9161 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,585 Year: 2,842/9,624 Month: 687/1,588 Week: 93/229 Day: 4/61 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Disgusting Berkeley Riots
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1435 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 1 of 275 (798477)
02-02-2017 7:56 PM


Let's hear all the wacko justifications for this violent fascist action against free speech that you all can come up with. Have at it.

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by Modulous, posted 02-02-2017 8:11 PM Faith has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1435 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 13 of 275 (798497)
02-02-2017 10:09 PM


Although incidents of physical attacks on people were caught on video and violence clearly characterized the event, not a single arrest was made. Or one was made, depends on which report you hear. Dozens should have been made by the sound of it. They had campus cops and Berkeley cops standing around. Why were no arrests made? This is what makes the University itself culpable, that they did nothing to stop the violence.
One report I heard described a peaceful protest that was then
infiltrated by over a hundred out-of-town "agitators."
The rioting moved into the town where a Starbucks, a bank and an ATM were broken into and looted. What does this have to do with protesting a conservative speaker, or protesting Trump?
I saw video of one attack on a young woman with some kind of spray that inflamed her eyes, when she was simply talking to a reporter in a cheerful way. Her cheerful mood rapidly changed. She had on a Trump shirt and was there to hear the speaker, Milo Yannopoulos. Then she was violently yanked, and hit hard on the head while crying and screaming for help.
What does this have to do with protesting a speaker or Trump? Why were no arrests made?
They cancelled the speaker. Clearly the violence was aimed at shutting people up they disagree with. I guess this is the "Anti Free Speech Movement" in contrast to the 60s protests.
"Fascist" is the right word for violent suppression of free speech and the rights of any class of people. Brownshirts for sure.
Will America ever be America again?
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Replies to this message:
 Message 16 by RAZD, posted 02-03-2017 9:24 AM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1435 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 17 of 275 (798540)
02-03-2017 9:34 AM
Reply to: Message 15 by NoNukes
02-03-2017 5:40 AM


Re: Riots are bad (but it depends on who's rioting).
Oh, fun! Ah yes, yes indeedy, this topic pulled out a true wacko lefty response, as I thought it probably would.
I'm on board with the idea that riots and violence are bad. I don't condone them.
Perhaps you could venture a thought about how so many of the anti-Trump "protests" have in fact become violent?
But Coyote specifically and directly, and perhaps Faith more indirectly seems to be suggesting that some "opposition" speech was missed that ought to have been heard.
this has me blinking wildly. What on earth can you mean? Milo Yiannopoulos was invited by the university to give a talk. People had come to hear him. Is there some special justification needed that he had a "right to be heard?"
Such a strange opinion suggests that "some" people really don't deserve free speech? Such as people who disagree with the darling opinions of the Left? Well, at least UC Berkeley had the guts to invite him in spite of such a perfectly righteously properly Constitutional opinion as that people who share his views should be hit over the head and thrown to the ground and stomped on.
(
I am really curious about what it is the Milo Yiannopoulos has to say that we all missed the opportunity to hear.
Since when does someone's free speech depend on anyone's having an opportunity to hear it? Which is what you seem to be implying. You mean if what he has to say isn't something you find to your liking we should consider that there's no loss if the opportunity is missed? What about those who came to hear him? They don't matter I suppose. That wouldn't be any surprise, since nobody's opinion but their own matters to the anti-Trumpers.
I ask that question because history does not allow me to accept without question purity of motives. If anyone wants me to cite some history, I'd be happy to oblige.
Eh? Now you seem to have lurched from a suspiciously fascistic suggestion that perhaps "some" people, even some invited to speak on a college campus, really should be denied the right, from that position, I say, to this utterly incomprehensible non sequitur about "purity of motives." Excuse me? WHOSE "purity of motives" are you talking about, and what does history have to do with it? The only relevant history I can think of offhand, to what you have been suggesting so far, might be the Nazis' suppression of the rights of their citizens to speak a political opinion in someone's hearing. Yes, the Nazis do seem to keep coming up in this context. Hard to find a more appropriate analogy to violent attempts to shut someone up.
I'm also amused at the very low level of action that is required to draw folks to call other folks Nazi's.
Eh? Violent attacks intended to silence a political opinion are a "low level" action that shouldn't be compared to the Nazis, cuz why? Again it's a rather apt comparison it seems to me. Perhaps you have another word for it? How about Stalinism? Maoism?
Apparently promoting ideas regarding white supremacy does not invoke such ideas, while protesting against the promotion of those ideas is right up there with operating ovens for humans.
I see. Yes, just accuse him of "white supremacy" and there you have your clever Lefty propaganda to turn HIM into a Nazi. Oh, and yes, call a violent riot a "protest." (You don't REALLY think "riots are bad" as your title claims, it depends on who's being beaten bloody, right?) Ah yes. The Left knows how to sling the lies to make an honest conservative into a Nazi. But we can't call the violent protest intended to suppress him what it is, fascism.
I never heard of Milo Yiannopoulous before this incident. What I've found out about him is that he's a nicelooking blond gay man who is an editor for Breitbart, considers himself to be a libertarian, identifies with his Jewish grandmother, has a reputation for being funny, and says he's often enjoyed lampooning white supremacists.
He's even had to take legal action against the liars who call him a white supremacist, such as Glamour magazine. Does it ever occur to you that these accusations that are so freely slung by the Left at Trump and Trump supporters and conservatives and libertarians, are being invented by some Leftists somewhere off the radar and flung into the public arena for political purposes? They are lies, there are lots of them out there. Or call it "fake news." Very reminiscent of fascism.
I'm also amused by the association of Berkeley Republicans with this crackpot
Amused? Crackpot?
In short. I smell hypocrisy this morning, and the smell is not coming entirely from the west coast.
Hypocrisy? Ah another good PC slur. Me on the other hand, I smell Leftist fascism.
Just for reference here's this "white supremacist crackpot" giving a talk he was able to give in Colorado despite protests there too. Here's your opportunity to hear what he had to say, since you expressed curiosity about that.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by NoNukes, posted 02-03-2017 5:40 AM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by vimesey, posted 02-03-2017 10:13 AM Faith has replied
 Message 29 by NoNukes, posted 02-03-2017 3:18 PM Faith has replied
 Message 73 by Taq, posted 02-06-2017 12:22 PM Faith has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1435 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 18 of 275 (798541)
02-03-2017 9:38 AM
Reply to: Message 16 by RAZD
02-03-2017 9:24 AM


Could have been the work of "outside agitators." Perhaps there will be some information coming about that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by RAZD, posted 02-03-2017 9:24 AM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by RAZD, posted 02-03-2017 10:25 AM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1435 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 21 of 275 (798549)
02-03-2017 11:09 AM
Reply to: Message 19 by vimesey
02-03-2017 10:13 AM


Re: Riots are bad (but it depends on who's rioting).
Violent attacks intended to silence a political opinion are a "low level" action that shouldn't be compared to the Nazis, cuz why?
Because the defining characteristic of Nazis - the evil that we most associate with them - is the horrifying and systematic murder on an industrial scale of 6 million innocent Jewish/gay/disabled/Romany people. That's Nazism to most people.
Yes, well my preferred term is "fascist" rather than Nazi although I think Nazi applies well enough, as I explained.
Of course they suppressed free speech and did numerous other immoral things, but the reason they have rightly acquired such a universal hatred as recent history's most evil group is the deliberate and systematic genocide of 6m people.
Eleven million. Six million Jews and the rest were Slavs, Communists, Christians and the like.
They were the police - the army - the entire apparatus of state - there was no-one to turn to when they came for you to send you off to the gas chambers. The despair and misery they caused is unfathomable.
That is what a Nazi is. Every time you equate someone who does something far less wrong, with a Nazi, you normalise that little bit more what the Nazis did.
LET ME POINT OUT that it is the Left calling Trump supporters by such names that has launched this whole line of thought. We are answering because we are not the Nazis, THEY ARE. That is one thing Milo mentions in his talk, that we are being called fascists when we are not acting anything like fascists but they are. Their expressed opinions are fascist -- shutting us up is what they want to do. An amazing number of MAINTSTREAM commentators actually have called for Trump to be assassinated. Blowing up the white house is a fantasy of Madonna's. Listen to them. IN A SANE WORLD NOT DOMINATED BY BIASED LEFTIST LYING MEDIA THAT WOULD BE CONSIDERED TREASON AND SHE WOULD BE ARRESTED.
Their opinions are all fascist, anti-free speech, anti-Constitutional freedoms, but they justify them on their false claim that WE are the fascists. They think nothing of calling a conservative or liberatarian a "white supremacist" which is as good as calling us Nazis, which they do on other occasions anyway, and what does that do but whip up hatred against us?. Against US, who are NOT in any sense whatever Nazis, fascists, racists or white supremacists. Again, THEY ARE. That is how THEY are acting and they DO deserve these epithets.
You have to realize that it is quite possible for the Left to be the fascists. The distinguishing mark is NOT THE POLITICAL CONTENT, it's the violent suppressive attitude that even includes wanting to kill the opponent. The protests against Trump have pretty much all turned violent, and at least verbally accusatory and threatening FALSELY. I mentioned five documented incidents of violence by Trump haters on Trump supporters, and so far I haven 't seen one similar incident the other way around.; Leftists infiltrated Trump rallies and provoked violence. Trump supporters are not violent, they are the victims of the violence. And a lot of it is based completely on lies. There is not one racist plank in Trump's platform, there is no xenophobia, and he EXPLICITLY supported the LGBT cause, yet he and his supporters are called homophobes. The lying PROPAGANDA IS ALL ON THE LEFT AGAINST TRUMP SUPPORTERS AND SO IS THE VIOLENCE. Truth requires that the traditional definition of fascism be rethought.
AND, speaking of the police and the government as the fascist element, the police made no arrests from the violent riots at Berkeley. It is very possible for the LEFTIST establishment, which all of them in Berkeley are, to be the fascist force. And the medie wield incredible power with their biased reports that make us into the villains in the minds of the public. Calling us the fascists is a PROPAGANDA WEAPON. We are resisting while we still have the time to resist.
There is a very genuine debate to be had about what the rioters did, and the extent of free speech. But leave the Nazis out of it - it leaves you and Coyote with a severe credibility issue - and is insulting to the memories of those 6m and the unimaginable horror they suffered.
Sorry, even your reasonable opinion is being used on the wrong side of this argument. There are global level powers and government and police powers that are out to get conservatives, people who want national sovereignty and don't want to be run by leftist billionaires. The Jews are also being targeted AGAIN though, by THEM, not US. Israel is always the scapegoat while Islam which is a real threat to world peace is supported by the Left.
The views that would have applied fifty years ago don't always apply now. There are clever devils working feverishly to control the world and they don't care which political view has the upper hand, but right now they are pushing the Left.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by vimesey, posted 02-03-2017 10:13 AM vimesey has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 22 by ringo, posted 02-03-2017 11:23 AM Faith has not replied
 Message 23 by Phat, posted 02-03-2017 11:37 AM Faith has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1435 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 24 of 275 (798556)
02-03-2017 12:26 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by RAZD
02-03-2017 10:25 AM


Re: anarchists and agent provocateurs
I don't really see much of this supposed condemnation of the violence from the Left, or from the media etc. The anarchists' views seem to be popular, even if the violence is tepidly decried.
We don't really hear much from the Left denouncing the violence of the protestors, decrying the violent speech of those who want Trump to be assassinated, the white house blown up etc., and it seems to me we often hear sympathy with the violent demonstrations instead, even characterizing Trump supporters more or less as deserving it, because after all we're evil just as the anarchists think we are.
What I posted about media characterizing Yiannopoulos as a white supremacist is the usual thing from the Left, and very very little objection to anything the Left does.
The anarchists should have been arrested. Why weren't they?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by RAZD, posted 02-03-2017 10:25 AM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by RAZD, posted 02-03-2017 1:33 PM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1435 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 27 of 275 (798566)
02-03-2017 1:58 PM
Reply to: Message 26 by RAZD
02-03-2017 1:33 PM


Re: anarchists and agent provocateurs
OK, I guess I missed your saying that the media is biased against non-violent Leftists. That's interesting if so, but then you'd think I'd hear about them from the conservative media I listen to most, and I don't. They could call into many conservative talk shows and protest the media bias against them. Conservatives would be happy to know this.
abe: OR, they could write their complaint all over the internet. I'd see it, the conservative internet would pick it up etc. Why isn't that happening? It tends to contradict your claim.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by RAZD, posted 02-03-2017 1:33 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 28 by Theodoric, posted 02-03-2017 2:25 PM Faith has not replied
 Message 30 by RAZD, posted 02-03-2017 5:33 PM Faith has not replied
 Message 63 by RAZD, posted 02-05-2017 8:29 AM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1435 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 31 of 275 (798609)
02-03-2017 6:47 PM
Reply to: Message 29 by NoNukes
02-03-2017 3:18 PM


Re: Riots are bad (but it depends on who's rioting).
How is Yiannopolous spreading "propaganda?" He's not. He makes some rather crude jokes about feminism that I don't get but I'd be inclined just to ignore someone who talks like that. It's not "propaganda," and it's not "hate speech." Nobody is threatened by such remarks. How can you compare such trivia with calling Jews the cause of all Germany's woes and calling them "vermin" and the like?
It's the rioters who were in fact attacking women in reality. The people who go to Trump events and I guess also Yiannopolous are completely nonviolent; their opponents are the fascists, that's just a fact. Wearing a Trump shirt is the only reason a young woman was sprayed in the face and physically yanked around. That's fascism. What else can you call it? If most of the crowd really objects to treating people that way why didn't anyone come to her rescue?
"Protesting hate speech?"
In any case protesting would be fine if people want to bother, I'd ignore them too myself because it's silly, nothing he says is any kind of threat to anybody. But to attack people physically for ANY reason is indefensible. That's not a protest, that's a riot and it is against the law and the whole thing should have been dispersed and arrests made.
It's "alt-right" speech, whatever that is in reality, that's under attack. I don't see any other speech being threatened in the slightest. Political Correctness is THE main attack on free speech, and it has been oppressing us for decades. Yiannopolous seems to be trying to protest that sort of suppression of speech. I don't think his jokes succeed at that, or do anything but show he's trying to be iconoclastic and insist on the freedom to say whatever he wants. Why is it OK to suppress what you call "hate speech?" The only speech that should be suppressed is speech that promotes violence. THAT's against the law. (abe: or I might include namecalling of a class of people -- vermin etc. ) Milo Y isn't saying anything like that, but Madonna did, Leftists that are cdalling for assassinating Trump do. That doesn't bother you though? You're far more bothered about a guy who makes bad jokes about feminists.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by NoNukes, posted 02-03-2017 3:18 PM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 32 by NoNukes, posted 02-03-2017 7:01 PM Faith has replied
 Message 34 by Modulous, posted 02-03-2017 7:32 PM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1435 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 33 of 275 (798611)
02-03-2017 7:03 PM
Reply to: Message 32 by NoNukes
02-03-2017 7:01 PM


Re: Riots are bad (but it depends on who's rioting).
Here's a preliminary attempt to reconcile a few issues.
I have to acknowledge that I also don't like the jokes Yiannopolous made. I don't like talking that way about any class of people. But I strenuously object to the Leftist reaction of just suppressing it as "hate speech,: especially knowing that a perfectly reasonable well-though-out argument against feminiost ideology would be treated exactly the same way. PC is a verbal punch in the nose, it represents the abysmally low level of political discourse the nation has sunk to. Leftist slurs and epithets show some sort of mental deterioration that is now issing iin violence because true dialogue has been so pathetically reduced.
Yiannopolous' jokes are really no better than PC. They are also little more than slurs and epithets on the same mentally deranged level.
How are such things to be dealt with in a healthy democratic society? Not by PC, not by slurs and epithets, not by lies and manipulation, not by accusations of "hate speech" and violent fascistic attempts to shut him up. ((I'm going to keep calling it "fascistic" because it far better characterizes current Leftist tactics than conservatives, which they accuse of it)..
Careful thoughtful analytic discussion is the civilized way. Take apart Yiannopolous' rhetoric seriously and carefully. A serious critique of feminist ideology is quite possible; reducing it to slurs and epithets accomplishes nothing. He sounds as demented as Leftist "humor" sounds to me. To me the humor thread at EvC is demented, mentally deranged lies and slurs and misrepresentations.
There may not be a cure because so many think on that level these days. I've made heroic efforts to show the danger of Islam here. All I get back is basically Leftist accusations, slurs and epithets, PC. ad hominens, personal attacks I can see on this thread another bit of evidence that the real danger in the world right now is the violence in the place of dialogue and the utter erosion of respect for a political opponent. But Yiannopolous also represents a similar deterioration of discourse on the other side. All that's left to us if this keeps escalating is throwing rocks at each other.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by NoNukes, posted 02-03-2017 7:01 PM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 35 by NoNukes, posted 02-03-2017 8:28 PM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1435 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 36 of 275 (798652)
02-04-2017 10:40 AM
Reply to: Message 35 by NoNukes
02-03-2017 8:28 PM


Re: Riots are bad (but it depends on who's rioting).
Calling it "hate speech", particularly when the label is accurate, is just more speech.
No it's politically motivated speech intended to intimidate and suppress, as is all Political Correctness. Thought police. Shut people up. Now riot and burn things down and beat up Trump supporters because of it, even when there isn't a shred of evidence that the person even remotely has such an attitude. Beat them up with impunity too. No arrests in the Berkeley riots, no punishment, police stood around and watched this criminal activity. "Hate speech" justifies all this evil and the Left applauds.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by NoNukes, posted 02-03-2017 8:28 PM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by NoNukes, posted 02-04-2017 2:41 PM Faith has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1435 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 37 of 275 (798654)
02-04-2017 10:46 AM
Reply to: Message 34 by Modulous
02-03-2017 7:32 PM


Re: Riots are bad (but it depends on who's rioting).
"Dreadful behavior" glosses over the fact that the behavior is politically motivated, the aim being to suppress opposing viewpoints. The conservative point of view keeps getting called fascist although there hasn't been one case of such politically motivated violence on the Trump side, no desire to shut anyone up and the rallying cry is for freedom.
The effort is made to pin the idea on people who reacted against the fascistic Leftist disruption of Trump rallies. Nope, defending yourself and kicking out Leftist fascists is not fascism. I can call the stuff totalitarian, or despotic instead, but the point here is that "fascism" is wrongly used to brand conservatives when it is the Left that is acting like fascists. They deserve the term.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by Modulous, posted 02-03-2017 7:32 PM Modulous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by Modulous, posted 02-04-2017 11:15 AM Faith has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1435 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 42 of 275 (798666)
02-04-2017 12:49 PM
Reply to: Message 41 by Dr Adequate
02-04-2017 12:37 PM


I guess you're insinuating something in the effort to justify violence?
Yiannopolous is right to demand an apology. And if he doesn't get it that will be just one more confirmation that the Left is working to bring the nation under totalitarianism based on lying slander and enforced by terrorism.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 41 by Dr Adequate, posted 02-04-2017 12:37 PM Dr Adequate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 43 by Theodoric, posted 02-04-2017 1:17 PM Faith has replied
 Message 49 by Dr Adequate, posted 02-04-2017 4:08 PM Faith has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1435 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 44 of 275 (798669)
02-04-2017 1:22 PM
Reply to: Message 43 by Theodoric
02-04-2017 1:17 PM


Hypocrisy? One thing I've learned by now is that when the Left slings that term it's a total lie. Just another case in point here.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by Theodoric, posted 02-04-2017 1:17 PM Theodoric has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 45 by Theodoric, posted 02-04-2017 1:45 PM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1435 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 50 of 275 (798691)
02-04-2017 5:38 PM
Reply to: Message 45 by Theodoric
02-04-2017 1:45 PM


Complaining about people with hurt feelings and then demanding an apology for your hurt feelings is hypocritical. I don't care how you feel about this idiot, but you cannot dispute facts. His demand for an apology is hypocritical.
No wonder I didn't get it. The usual breathtakingly illogical irrational nonthinking weirdness of the Left.
No, he wants an apology for a LIE because he is not a white supremacist. It's not about hurt feelings, it's about slander. I can't believe I have to explain something so obvious. But after reading through all the other posts to me today I shouldn't really be surprised. I should go into deep mourning for the destroyed minds of the Left.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by Theodoric, posted 02-04-2017 1:45 PM Theodoric has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 51 by Theodoric, posted 02-04-2017 6:15 PM Faith has not replied
 Message 52 by NoNukes, posted 02-04-2017 6:33 PM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1435 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 53 of 275 (798696)
02-04-2017 6:51 PM
Reply to: Message 52 by NoNukes
02-04-2017 6:33 PM


Offense is not slander.
Obviously.
Get a clue.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by NoNukes, posted 02-04-2017 6:33 PM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 54 by NoNukes, posted 02-04-2017 6:55 PM Faith has replied
 Message 56 by Theodoric, posted 02-04-2017 7:00 PM Faith has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024