Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله
ShiaChat Mod

Black Lives Matter [OFFICIAL]

ShiaChat Mod

Note: This topic is of a sensitive nature dealing with current events, with a range of opinions presented, which some readers might find objectionable. Please refer to credible sources when assessing any factual claims presented. Racist language of any kind will not be tolerated, per ShiaChat guidelines.

Message added by ShiaChat Mod

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Ali_Hussain said:

Why do you interpret that as enmity against Jews? Do they fund BLM yes or no? Is the Jewish owned media spreading their propaganda, yes or no?

I fail to see how it is somehow 'anti-semetic' to ask if there is any reason for that? Could you explain please

BLM is being funded by donations that are being distributed to the Biden campaign (and others) through ActBlue.

When you go to donate money to BLM, you're taken to secure.actblue.com, so no, it's not the favorite Islamic bogeyman (THE J00Z!!!) funding it, if anything, it's not even really being funded but is being used as a means to get around campaign finance laws and launder money to the democrat party.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Abdul-Hadi said:

BLM is being funded by donations that are being distributed to the Biden campaign (and others) through ActBlue.

When you go to donate money to BLM, you're taken to secure.actblue.com, so no, it's not the favorite Islamic bogeyman (THE J00Z!!!) funding it, if anything, it's not even really being funded but is being used as a means to get around campaign finance laws and launder money to the democrat party.

 

"Soros has given out $33 million to organizations working with BLM back in 2015 when the Ferguson protests were happening"

https://www.canyon-news.com/george-soros-accused-of-funding-black-lives-matter/117666

The average Jew is obviously our natural ally in the West if for no other reason than for our desire to keep ritual slaughter and circumcision legal - although there are other reasons.

I've even got nothing against a person who likes isreal, if I meet a Jew I don't ask him about that because I understand that they are in a difficult position with regards to that issue and a person can hold the (perhaps contradictory) position where in theory they like isreal generally but don't support the genocide of Palestinians. 

I've got nothing against Jews in principle, however I completely reject that there are privileged classes of people who are beyond critique, like the Jews and the African-Americans. The same way that we in the Muslim community leave ourselves open to rightful criticism through our general behaviour, likewise so do the Jews and the AF community.

The idea that there isn't a powerful cabal of Jews who only have their own best interests at heart, at the expense of everyone else is a joke. The problem is in the generalisation, I get that, however the Jewish community is generally silent about it, as Muslims are so it isn't necessarily wrong to interpret silence and lack of criticism as a type of approval even if that may not be the case.

 

Edited by Ali_Hussain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Ali_Hussain said:

"Soros has given out $33 million to organizations working with BLM back in 2015 when the Ferguson protests were happening"

Given that donating to BLM is actually going to the democrat party, where do you think that Soros' money likely went?


You can pull up the tallies for how much money actblue has given to the sander, biden, buttigieg, warren, etc campaigns in the month of June, and you'll notice some interesting data when compared to the money that BLM has raised (through actblue... BLM is nowhere on the top 10 recipients).

3 hours ago, Ali_Hussain said:

've even got nothing against a person who likes isreal

Heh, notice how I said I have nothing against Jews? I didn't mention Israel. The Israeli govt is doing terrible things and plenty of commentators (Noam Chomsky, a Jew, being one of them) will point that out. I just know enough to separate the Israeli govt from the Jewish people themselves and ask people to do the same with regard to the US Govt and Americans.

We long ago lost control of this country


 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, notme said:

Nonetheless, attempting to, through combat, break away from the United States is treason.

I want to study history of the American Revolution. Where do we keep our Benedict Arnold statues? 

No, it is revolt or at worse sedition.

In the US legal history, there is a "natural right of revolution".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, hasanhh said:

No, it is revolt or at worse sedition.

In the US legal history, there is a "natural right of revolution".

That's why the American Revolution isn't treason (from our point of view), but history is written by the victors not the defeated losers. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, notme said:

That's why the American Revolution isn't treason (from our point of view), but history is written by the victors not the defeated losers. 

Provocatively, then what is 'wrong' with "states' rights revolution?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, hasanhh said:

Provocatively, then what is 'wrong' with "states' rights revolution?"

Every conservative knows they should not have been revolting, but should have had the laws changed through proper electoral channels. Maybe the southern states should have allowed more of their people to vote 

Nothing wrong with states' rights, as elucidated in the Constitution. If a state attempts to break away from the union, it becomes an enemy of the United States..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I was a child in elementary school, we dressed up in costumes and reenacted the "heroic" Boston Tea Party. 

Those colonists looted and rioted over taxes, which is an undeniably less significant complaint than police getting away with murdering innocent people repeatedly

(And don't rebut with "some of them were being arrested" because we have this thing in the US, innocent until proven guilty before a jury of their peers.)

Police need to be held accountable for their actions of tyranny. Wearing a badge is not permission to bully, beat, and murder. In fact, a person who has been entrusted with a position of authority should be held to a higher standard than everyone else. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Ali_Hussain said:

The idea that there isn't a powerful cabal of Jews who only have their own best interests at heart, at the expense of everyone else is a joke. The problem is in the generalisation, I get that, however the Jewish community is generally silent about it, as Muslims are so it isn't necessarily wrong to interpret silence and lack of criticism as a type of approval even if that may not be the case.

Yet the powerful Jews, especially Zionist Jews, tend to be assimilated and do not practice their religion. They are culturally Jewish at best and engage in activities and behaviours that their religion actually prohibits, at least in many cases. In this sense, they are more like average Christians than orthodox practitioners of either Judaism or Islam, given that evangelical Christianity in particular tends to be antinomian and that Christianity in general spurns much of the sacred Judaeo-Islamic corpus of ritual, i.e., circumcision, dietary laws, purification (ablution), et al. I think there is a movement to scapegoat the Jewish religion on the basis of what irreligious Jews do, much as there are similar movements against religions in general on a similar basis. One can easily form the most negative impressions of religion on the basis of what hypocrites do. Also, I still think a lot of the Gentiles and Christians in the West scapegoat Jews and Muslims as “others” and use the worst examples of the latter two—Zionists and Wahhabis in particular—to smear and/or discredit the Jewish religion and Islamic Deen. If Jews were really so powerful as a lot of the conspiracist right thinks, the U.S. would be filled with synagogues instead of churches, everyone would follow or appeal to the Torah rather than the Christian Bible, and presidential candidates would not be using Christian frames of reference to court voters. The Zionist minority likes to spread conspiracy theories about “Jewish power” because antisemitism, like all other sources of foreign and domestic turmoil, benefits the State of Israel and the Western military-industrial complex in general. The vast majority of Jews today are still vulnerable and victimised, like a lot of Muslims and other groups, because of their precarious position in Western society, especially if they are religiously observant.

Edited by Northwest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Northwest said:

Yet the powerful Jews, especially Zionist Jews, tend to be assimilated and do not practice their religion. They are culturally Jewish at best and engage in activities and behaviours that their religion actually prohibits, at least in many cases. In this sense, they are more like average Christians than orthodox practitioners of either Judaism or Islam, given that evangelical Christianity in particular tends to be antinomian and that Christianity in general spurns much of the sacred Judaeo-Islamic corpus of ritual, i.e., circumcision, dietary laws, purification (ablution), et al. I think there is a movement to scapegoat the Jewish religion on the basis of what irreligious Jews do, much as there are similar movements against religions in general on a similar basis. One can easily form the most negative impressions of religion on the basis of what hypocrites do. Also, I still think a lot of the Gentiles and Christians in the West scapegoat Jews and Muslims as “others” and use the worst examples of the latter two—Zionists and Wahhabis in particular—to smear and/or discredit the Jewish religion and Islamic Deen. If Jews were really so powerful as a lot of the conspiracist right thinks, the U.S. would be filled with synagogues instead of churches, everyone would follow or appeal to the Torah rather than the Christian Bible, and presidential candidates would not be using Christian frames of reference to court voters. The Zionist minority likes to spread conspiracy theories about “Jewish power” because antisemitism, like all other sources of foreign and domestic turmoil, benefits the State of Israel and the Western military-industrial complex in general. The vast majority of Jews today are still vulnerable and victimised, like a lot of Muslims and other groups, because of their precarious position in Western society, especially if they are religiously observant.

Being a Jew is either a religion as we classify them in Islam or an ethnicity as Arabs were before they became a linguistical group or a tribe as they claim descent from Ya'qub (a). Even an atheist can fiercely identify with his 'jewishness' and view what has been done to the Jewish people from an ethnic viewpoint rather than a religious one.

As for the rest of what you said, looking at it from a religious angle, Jews don't proselytize nor do they seek converts (in fact you can hear numerous first hand accounts of people who were able to convert who were never really accepted, there are still many areas where they don't allow people to convert.) But in spite of that you should read into the Noahide laws and see the positions that various presidents have taken with regards to them.

Edited by Ali_Hussain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

In a recent memo sent by University of Colorado-Boulder officials to all students and employees, the university dictated which opinions of the recent waves of Black Lives Matter protests will be accepted by the school.

Since the killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis on May 25, protests and riots have swept the country. Led by the Black Lives Matter movement, these protests have taken control of the attention of nearly everyone in the country, including institutions of higher education.

On June 5, 2020, CU Boulder sent a memo to its students and faculty providing a statement on the recent uprisings. 

The announcement, co-written by Vice Chancellor for Diversity, Equity, and Community Engagement, Vice Chancellor for Student Affairs Akirah Bradley,  and Associate Vice Chancellor the Office of Institutional Equity and Compliance and Title IX Coordinator Valerie Simons, described a supporting opinion of Black Lives Matter as a “non-negotiable condition of enrollment and employment.”

[...]

DeStefano then speaks about the First Amendment. He continues, “While as a public institution we must acknowledge each person’s First Amendment right to free speech, we strongly encourage anyone who doesn’t want to or believes they cannot live our values of respecting the rights of others and accepting our differences to reconsider their ability to be a productive member of our community.

The same message went on to detail “immediate actions for change” to “begin the sustained transformation of the CU Boulder experience of our Black students, faculty, and staff,” including tasking faculty “with developing a CU 101 anti-racism module for first-year students that explores the toxicity of racism in U.S. history, U.S. life and at CU Boulder.”

CU-Boulder spokeswoman Deborah Mendez-Wilson told Campus Reform, "We value and support the principles of academic freedom and free expression, which are central to our academic mission. Upholding these principles is not mutually exclusive from the idea that we have a responsibility, as an academic community, to embrace, acknowledge and promote equal access and inclusion to all who come to our campus to pursue their academic, research and career goals.

https://www.campusreform.org/?ID=15147

 

Absolutely chilling... It's amazing that they are capable of talking about 'respecting the rights of others' and 'accepting differences' without any self-awareness whatsoever.

Trust me, when the big bad white man and his 'white supremacy' is dead, they'll start coming for all the other groups and ideologies that don't conform with their wacko beliefs. And when you start looking around, it doesn't take long to realise that orthodox Islam will be right in the firing line, and it will be undermined from the inside by all the social justice warrior liberal 'Muslim' 'allies'. I would invite people to do the thought experiment of imagining a white Christian man voicing standard Muslims beliefs on marriage, abortion, women's rights, homosexual activity, slavery, etc. What would the reaction be like? We all know... The only reason that Muslims don't currently get that reaction is because they are seen as 'allies' in the great coalition of minorities/oppressed groups that is fighting against 'white supremacy'. But I think they will soon learn that you should be careful what you wish for, and sometimes it's better the devil you know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Haydar Husayn said:

rust me, when the big bad white man and his 'white supremacy' is dead, they'll start coming for all the other groups and ideologies that don't conform with their wacko beliefs. And when you start looking around, it doesn't take long to realise that orthodox Islam will be right in the firing line, and it will be undermined from the inside by all the social justice warrior liberal 'Muslim' 'allies'. I would invite people to do the thought experiment of imagining a white Christian man voicing standard Muslims beliefs on marriage, abortion, women's rights, homosexual activity, slavery, etc. What would the reaction be like? We all know... The only reason that Muslims don't currently get that reaction is because they are seen as 'allies' in the great coalition of minorities/oppressed groups that is fighting against 'white supremacy'. But I think they will soon learn that you should be careful what you wish for, and sometimes it's better the devil you know.

Couldn't have said it better myself, and I've tried.

I am wholeheartedly in opposition to most if not all leftist movements for this reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Haydar Husayn said:

accepted by the school.

:yahoo:YES COMRADES . . . We Have Control of the Skools

 

1 hour ago, Haydar Husayn said:

the university dictated which opinions of the recent waves of Black Lives Matter protests will be accepted by the school.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Haydar Husayn said:

In a recent memo sent by University of Colorado-Boulder officials to all students and employees, the university dictated which opinions of the recent waves of Black Lives Matter protests will be accepted by the school.

Maybe this will be enough to convince normal people that you don't need to go into tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt to have a good career, because this is frighteningly fascistic.

Looks like trade school is the way to go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Abdul-Hadi said:

Looks like trade school is the way to go.

What's your basis for assuming that trade schools aren't also infiltrated by leftists? You know those trades are dominated by evil unionists.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, notme said:

What's your basis for assuming that trade schools aren't also infiltrated by leftists? You know those trades are dominated by evil unionists.

Trade schools tend to get more normal people going to them because they actually train you for a career instead of requiring you to take classes on hating whitey and lesbian dance theory.

I just went to one last year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Abdul-Hadi said:

Trade schools tend to get more normal people going to them because they actually train you for a career instead of requiring you to take classes on hating whitey and lesbian dance theory.

I just went to one last year.

Just one? Ok.

The university that I attended was mostly more conservative students too. It was known for its business and engineering programs, and those tend to attract "normal" people.

But I do currently know several leftist laborers, more, in fact, than leftist white collar workers. 

I remain unconvinced that skilled laborers are likely to support conservative, pro-business, anti-worker regimes. I know about labor unions, though I've never been part of one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, notme said:

Just one? Ok.

The university that I attended was mostly more conservative students too. It was known for its business and engineering programs, and those tend to attract "normal" people.

But I do currently know several leftist laborers, more, in fact, than leftist white collar workers. 

I remain unconvinced that skilled laborers are likely to support conservative, pro-business, anti-worker regimes. I know about labor unions, though I've never been part of one.

It's anecdotal, that much is true

But skilled laborers tend to be more conservative where I live than people who go to college. You have to keep in mind that a lot of these workers are people with families & children. We also don't have labor unions in Florida, so that eliminates a lot of the leftism in the construction fields.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Abdul-Hadi said:

You have to keep in mind that a lot of these workers are people with families & children.

White collar, degreed workers are also people with families and children. 

37 minutes ago, Haydar Husayn said:

Traditionally aren't they fairly socially conservative?

They, being laborers? Who led the French Revolution? And you do know that labor unions are socialist, right? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, notme said:

White collar, degreed workers are also people with families and children.

There are a higher percentage of childless-by-choice people in white collar jobs in this country, that's why I said what I did. Whereas I'm probably the only blue-collar childless person (not by choice) that I know, and also the only Muslim I'm aware of that works in construction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Abdul-Hadi said:

There are a higher percentage of childless-by-choice people in white collar jobs in this country,

Percentage, sure, but still the majority of white collar workers have spouses (or ex-spouses) and children. I've been both: trust me - we aren't that different. It is this kind of imagined difference which keeps us, as a nation, weak. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, notme said:

They, being laborers? Who led the French Revolution? And you do know that labor unions are socialist, right? 

You do know that being socialist doesn't necessarily have anything to do with supporting trendy social justice causes, right? It is very possible (and in fact quite likely among the non-university educated) to be on the left economically, but on the right socially. 

Trump got elected in 2016 off the back of gaining a significant number of those voters. They clearly wouldn't have voted for him if their biggest concern was social justice activism.

As for laborers leading the French Revolution, aside from being utterly irrelevant to the discussion, it's just not true. It was a bourgeois revolution, lead by lawyers, other educated professionals and merchants.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Haydar Husayn said:

They clearly wouldn't have voted for him if their biggest concern was social justice activism.

That's because what the leftists call "social justice" is really just anti-white, anti-religion, anti-family sentiments.

It has so little to do with actual social justice that I'm not at all surprised they call it that. America has a tendency to call terrible things nice sounding names.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Haydar Husayn said:

It is very possible (and in fact quite likely among the non-university educated) to be on the left economically, but on the right socially. 

Trump got elected in 2016 off the back of gaining a significant number of those voters. They clearly wouldn't have voted for him if their biggest concern was social justice activism.

True. The descendants of the "rednecks" who led the labor movement are now staunch conservatives, much to their own harm. 

And Trump lost the popular vote. Most Americans preferred more of the same failed politics to his hateful nationalist garbage. (Not that any really good candidate has run for office in my lifetime.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, notme said:

True. The descendants of the "rednecks" who led the labor movement are now staunch conservatives, much to their own harm. 

To be fair, he promised that he would protect and bring back their jobs, so they thought they were voting in their economic interests. 8 years of Obama clearly didn't do much for them, so they probably didn't feel like they had much to lose. But even if we suppose that voting Democrat is in their best economic interests (which is very debatable since the Clinton era), economics is not necessarily the most important factor when deciding how to vote. There are also social matters that need to be taken into account (which clearly also motivates many rich people to vote Democrat for example).

A party that really represented the people would be broadly on the left economically and the right socially. It is unfortunate that in most countries, what you have is a choice between two economically right-wing and socially left-wing parties. The only real difference between them is one has to pretend to be economically left-wing (the Democrats) and the other pretends to be socially right-wing (the Republicans). This gives the impression that there is a difference between them, but in reality it's just a matter of the pace of change. They are both headed in the same direction, which is why they tend not to undo anything the previous administration did (apart from Trump who seems to have a personal grudge against Obama). Voters of both parties tend not to get what they think they voted for, as Trump voters have seen again with the recent Supreme Court decisions. They thought they were getting a socially conservative court, but in reality it is a pro-big business court, that isn't willing to stand up for socially conservative positions.

 

3 minutes ago, notme said:

And Trump lost the popular vote. Most Americans preferred more of the same failed politics to his hateful nationalist garbage. (Not that any really good candidate has run for office in my lifetime.)

Ok, but the point is that he attracted a significant number of blue collar workers, because they were more interested in what he had to say about their jobs than his views on immigration. And the reason for that is because those voters are primarily left-wing on economics rather than on social issues. That was simply the point I was making above.

As for the popular vote, the demographics were always going to be against Trump because of the populations of the big coastal states, which tend to vote heavily Democrat regardless of who the candidates are. But voters that always vote the same way aren't interesting anyway, as they are mostly sheep. The interesting ones are those that are willing to swap from one party to the other. But luckily for Republicans, the popular vote doesn't decide the election.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, notme said:

And Trump lost the popular vote. Most Americans preferred more of the same failed politics to his hateful nationalist garbage

The democrat party is well known for rigging the popular vote & has been doing so since "Tammany Hall" days, because this is the second time in my lifetime that a democrat has "won" the popular vote yet still managed to lose the election.

The govt has the ability to collude with the media to report any results for voting that they desire. There was a documentary about how W's administration in 2004 had demanded that Diebold "add a line of code to flip the votes to George W in a believable fashion, because we're in a war".

There is absolutely zero doubt in my mind that the newsmedia colluded with the democrats to try and contest the results of the election when it became clear that Hillary had lost. They tried this again in Florida in 2018 when boxes of ballots were turning up in rental cars + cargo trucks in Broward county. Certain investigative journalists were about to sieze the ballots and blow the lid off of the entire thing, but then the corrupt Broward county sheriff magically received a "bomb threat" and had to evacuate the area.

I do not trust the democrat party in the least. Their agenda is anti-white, anti-family, and anti-religion. They want to push transsexual & gay ideology on children in public schools and then have a militant wing (antifa) that is being funded by George Soros. They are very terrible people and that's saying something when the only other option that American citizens are given is the GOP.

I voted for Obama twice and I seriously regret that, but I was young and stupid. I likely won't be able to vote this year, so it's moot. Not that voting matters anyway... honestly, I probably won't vote ever again because our votes don't matter.

Edited by Abdul-Hadi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Abdul-Hadi said:

I do not trust the democrat party in the least.

I do not trust either major US political party. Both of them are mafias with no interest in representing the American people.

But Trump is a cancer. He was the worst possible candidate in a huge Republican primary and he's the worst president by far, if not ever, at least in my lifetime. I'm willing to hold my nose and fill in that bubble for Biden. I won't be happy about it, but it's the (slightly) less offensive choice. 

I did like what Biden was saying recently about taxing rich people. Let's see if it actually happens. 

 

26 minutes ago, Abdul-Hadi said:

have a militant wing (antifa)

Maybe somewhere in the world, antifa is militant, but in the US they are street medics and affordable housing advocates, not militants. Greenpeace is far more militant than antifa. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, notme said:

Maybe somewhere in the world, antifa is militant, but in the US they are street medics and affordable housing advocates, not militants

I've seen footage of them with rifles, as well as footage of them destroying property and assaulting people. It's all over the place online, so do you mean to tell me that those people are somehow not antifa; the people tearing down the statues, attacking police, and burning down buildings? Because they definitely seem like antifa to me.

My problem is that there is nobody good to vote for, but if given the opportunity I'd be voting for Donald Trump. The other option is to vote for the party of antifa, the people who are tearing down statues and burning the country to the ground on behalf of Barack Obama as revenge for his legacy (thankfully) being largely erased by Trump.

I registered Democrat to vote for Bernie Sanders in the primary, but of course, the Obama/Clinton wing of the party basically overruled that. He (Sanders) had economic policies that were the closest to beneficial for me.

Edited by Abdul-Hadi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Haydar Husayn said:

As for Biden, he won't be substantially different to Trump. He will just appear to be so. He will be better on the environment, just as bad on Israel, and worse on foreign war

I wish I could disagree with this. 

17 minutes ago, Haydar Husayn said:

Has Trump really been that much worse than Bush or Obama?

Perhaps not internationally but domestically yes. But the worst thing Trump does - and I was discussing this with my family just the other day - is validate racists and xenophobes, and sow discord, division, and confusion. Policy wise he's done some awful things - for example, denying green card holders the right to travel home for any reason, wasting taxpayer money on his wall monument to himself - but those pale in comparison to the division he has constructed between us. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, notme said:

The university that I attended was mostly more conservative students too. It was known for its business and engineering programs, and those tend to attract "normal" people.

This prompted me to remember a WSJ article in the 80s where the paper was reporting on the hiring boycott many  corporations had towards lvy League universities, espeically Harvard and usually excepting MlT because the graduates had such poor social views (as the corporations saw it).  There will now be a boycott of hiring from radical and liberal colleges.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Abdul-Hadi said:

I've seen footage of them with rifles, as well as footage of them destroying property and assaulting people. It's all over the place online,

While driving today, l listened to Sean Hannity radio program. He had a social worker on and one of the things they said was social worlers, ambulance crews and firemen do not go near these "people's zones" (hey, a political coinage, "zone-bies") without the police because they will be cut or stabbed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...