Post Archive

Region: Libertatem

History

Pevvania wrote:That post gave me cancer

Well you can thank me, I made the Affordable Care Act to help middle class citizens of America like yourself. I think we can all sleep better at night when we know that abuela can get her prescription drugs or you can go get your cancer infested testicles radiated.

Pevvania wrote:Question: what are your thoughts on UKIP?

Note, I have little formal knowledge on the inner workings of British political culture as it stands.

That being said, I find their thatcheresque economic profile to be quite appealing, however some of the clips I've seen of party leadership talking about immigration and Islam in general are a pretty severe turn off.

Conservative Idealism In Libertatem wrote:Very well.

There is a request to establish Board precedent such that each Chairman is expected to keep a public log of votes (for example, a factbook) made by all Board members during their term so that people know how their elected officials voted (you know, for posterity). Shall we make it so?

Voting starts now. I say AYE.

Voting stands at three AYES so far - one from me, one from Funkytopia, and one from a Board member who has elected to remain anonymous by submitting his vote through telegram. His identity will be revealed upon the vote's conclusion.

Two Board members have yet to vote.

Zenny Ambassador wrote:[B]Bonjour, Comrades[/B] ^_^

Welcome back to Libertatem, Zenny. When last you were here, I was a foreign affairs adviser (Manager of State), but no longer.

Speaking of which, where'd Lack run off to...?

Lack There Of wrote:Note, I have little formal knowledge on the inner workings of British political culture as it stands.

That being said, I find their thatcheresque economic profile to be quite appealing, however some of the clips I've seen of party leadership talking about immigration and Islam in general are a pretty severe turn off.

They're a nasty, xenophobic party that has tried quite hard to downplay their neoliberal economic policies, which aren't anything radical. However, they'll probably be getting my vote. That's how bad the political system is in the UK.

Also, I cannot vote for the BR Amendment with Section II the way it stands. It would be an erosion of the corporate-republican model we've fought so hard to protect that I can't go along with. Honestly, having a Board confirmation vote would be a neat idea, but fundamentally it is too radical an alteration of Section I of the Constitution that strips the executive of his most basic role: appointing advisers.

UKIP are economically illiterate xenophobes.

Immigrants benefit capitalism.

Republic Of Minerva wrote:UKIP are economically illiterate xenophobes.

^

What cracks me up is how they refer to themselves as a "libertarian party".

However, Douglas Carswell, a Tory MP that's about to become UKIP's first elected man in Parliament, is a genuine libertarian, and would happily get my vote.

They must of heard of Ron Paul and then ran with the ideas he liked.

"Libertarian" is more than just a hip word to make yourself look attractive.

Pevvania wrote:Question: what are your thoughts on UKIP?

I dislike most of its immigration policies however I will support it to a minimal since it is an Anti-Europe Union Party which I will usually support.

I actually don't know which British Parties I support.

I read a good article for libertarian support of the EU (mostly a utilitarian argument) actually.

Republic Of Minerva wrote:I read a good article for libertarian support of the EU (mostly a utilitarian argument) actually.

Link?

The premise is without the EU the countries of Europe would become much more protectionist and socially authoritarian.

Will deliver link later

Republic Of Minerva wrote:Will deliver link later

Thank ya love.

Interesting statistics from downsizingovernment.org:

Federal subsidy programs have grown exponentially since the Reagan Era. In the 1970s, the number of federal subsidy programs grew by 10%, followed by 4.7% in the 1980s, 21% in the 1990s and a whopping 40% between 2000 and 2010, to an all-time high of 2001 programs. In just four years since then, "anti-corporate" President Barack Obama has overseen 235 new federal subsidy programs - a growth of 11.7%.

http://www.downsizinggovernment.org/sites/downsizinggovernment.org/files/charts/dfg-no_fed_subsidies.png

I just saw an add by a group called "Californians for Population Stabilization" in which they blamed the Wall Street Marketers for convincing Obama there was a Workers shortage thus giving Obama the idea to give Amnesty to the illegals.

Also. I'm not Mr. Economics but is it good or bad that Wal-Mart took those workers off of Healthcare thus putting them on Obamacare. Doesn't that action actually make the company have to pay less thus saving them some money? Or is it simply bad all the way around.

Republic Of Minerva wrote:The premise is without the EU the countries of Europe would become much more protectionist and socially authoritarian.

The move towards social conservatism in Europe is a political fad that will pass with time. The EU benefits us with free trade and immigration agreements, which, if I was in charge, would renew if Britain were outside of Europe. These have been met with hostility by UKIP, La Front Nationale and the other Eurosceptic parties of the continent. But is that really worse than having more regulations made per year than in the Soviet Union, corporatist subsidy programs that increase the price of food, bullshit rights protections* and draconian moves towards political union. I think less immigration is a justified price to pay for control of our government back.

*Article 10 of the European Convention of Human Rights

1. Everyone has the right to freedom of expression.

2. The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary.

Republic Of Minerva wrote:They must of heard of Ron Paul and then ran with the ideas he liked.

"Libertarian" is more than just a hip word to make yourself look attractive.

"Libertarian" is more than just a sh*t word to make yourself unrecognized to my administration.

Barry Obama wrote:"Libertarian" is more than just a sh*t word to make yourself unrecognized to my administration.

okay fris

Here it is: http://reason.com/archives/2014/09/09/the-libertarian-case-for-the-european-un

Pevvania wrote:The move towards social conservatism in Europe is a political fad that will pass with time. The EU benefits us with free trade and immigration agreements, which, if I was in charge, would renew if Britain were outside of Europe. These have been met with hostility by UKIP, La Front Nationale and the other Eurosceptic parties of the continent. But is that really worse than having more regulations made per year than in the Soviet Union, corporatist subsidy programs that increase the price of food, bullshit rights protections* and draconian moves towards political union. I think less immigration is a justified price to pay for control of our government back.

*Article 10 of the European Convention of Human Rights

1. Everyone has the right to freedom of expression.

2. The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary.

But on some level we must realize that we can't defend policies that while that might set a path for the long run, won't severely damage us in the short run. We must stop thinking utopically, learn to compromise, see what best aids us in the moment so we can better understand where we are headed and what problems may arise later. The EU might be economically and politically restrictive as fvck, but it's the only thing that is keeping Europe together (centered around Germany) and not leading to the sorts of things that caused fascism and communism to arise in Europe.

14 hours ago: Following new legislation in North Korea-chan, the new hit series "North Korea-chan's Got Trauma" has corporate executives fleeing the country.

Well that is a weird outcome..

Pevvania wrote:

Also, I cannot vote for the BR Amendment with Section II the way it stands. It would be an erosion of the corporate-republican model we've fought so hard to protect that I can't go along with. Honestly, having a Board confirmation vote would be a neat idea, but fundamentally it is too radical an alteration of Section I of the Constitution that strips the executive of his most basic role: appointing advisers.

Section II will be striken. If there are no other concerns I would like to have this brought to vote relatively soon

Lack There Of wrote:Section II will be striken. If there are no other concerns I would like to have this brought to vote relatively soon

As would I.

Two Board votes are still required on the issue of creating a Board vote log. Upon its completion, I hope to turn the Board's attention to the BR Amendment.

Note that if I do not receive said two votes by tomorrow morning, the proposal will pass with a simple 3/5 majority and the absence of the two Board members left to vote will be noted on record.

Conservative Idealism In Libertatem wrote:Note that if I do not receive said two votes by tomorrow morning, the proposal will pass with a simple 3/5 majority and the absence of the two Board members left to vote will be noted on record.

Shouldn't it just pass automatically by now anyways?

Miencraft wrote:Shouldn't it just pass automatically by now anyways?

It took me longer than it should have to figure that out, but my reasoning is that I should at least grant the rest of the Board enough time to go on record. Though, in this case, I feel I'm granting them too much.

The Constitution does not provide a time limit for Board votes. Presumably, it gives the duty of determining one to the Chairman.

Anyone heading to the International Students for Liberty Conference in Washington next February?

They're taping a show of Stossel and will have a historical exhibit featuring works and memorabilia of major figures in the liberty movement, such as Milton Friedman, Ayn Rand and FA Hayek. It's gonna be awesome. Also, the hotel they're sponsoring is only $139/room.

Speaking of Europe, Sweden might recognize "Palestine" as a nation :(

http://america.aljazeera.com/opinions/2014/10/sweden-palestinestatehoodisrael.html

Great let's recognize Kosovo, Biafra, Frestonia, and Candyland next.

The Neo-Confederate States Of America wrote:Speaking of Europe, Sweden might recognize "Palestine" as a nation :(

http://america.aljazeera.com/opinions/2014/10/sweden-palestinestatehoodisrael.html

Great let's recognize Kosovo, Biafra, Frestonia, and Candyland next.

Palestine is a nation. Kosovo should be as well.

The Neo-Confederate States Of America wrote:Speaking of Europe, Sweden might recognize "Palestine" as a nation :(

http://america.aljazeera.com/opinions/2014/10/sweden-palestinestatehoodisrael.html

Great let's recognize Kosovo, Biafra, Frestonia, and Candyland next.

I approve.

The Neo-Confederate States Of America wrote:Speaking of Europe, Sweden might recognize "Palestine" as a nation :(

http://america.aljazeera.com/opinions/2014/10/sweden-palestinestatehoodisrael.html

Great let's recognize Kosovo, Biafra, Frestonia, and Candyland next.

Kosovo is a nation. Palestine should be as well.

Hey... Candyland would make a delicious nation!

Conservative Idealism In Libertatem wrote:Kosovo is a nation. Palestine should be as well.

The Human-Equine Alliance wrote:Palestine is a nation. Kosovo should be as well.

These two posts...

The Human-Equine Alliance wrote:These two posts...

No, seriously, Kosovo is a nation. And Palestine is being widely regarded as one as well.

Why does palastine need it's own nation? Aren't most Arab nations almost copies of each other any way? Why share a stop of land the size of Connecticut. That's like sharing a Crum of a brownie.

Let's recognize The Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant while we are at it.

Conservative Idealism In Libertatem wrote:No, seriously, Kosovo is a nation. And Palestine is being widely regarded as one as well.

I know.

We said the same thing but backwards.

The Amarican Empire wrote:Why does palastine need it's own nation? Aren't most Arab nations almost copies of each other any way? Why share a stop of land the size of Connecticut. That's like sharing a Crum of a brownie.

Because the people want freedom and can support it.

They were there first anyways. Screw scriptures. The brits stole it.

The brits conquered it. They then released the land to the jews. Plus no Arab state has freedom like in the first world. Closest thing to it is turkey.

It does not matter who had it first. The natives were settled here before us. Are you saying that we should all just go back to the old world?

The Amarican Empire wrote:It does not matter who had it first. The natives were settled here before us. Are you saying that we should all just go back to the old world?

Yeah. Besides, the Jews had it first, but were themselves kicked out of their homeland. Multiple times throughout history, in fact.

Jews might be one of the most harassed groups in history.

The Amarican Empire wrote:The brits conquered it. They then released the land to the jews. Plus no Arab state has freedom like in the first world. Closest thing to it is turkey.

Who cares about that when Israel has no Freedom for those people. Israel just oppressed them.

The Amarican Empire wrote:It does not matter who had it first. The natives were settled here before us. Are you saying that we should all just go back to the old world?

...Damn it you and your point I can't argue.

Why are we talking about Israel and Palestine anyway?

According to liberal property rights, one gains ownership of the land after one has mixed their labor with it. Considering the Arabs have "mixed their labor" in what is now (eastern) Israel for generations, it is only fair that they be awarded the land they toiled upon for generations over a land claim by the Jews whose majority of their ancestors were European....

Dammit, I really want candyland to be a nation now. Let's annex Wyoming and rename it candyland. Who's in?

Didn't the Arabs kick out the ancient jews out to Europe anyway?

Muh Roads wrote:Dammit, I really want candyland to be a nation now. Let's annex Wyoming and rename it candyland. Who's in?

But Wyoming is a red state :(

Muh Roads wrote:Dammit, I really want candyland to be a nation now. Let's annex Wyoming and rename it candyland. Who's in?

Or we could annex Belgium or swizer land and rename it candyland.

The Amarican Empire wrote:Didn't the Arabs kick out the ancient jews out to Europe anyway?

No. Many Jews fled voluntarily.

The whole Ashkenazi tribe, which a lot of Jews have roots in, are Europeans who converted to Judaism.

The jews have made that strip of land that they hold more prosperous then the Arabs ever could have. Instead of fighting for their own slice of the small strip why don't they work for race equality and push for prosperity for both peoples.

Compromise would be key, yes.

The Libertarian solution would be to disregard the "who owns what" altogether, since it is a tribalist notion with no place in the modern world, and instead secure on attempting to protect the property rights of citizens who live in Gaza, etc. That being said, Israel has been no friend to property right so far, with uprooting entire Arabian communities.

Most Jewish parties are nationalists and leftists. Arabs are nazi leaning. Property rights only seem to be safe in the uk and it's children minus India and Africa plus the mid east.

The us is the child of Britain and France same with Canada.

Australia and New Zealand was born from a virgin Britain

.... I don't know where I am going.

Note Britain is the mother france is our father. Or maybe both are female and we got help from Germany hmmm.

You forget our crazy Dutch uncle, Amarican.

O ya! But german is the largest heritage group in america with 15%.

My thought is that we, as Americans, should worry about America. Period. Why is the petty terrorist feuding in Palestine and Israel any of our business or our place to waste resources?

Because isreal is our friend.

The Amarican Empire wrote:Because isreal is our friend.

They don't have to be. Why would we need a Middle Eastern ally if we mind our own damn business and stay out of arabia.

The Amarican Empire wrote:Maybe your right idk.

(nods head)

Yeah I agree we need to mind our own business. It's all globalization's fault. Forcing us to work with others. *sigh* if only i were born in the 1800s

Renegalis wrote:Yeah I agree we need to mind our own business. It's all globalization's fault. Forcing us to work with others. *sigh* if only i were born in the 1800s

Globalization has been the best dam thing to happen to capitalism...if it weren't for globalization, we'd still be in the 1950s with 90% tax rates for the rich and extremely conservative social policies.

If only I could be Emperor of the us to fix things before restoring the republic.

Republic Of Minerva wrote:Globalization has been the best dam thing to happen to capitalism...if it weren't for globalization, we'd still be in the 1950s with 90% tax rates for the rich and extremely conservative social policies.

The US became a global power due to industrial expansion in the Gilded era. Globalization began more in the time of Wilson and WWI as it was our primary reason for entering against Germany. Particularly our trade with UK and France. The mass expansion of capitalism primarily came from pre 1913 fervor. Globalization has led to calls of the world to improve social conditions and to begin to force government out of the Laizzes- faire idealism.

'm not so naive as to not see the use of globalization as a necessary step I'm simply saying it promotes a more Socialist idealism then i enjoy and it forces interventionism thru force.

Jambion wrote:My thought is that we, as Americans, should worry about America. Period. Why is the petty terrorist feuding in Palestine and Israel any of our business or our place to waste resources?

The US and Israel have a robust intelligence sharing relationship, much of which isn’t known about publicly. No doubt this has resulted in both US and Israeli agents giving their lives for our mutual security. The entirety of US “aid” to Israel is spent on weapons research & development, which benefits US security and allows long-term research projects that eventually gets used by the US military. Also, since the US is going to be blamed and hated for the existence of Israel no matter what stance we take, we might as well stand by them. Remember: the US is the "Great Satan," Israel is only the "Little Satan."

That said, hopefully Kadima will win the next election over there. Livni is more likely to roll back settlement expansion, which is probably the most legitimate Palestinian complaint.

As a concept, globalization is the process of connecting different markets together globally. Globalization brings life into dead civilizations, allows different cultures to mingle and benefit from their discoveries, allows ideas to flow farther and spurs innovation.

http://libertarianpapers.org/articles/2009/lp-1-10.pdf

Socialists generally oppose globalization as they see it as a mass exploitation of the third world. I don't know where you think that. Interventionism is also anti-globalist, as it attempts to restrict the global market in favor of cornering a single one, like governments do all the time. A form of "rational constructivism" or social central planning in its belief that good relations (and the economic benefits that come from it) to be best coaxed, coerced, and staged, which we know is false.

Hey if we are exploiting the third world then at least they are getting jobs and some type of pay. Think how far the third world would be without the first world cuddling with the third.

I disagree i think the mixed more generally socialist nations have begun to isolate capitalist countries due to globalization. And interventionism isdue to globalization because we believe we need to take resources when we cannot get them. I mean most of our politics in the middle east are about oil, not actually caring about other countries

Heck the Africans were still using Spears and other primitive weapons when the Imperialists came if they didn't come to Africa I bet that the Africans would be just discovering the telegraph by now.

That being said I believe if globalization were applied properly you'd be right Minerva but its not. Its all bargaining in a big governmental power struggle.

Renegalis wrote:I disagree i think the mixed more generally socialist nations have begun to isolate capitalist countries due to globalization. And interventionism isdue to globalization because we believe we need to take resources when we cannot get them. I mean most of our politics in the middle east are about oil, not actually caring about other countries

We have the oil here in america. America's energy! America's Choice!

The Amarican Empire wrote:Heck the Africans were still using Spears and other primitive weapons when the Imperialists came if they didn't come to Africa I bet that the Africans would be just discovering the telegraph by now.

Yeah and maybe if we hadnt given assault weapons to Africa then theyd have more living people lol.

The Amarican Empire wrote:We have the oil here in america. America's energy! America's Choice!

The Amarican Empire wrote:We have the oil here in america. America's energy! America's Choice!

Yeah doesn't mean we arent trying to get more

Renegalis wrote:Yeah and maybe if we hadnt given assault weapons to Africa then theyd have more living people lol.

.....maybe

Renegalis wrote:Yeah doesn't mean we arent trying to get more

We have oil that we have not even taped yet. Let's just leave the middle east and return once they have wiped each other out.

The Amarican Empire wrote:We have oil that we have not even taped yet. Let's just leave the middle east and return once they have wiped each other out.

Not saying I don't agree with you just saying thats not what we're doing/

I know I get crazy when I am tired. Speaking of which guten Nacht!

As to Minerva to further my point. i am making a very firm distinction between Socialist and Communist. I agree Communists view globalization as evil i dont think Socialists are quite that level of crazy. Tho they do suck. Socialism has spread rapidly in EU and even in US which shows one way or the other globalization is helping Socialists

There are no socialist countries. Mostly due to the fact that socialism doesn't work. Mixed market economies are still capitalist, as it is defined by the tolerance of property rights.

Oil is a result of stupidly trying to cling to a failing market. If the government had a brain, they would enact trade with the middle east to obtain what they desire, but any chance of that is eliminated now. The intervention portion is the part where governments attempt to control and restrict the flow of trade to either align their pockets or some misguided attempt to play chess with wolverines. Or both. The problem is not globalization, the problem is big government.

Read some of Hayek's Road to Serfdom and it explains both the reasons and consequences of government central planning beautifully.

Uh, I don't see how globalization is helping socialists, other than reducing poverty of course (which is not needed by the government/workers to achieve)

The Amarican Empire wrote:We have the oil here in america. America's energy! America's Choice!

Problem is that if we relied on our own reserves, at the current rate of consumption, we would not be able to sustain that for long (not to mention how incredibly high prices would be if we relied on our supply). It is incredibly important to develop and promote alternative forms of energy. Whether it be solar, wind, hydroelectric, I'd even favor nuclear.

Renegalis wrote:Yeah and maybe if we hadnt given assault weapons to Africa then theyd have more living people lol.

It's good that there isn't more living people in Africa though...-_-

Republic Of Minerva wrote:As a concept, globalization is the process of connecting different markets together globally. Globalization brings life into dead civilizations, allows different cultures to mingle and benefit from their discoveries, allows ideas to flow farther and spurs innovation.

I agree. The best argument, for globalization as well as the post-cold war/American world system, is an empirical approach. Since the end of the cold war:

1. The number of people killed in violent conflicts has dropped to its lowest point. Even during the height of the Iraq/Afghanistan wars, the number of people killed in conflicts was only about 250,000, which is the lowest in recorded history.

http://blogs-images.forbes.com/erikkain/files/2011/09/RVAE378_VIOLEN_G_20110923205707.jpg

2. Global poverty and hunger is lower today than it's ever been.

http://skepticalswedishscientists.files.wordpress.com/2014/01/global-poverty-rates-declining-rapidly-chen-and-ravillion-2010.jpg

3. Illiteracy, too!

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a1/World_illiteracy_1970-2010.svg/300px-World_illiteracy_1970-2010.svg.png

4. The world as a whole is more democratic than ever before, as well.

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Democracy_Index.png

While it's easy to see the problems, today is probably the best time in the history of humankind to be alive. And we have the current world system to thank for that.

The Human-Equine Alliance wrote:It's good that there isn't more living people in Africa though...-_-

I'm going to take this as you saying that Africa doesn't need more people, not that it's good that all the people that have died are dead...

If I'm taking you right, I'd agree. It's my opinion that the AIDS epidemic could be largely curbed if someone went over there (to Africa) with a few thousand crates of birth control and a plane full of sex ed teachers. Less born, but those that are born have a greater chance of survival (partly because there are less of them).

So it's 1 am here. Have work in 7 hours, but do you think I can sleep? No. Because my brain wants me to think about the complexity of life. Gotta love nights... or technically mornings? Like this.

Pevvania wrote:Anyone heading to the International Students for Liberty Conference in Washington next February?

They're taping a show of Stossel and will have a historical exhibit featuring works and memorabilia of major figures in the liberty movement, such as Milton Friedman, Ayn Rand and FA Hayek. It's gonna be awesome. Also, the hotel they're sponsoring is only $139/room.

Funkytopia wrote:I agree. The best argument, for globalization as well as the post-cold war/American world system, is an empirical approach. Since the end of the cold war:

1. The number of people killed in violent conflicts has dropped to its lowest point. Even during the height of the Iraq/Afghanistan wars, the number of people killed in conflicts was only about 250,000, which is the lowest in recorded history.

http://blogs-images.forbes.com/erikkain/files/2011/09/RVAE378_VIOLEN_G_20110923205707.jpg

2. Global poverty and hunger is lower today than it's ever been.

http://skepticalswedishscientists.files.wordpress.com/2014/01/global-poverty-rates-declining-rapidly-chen-and-ravillion-2010.jpg

3. Illiteracy, too!

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a1/World_illiteracy_1970-2010.svg/300px-World_illiteracy_1970-2010.svg.png

4. The world as a whole is more democratic than ever before, as well.

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Democracy_Index.png

While it's easy to see the problems, today is probably the best time in the history of humankind to be alive. And we have the current world system to thank for that.

The invisible hand at work.

Most of EU has generally more Socialistic then Capitalist countries. Socialism has seen vast expansion in UK Germany, France, Sweden, Norway, and Dnemark.

There have been ups for capitalism ie exoansion is markets that had previousl failed, more trade partners, etc. But Socialism has also done very well and is thriving.

Renegalis wrote:Most of EU has generally more Socialistic then Capitalist countries. Socialism has seen vast expansion in UK Germany, France, Sweden, Norway, and Dnemark.

As a British citizen, I can say that the age of socialism in this country is over. Thatcher did a very good job at denationalising industry, rolling back the regulatory state and introducing competition to education and healthcare services. The Scandinavian countries also faced a crisis when their mega-states almost caused economic collapse. They have been forced to reform to more pro-market policies.

It always amuses me when I see so-called anarchists at anti-austerity protests.

The funny fact about Thatcher is that she is still considered as the second best prime minister of the UK by the UK's citizens : https://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/3158/Margaret-Thatcher-19252013.aspx

And Cameron doesn't hesitate to take her as an example in his speech.

But in France ( my " homecountry " that I left many years ago ), she is seen as a devil by all the politicians, and critized by the medias. The consequence is that the French don't like her, even if the british are a majority to salute her great work at the head of the State.

Brainwashing takes all its sense in this case.

And of course there is no french version of Thatcher to be seen, when France would need it more than ever. I'm happy to see this country falling, but I'm afraid that it takes half of Europe in its fall.

Post by The Human-Equine Alliance suppressed by a moderator.

Assembled with Dot's Region Saver.
Written by Refuge Isle.