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
Sign in to follow this  
Firoz Ali

Wahhabi opposition to Iraqi constitution

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

http://www.tehrantimes.com/Description.asp...&Cat=14&Num=001

Wahhabi opposition to Iraqi constitution

By Hassan Hanizadeh

The new Iraqi constitution continues to be the main issue discussed by various Iraqi groups, with each calling for some changes in the articles of the document that will become the supreme law of the land.

For nearly a week, the draft constitution has been ready for the Iraqi National Assembly to begin the process of preliminary approval before the people make the final decision on it in a referendum. However, certain elements, both inside and outside of Iraq, are trying to make amendments to the draft constitution.

The changes sought are mainly based on the Wahhabi and Salafi schools of thought, which are influenced by the customs of the Arabs of jahiliya (the time of ignorance before the advent of Islam in the Arabian Peninsula), which recognized no rights for other people.

This way of thinking, which has become even more conspicuous since the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, is totally opposed to every aspect of Western civilization. Such a dangerous attitude is based on the Wahhabi and Salafi interpretation of Islam, whose followers used to behead people before the eyes of others.

The Salafi way of thought, which originated in its main center, the Arabian Peninsula, is in fact against all new religious ideas and modern technology and is also opposed to any kind of harmony with followers of other religions and dialogue among civilizations.

Such a misconception about religious beliefs has presented an inappropriate image of the noble Islam of Prophet Mohammad (S) to the world and is one of the main reasons for the current confrontation between the East and the West.

This way of thought, which was limited to the Arabian Peninsula and Afghanistan until very recently, has now emerged in Iraq. All the suicide-bombing missions in that country are ordered by the circle of leaders of this misguided sect.

The thinking of most of the Arab Salafis is similar to the philosophy of the Iraqi Baath Party, according to which the Arabs are the world’s master race.

Although the Iraqi Baath Party is basically a secular party opposed to every kind of religious thought, especially in relation to politics, the ousted Iraqi dictator began using Salafi and Wahhabi agents to strengthen the pillars of his government after his political isolation intensified in 1992.

Saddam Hussein used these agents to organize suicide attack against the interests of the West and also against Iraqi Shia leaders and gave them some bases in Iraq from which to carry out their missions.

After Saddam’s downfall, the Wahhabis and Salafis devised a common strategy to realize their ominous objectives.

Their first objective is to confront the foreign forces in Iraq with violence and terror and to try to tarnish the image of Islam by carrying out suicide attacks.

Their second objective is to prevent the Iraqi Shias from attaining their rights through the plan to draft a new constitution meant to create a parliamentary system and a civil society.

Toward this end, the Iraqi Salafist criminals recently made an unholy alliance with the remnants of the Iraqi Baath Party and are taking advantage of the current democratic atmosphere in Iraq to fight against the efforts to establish a religious democracy.

This struggle is manifested in the opposition to the referendum on the constitution and free elections. For example, the Salafists and Baathists and their sympathizers have held several rallies in Iraq to express their opposition to the constitution over the past few days.

Unfortunately, these groups are supported by some neighboring Arab countries which do not want the Iraqi nation to attain their legal rights through democracy and the new constitution.

If the Iraqi government and National Assembly do not take serious measures to control the Salafist and Baathist agents, they will try to trigger a civil war by raising the already high level of violence, with the support of certain Arab countries.

Although the majority of Iraqis are determined to create a civil society and have sacrificed the lives of a great number of their loved ones to realize this ideal, the continuation of the current process and allowing the Salafist and Baathist agents unlimited freedom will lead to an impasse in Iraq.

Now is the correct time for the Iraqi government to announce a temporary state of emergency and to establish a rapid reaction force made up of pious young Iraqis to detain and punish the leaders of these agents. Otherwise, these power-thirsty groups will not allow democracy to take root in Iraq

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest ya ameer

if the sunni scolars say that the first 10 caliphs will go to heaven (including the criminals uthman, muawiyeh, yezid, abd el malik etc) then it has some blame?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(bismillah)

Muqtada Al-Sadr is politically bankrupt; I hope those kids who protest on his behalf will be able to waive off the new constitution. I can understand some of the fears regarding the distribution of wealth; but I don't quite understand their opposition to Federalism.

(salam)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(bismillah)

I don't understand; please elaborate. Also; you're not even Iraqi, so I don't understand what exactly your problem is. Besides; there is a 4% population that is Non-Muslim (In Iraq), so it is inconsiderate to say 'It is a Muslim thing'.

(salam)

Edited by NoorFatima

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(bismillah)

Muqtada Al-Sadr is politically bankrupt; I hope those kids who protest on his behalf will be able to waive off the new constitution. I can understand some of the fears regarding the distribution of wealth; but I don't quite understand their opposition to Federalism.

(salam)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Muqtada Al-Sadr is politically corrupt because he does not call for a Shia Ummah as the previous writer. His Ummah is Islam. He is a Muslim Arab and not a Shia particularist.

You do not undertand the fear about federalism because you have not looked at the proposed federalism by SCIRI and BADR. Theirs is a sectarian federalism. Theirs will breakup Iraq into sectarian statelets. They are not talking about Iraq;s 18 (is it 19?) provinces having equal status. They are talking about the formation of large regions (sectarian regions) where the center has very little power.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am from Lebanon and not privy to some of the issues going on within the community in Iraq. I was however SHOCKED when SCIRI and BADR proposed a semi-independent region in the South. As a Lebanese, it had the feel of Zionist plans (As made public by a dovish former Prime Minister of Israel Moshe Sharret in his memoirs. To his credit, he called the authors which included Ben Gurian, the founder of Israel, mad) to divide the immediate area around Israel into Sunni, Shia, Alawi, Druze and Christian statelets. That would guarantee a belt of weak statelets dependent on Israel and providing Israel with a security belt. They knew that as long as Arabs identified themselves as Arab (and not as Sunni, Shia, Alawi, Druze, Christian, etc...), Israel will never be safe.

My fear is that the same game is afoot in Iraq.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

- Baath and Wahabis are the same: Ahem! How? The Wahabis consider the baathists to be apostates because they are seculars. Saddam was called the enemy of God by Osama Bin Laden. Baath was referred to as the Baath gang. The Baath were in a mortal struggle with the Muslim brotherhood in Syria (before and after Assad). Mohamad Army - Jaish mohamad - in Ramadi (thought to have been formed by "former regime elements") engaged in fighting with the ZARQAWI gang who wanted to expel the Shia population one month ago. In Lebanon, where I am from, Sunni islamists accused the Baath of being a Vatican creation! Others accused of being Communists! (man, the communists must really be in shock!) [These Baathists do really go around!]

- The Baath Party has never ever called for Arab Supremacy. Whether one agree with its ideology or not, one should not manufacture statements. For those interested in reading about its ideology, you can find some of Michel Aflak writings on (http://albaath.online.fr/). His views about Islam I found to be very interesting (That there would be no Arab nation or a rich Arab culture without Islam). By the way, he is Christian.

- The resistance to the constitution is not coming from ZARQAWI and Company. They consider that any constitution outside the Sharia is Kufr. The opposition is coming from those who want to see a constitution of Iraq, but one that will not lead to the breakup of the country.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
its not wahaabi intervention but SUNNI INTERVENTION

I'm not an iraqi. In fact, I'm quite sure no one will ever mistake me for one. that said, I support any sunni who is fighting the wahabi. By that i mean either the wahabi ideology or actual people who are obviously at least half responsible for the chaos in iraq. Any Sunni who is driving out these mental patients back to Yemen or Suadi Arabia is a hero and I believe Sadr is right about shia-sunni unity, at least in principle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
its just an excuse to allow the chaos and disorder to continue, and for them to continue killing shias in baghdad.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It is a shame that you would continue this Shia versus Sunni dogma. Reality is that many more Sunnis are being killed than Shia. You should remember that the battelfields are going through largely Sunni towns and villages. ZARQAWI may be out to start a sectarian war by massacring Shias but there are others who are doing the same to Sunnis. Could it be the same people who are trying to whip up sectarianism to justify their statelet in the South. Could SCIRI and BADR attempting to do in with Iraq by enflaming the Shia community.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The more I read the above article, the angrier I get about the level of distortions and outright lies. I dealt with some and over the next few days, I will deal with the others.

May be our Iranian friend writing in their newspaper (by the way, I have great respect for Iranian culture and Ahem women ... I dated couple) will explain to us why the Iranian government oppress and dispossess (latest figures from UN 200,000-250,000) Shia Arabs in the Ahwaz (Khuzistan). Why is it that they are building towns (According to the UN again!) specifically for out of province non-Arabs while the local Arabs live in absolute destitution? Why they keep changing names of municipalities and villages from Arab names to Persian names?

Something smells and if I am an Iraqi I will be very careful. There are those who are out to destroy Iraq's unity by inflaming Shia/Sunni passions. They want people to identify themselves as Sunni and Shia and not as Iraqis and Arabs.

We saw this plan before in Lebanon and 200,000 (out of a population of less than 4,000,000) perished. I lived that nightmare and I do not wish it upon anybody.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(bismillah)

First of all; the Federal project proposed by Sayed Abdul-Aziz Al-Hakeem is build, shaped and paved thanks to a century of Sunni homogony over Iraq while in the process killing hundreds of thousands of Shias. Saddam Hussayn’s Iraq is the finest example of Secular Arab brutality against fellow Arabs (Predominantly Shias); not to mention that Sunni Arab Clerics DID NOT breath a word of outcry against these injustices carried out by Saddam and his Sunni sympathizers.

As a result; the South of the country has become a poor and rotten hut with NO modern affiliation what so ever; The Iraqi Oil has been deployed to build castles and palaces for Saddam and his Gang of killers and rapists; yet the Sunni population that clearly benefited (and still miss him to this day) said and did NOTHING. The South of the country is economically deprived, and it needs major funds in order to rebuild it.

To simply ignore the geopolitical and geographical inclination of the Southern region is inhumane and ludicrous; more than half of Iraq’s population lives in the South, while millions of Shias live in the center; why should they get equal amounts of money as the Sunnis (who make up a small percentage of the over all population and are divided in four provinces while most Shias live and dominate in 11 provinces)?

So in the end Kiddies; the Federal project has an Economical objective more so than the superficial Sunni created secularism.

(salam)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(bismillah)

Second of All; Muqtada Al-Sadr is no ‘great’ Arab/Muslim Leader; he's an amateur that is cashing in on the Anti-American sentiments in the country, backed and supported by Arab Media outlets as Iraqs ‘Mujahid’ – I wonder where was this ‘Mahdi Army’ when Saddam’s tanks levelled our cities to the ground. I have said this on Paltalk and I will say it again; the Americans and the current Government is showing tremendous amount of patience and Mercy towards this kid; I swear if this was the Baathis Army; Muqtada Along with his ‘Children’ would have been annihilated in 24 hours.

(salam)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(bismillah)

(salam)

Second of All; Muqtada Al-Sadr is no ‘great’ Arab/Muslim Leader; he's an amateur that is cashing in on the Anti-American sentiments in the country, backed and supported by Arab Media outlets as Iraqs ‘Mujahid’ – I wonder where was this ‘Mahdi Army’ when Saddam’s tanks levelled our cities to the ground.

I have already stated that I abide by Ayatullah Seestanis stance towards what is happening in Iraq (voting and pushing constituon)

But I respect Sayed Sadr.

When you talk about "where was he before, when saddam was doing this and that"?

The question I ask is where were you?

And where were the Majority of the Shias in Iraq?

Just because you dont like him or his views and actions doesnt give you the right to make statments like that.

I am saying this in the most humble way, by making statments like that you condem all the Iraqi people for not standing up for Saddam.

Do you honestly believe that he just wanted his father and Uncle and Aunt to be brutaly murderd?

You dont think he wanted to take revenge?

You dont think that the millions of Iraqis didnt want to take revenge when these things happend to them and their loved ones?

Edited by khorasani

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(bismillah)

The question I ask is where were you?

And where were the Majority of the Shias in Iraq?

I am referring to the 1999 semi-uprising that was a direct result of the slaying of his father and brothers, in which tens of thousands of Shias rose in defiance against the Atheistic regime of Saddam Hussayn; thousands perished, homes destroyed and hundreds of Palm trees uprooted. I ask once again; where was Muqtada and his army while our people were suffering?

Once again; his round of ‘Iraqi Nationalism’ mixed with Shia Passionism infused with Anti-Americanism is nothing but political Propaganda shrouded in popular support among unemployed Shias, of which Muqtada hire to join his illegal Militia.

As to where was I; it is irrelevant to this discussion; it does not outline my current stance nor does it justify Muqtada’s selfish agenda (which clearly is pointed against fellow Shias).

P.S.

The rest of your statements contradict realities on the ground; Muqtada is cashing in using his family's heritage to wield power and influence; to this day, Khums money is being collected unjustly even though his father is no longer with us, nor is he (Muqtada) a Marja'a.

Muqtada is creating a cult around his family’s legacy headed by his Anti-American propaganda; perhaps he should use his militia to uproot terrorists in Sunni Areas instead of leading intellectually pathetic protests against a constitution that would guarantee us civil, political and religious liberties.

(salam)

Edited by NoorFatima

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(bismillah)

(salam)

I am referring to the 1999 semi-uprising that was a direct result of the slaying of his father and brothers, in which tens of thousands of Shias rose in defiance against the Atheistic regime of Saddam Hussayn; thousands perished, homes destroyed and hundreds of Palm trees uprooted. I ask once again; where was Muqtada and his army while our people were suffering?

Are you absolutly sure that he didnt take part in that semi-uprising?

I mean where you there?

Dont forget akhi give your muslim brother 70 excuses.

Allah Knows Best.

The rest of your statements contradict realities on the ground; Muqtada is cashing in using his families heritage to wield power and influence; to this day, Khums money is being collected unjustly even though his father is no longer with us, nor is he (Muqtada) a Marja'a.

Could you please provide proof of him collecting Khums money.

As to where was I; it is irrelevant to this discussion; it does not outline my current stance nor does it justify Muqtada’s selfish agenda (which clearly is pointed against fellow Shias

I dont believe his actions are working against other Shias.

I do believe he is acting a bit rashly, how ever I beleive that both he and Ayatullah Seestani want the same thing.

He is just more focused on making sure the Americans get out sooner.

Like his call for Americans to provide a withdrawl date.

Edited by khorasani

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(bismillah)

Could you please provide proof of him collecting Khums money.

It is quite known that the Clerics who follow Sayed Muhammad Sadiq Al-Sadir collect Khums money to this day in his name; since he has allowed those who were on his Taqleed to be so while consulting the ‘most Knowledgeable’ on new matters. Based on this deduction; many pay off their Khums to those Clerics who use the money for several purposes ranging from Civil and Medical welfare to the purchase of Weapons.

I don’t have a physical proof; however the incoming inflow of money is a clear indication to where it (the money) came from. Unless you can tell me and explain from where is Muatada Al-Sadr acquiring his ‘finances’?

I dont believe his actions are working against other Shias.

It seems you have not read the rest of my post:

Muqtada is creating a cult around his family’s legacy headed by his Anti-American propaganda; perhaps he should use his militia to uproot terrorists in Sunni Areas instead of leading intellectually pathetic protests against a constitution that would guarantee us civil, political and religious liberties.

(salam)

Edited by NoorFatima

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(bismillah)

Are you absolutly sure that he didnt take part in that semi-uprising?

Yes I am sure; if he did; he would have been dead (or ruling Iraq if he would have won against Saddam).

(salam)

Edited by NoorFatima

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(bismillah)

(salam)

It is quite known that the Clerics who follow Sayed Muhammad Sadiq Al-Sadir collect Khums money to this day in his name; since he has allowed those who were on his Taqleed to be so while consulting the ‘most Knowledgeable’ on new matters. Based on this deduction; many pay off their Khums to those Clerics who use the money for several purposes ranging from Civil and Medical welfare to the purchase of Weapons.

I don’t have a physical proof; however the incoming inflow of money is a clear indication to where it (the money) came from. Unless you can tell me and explain from where is Muatada Al-Sadr acquiring his ‘finances’?

Stating some thing because its "quite well known" isnt proof enough to bring claims against some body.

Propigating a belief like that based on here say.. would be slander (im not acusing you of slander im just saying).

His funds could come from many things. Allah knows best.

Yes I am sure; if he did; he would have been dead (or ruling Iraq if he would have won against Saddam).

It may be that he took part of it and made it out alive since it didnt go through.

If your drawing to the conclusion that he would of been executed because he was near there.. or some one could identify him.. baathi could of got him later (they would of found out he was there..ect).

I can tell you that my family knew a guy who was working with running things for the Kurdish peshmarga right out of Baghdad in the 80's and was doing it for years with out being caught.

He moved to the north him self eventualy.

Again give your Muslim brother 70 excuses (or does that hadith not count for any thing these days?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(bismillah)

Propigating a belief like that based on here say.. would be slander (im not acusing you of slander im just saying).

His funds could come from many things. Allah knows best.

It is not ‘hearsay’; it is a fact; of which I’m not sure how do you exactly want me to prove.

Also; your answer to my question regarding the origin of his financing doesn't answer anything.

It may be that he took part of it and made it out alive since it didnt go through.

He was not part of the uprising; nor does he or his ‘Minions’ claim that he was. On the contrary; they are avoiding this subject all together by focusing on other matters such as the current American military presence in Iraq.

P.S.

You have not answered my post regarding Muqtada not helping Shias in this political process (at all).

(salam)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(bismillah)

To simply ignore the geopolitical and geographical inclination of the Southern region is inhumane and ludicrous; more than half of Iraq’s population lives in the South, while millions of Shias live in the center; why should they get equal amounts of money as the Sunnis (who make up a small percentage of the over all population and are divided in four provinces while most Shias live and dominate in 11 provinces)?

So in the end Kiddies; the Federal project has an Economical objective more so than the superficial Sunni created secularism.

(salam)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Your ranting aside, the Sunnis (and Sadr) are not arguing for Sunni domination. Indeed if the Sunni Arabs are being sectarian, they will be calling for a loose federation. They are a minority (around 20%) and it is the Shia who are the majority. If Iraqis are to identify themselves primarily on sectarian basis and if that is the way politics will be determined in Iraq, the Sunni Arabs are better choosing a loose federation. But that is not the point Dear writer. The point is that there are those who are out to destroy and dismantle the country.

Another thing, where did any Sunni leader claim a larger share of oil revenue than their share of the population?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For those trying to besmirch the name of Sadr by questioning where he gets his money from, I have a counter question. Where does SCIRI and BADR gets their money from?

As for weapons, Sadr did not need to buy weapon. Iraq was awash with weapons since the Americans, in their wisdom, failed to secure the Iraqi arm depots.

Those who try to break off Iraq and sow Sunni/Shia discord are the enemy of Iraq and its people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(bismillah)

(salam)

It is not ‘hearsay’; it is a fact; of which I’m not sure how do you exactly want me to prove.

Also; your answer to my question regarding the origin of his financing doesn't answer anything.

Here is what you said,

I don’t have a physical proof; however the incoming inflow of money is a clear indication to where it (the money) came from. Unless you can tell me and explain from where is Muatada Al-Sadr acquiring his ‘finances’?

So you have no proof besides what you are saying, and considering a fact.

He was not part of the uprising; nor does he or his ‘Minions’ claim that he was. On the contrary; they are avoiding this subject all together by focusing on other matters such as the current American military presence in Iraq.

Again you have failed to prove any thing, you are just making asumptions based on your own opinions.

You have failed to prove that he was not involved in it.

I never claimed that he was or that he wasnt.

YOU claimed that he wasnt, to discredit him.

Yet you have provided no proof for either of your claims.

It is not in my interests if he was or wasnt.

If you can provide proof for both of the alegations you are making....

1) that he is using khums money to supply his army

2) that he didnt take part in that small uprising (and also how that is really relivent).

I will retract the statments I made, and not argue with you that Sadr is causing problems.

How ever if you can not provide proof, please stop making such claims.

P.S.

You have not answered my post regarding Muqtada not helping Shias in this political process (at all).

Muqtada is creating a cult around his family’s legacy headed by his Anti-American propaganda; perhaps he should use his militia to uproot terrorists in Sunni Areas instead of leading intellectually pathetic protests against a constitution that would guarantee us civil, political and religious liberties.

Ayatullah seestani was asked by some of his followers to give them the go ahead to find these terrorist and hunt them down. His reply was "please be civilized." (I dont not have the source on hand but will find it and will post it as soon as I can).

So we can ask the same of Ayatullah Seestani.

I dont know exactly his clear intentions on protesting the constitution, it may have some thing to do with the Americans not giving a withdrawl date.

He him self is calling for shias to unite.

For those trying to besmirch the name of Sadr by questioning where he gets his money from, I have a counter question. Where does SCIRI and BADR gets their money from?

As for weapons, Sadr did not need to buy weapon. Iraq was awash with weapons since the Americans, in their wisdom, failed to secure the Iraqi arm depots.

Those who try to break off Iraq and sow Sunni/Shia discord are the enemy of Iraq and its people.

Very valid points.

Edited by khorasani

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(bismillah)

Muqtada Al-Sadr is politically bankrupt; I hope those kids who protest on his behalf will be able to waive off the new constitution. I can understand some of the fears regarding the distribution of wealth; but I don't quite understand their opposition to Federalism.

(salam)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Salam Alaikum

Yes well, apparently he's not only politically bankrupt, he's pretty much politically illiterate aswell, since he claims that by federalism Iraq is going to face a break away of the north and south regions! And what is worse is he's leading ignorant masses who have no idea what they're fighting for. I wonder if its a coincidence that everytime Sunni Arabs feel pressured or cornered we see Moqtada flexing his muscles on the Shia and stirring clashes with the SCIRI.

The federalism issue is extremely overblown. Most of the ppl who're against the constitution havent even read it properly. The text of the constitution says that everyone in Iraq should have an equal share to its natural resources and wealth, which tells us the issue of oil wealth is at an acceptable level for all.

Personally, I think a federalist ruled Iraq is the only way the country can remain united. Its a very diverse country with many cultures and religions, and Iraqis have been through alot during the past three decades. It is clear that the three province in the North(kurds) and the nine provinces in the central and southern iraq realise that it is best that they are entitled to form their own regional entities. These regions should go about their own business and just be loosely connected to a federal government. Neither the Kurds nor the Shiites are willing to go back to the times of Saddam Hussein, when all things were dictated by the center, which sent chemical gases to their villages, military tanks to their holy cities, and dried up their their marshes...

Edited by Saberah

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah there is nothing Sayed Muqtadr hates more than peace. What a load of bollox u lot speak.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You're a Sunni from Pakistan in an argument between Shi'a about Iraq: why are you even talking? Your opinion does not matter. This is Iraqi Shi'a issue, it has nothing to do with you Nazeer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
if the sunni scolars say that the first 10 caliphs will go to heaven (including the criminals uthman, muawiyeh, yezid, abd el malik etc) then it has some blame?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

what typical shia bull[Edited Out]. qoute me one sunni scholar who claims that yezid and abdul malik will go to heaven.

I am reallu surprized that ali ahmed has decided to enter this conv. haaving to suffer typical shia ranting bul[Edited Out]

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.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...