Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Kanye West the Token Negro

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by JimL View Post
    No, not nonsense. It's obvious to intelligent people.
    It was a hit piece written by a liberal interviewing a liberal author with an axe to grind and a book to sell and no evidence.

    nonsense.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by JimL View Post
      Well, you can be sure, OBP, that I'm not dumb enough to go a changin to a conservative/republican.
      Swell.
      Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

      Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
      sigpic
      I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Littlejoe View Post
        http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/sh...l=1#post583215

        and then:

        http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/sh...l=1#post583666

        the fact that you haven't addressed his documented arguments means you are unwilling to discuss the issue raised in the OP.
        Edited by a Moderator

        Moderated By: sparko


        Charles,

        Stay out of this thread. Your continual nannying and derailing and sniping from the sidelines will no longer be tolerated on our site. Any such posts are being moved to a derail thread we set up for you, known appropriately as "Chuck's Car" located here:
        http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/sh...arious-threads

        In addition you will start getting points for repeated violations and could be matrixed (temporary ban). Several matrixes will result in a perma ban.

        If you have a problem with this decision or moderation, do NOT bring it up in this thread, take it to your derail thread or contact me via PM.

        Sparko

        ***If you wish to take issue with this notice DO NOT do so in this thread.***
        Contact the forum moderator or an administrator in Private Message or email instead. If you feel you must publicly complain or whine, please take it to the Padded Room unless told otherwise.

        Last edited by Sparko; 10-18-2018, 08:48 AM.
        "Yes. President Trump is a huge embarrassment. And it’s an embarrassment to evangelical Christianity that there appear to be so many who will celebrate precisely the aspects that I see Biblically as most lamentable and embarrassing." Southern Baptist leader Albert Mohler Jr.

        Comment



        • I'm always still in trouble again

          "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
          "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
          "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

          Comment


          • Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
            Maybe since all that was just the vile the left vented toward only 3 blacks who had the audacity to leave the liberal plantation I should add a couple of other examples

            I guess I could include General Colin Powell. Even though he became a Republican he's less a conservative and more of a maverick than the late John McCain ever dreamed of being that didn't stop liberals from savaging him[1] but I think I'd rather pick someone much more recent, folks the left have only had a couple years to demonize.

            Let's start with the person mentioned in the OP: Kanye West.

            When he called George W. Bush a racist, saying that he "doesn't care about black people" during a live TV broadcast of "A Concert for Hurricane Relief," he was a darling of the left, much lauded for "speaking truth to power." But boy how that has changed since he started expressing admiration for Trump.

            On CNN Tonight, anchor Don Lemon implied that his pro-Trump tweets ought to be seen as evidence that West does "not "care about black people."

            Apparently The Root, a website which bills itself as providing "thought-provoking commentary and news from a variety of black perspectives," pretty much made it clear that there is only one "black perspective" and like CNN's Lemon has proclaimed

            [ATTACH=CONFIG]32227[/ATTACH]

            The writer even wistfully relates how a friend disowned his own mother because she supported Trump, implying that this is the proper response to those who dare to set foot off the Plantation.

            And entitled white elitists like Jon Favreau, who was Obama's speechwriter is straight-out ordering all good little liberals to ignore West and his radical ideas about independent thought: "Stop giving Kanye the attention he’s desperate for"

            The Washington Post published a story with the headline "Kanye West fell for the worst black Republican sales pitch there is. Here’s why" and proceeded to attack him for what they declare is a myth -- for leaving the Democrat Plantation -- while Slate is now trying to link him to the "Alt-Right" because of his support for Trump (remember folks, anyone who has the temerity to disagree with the left is automatically a Nazi and the like )

            Over on his radio show on New York's WQHT (a.k.a., "Hot 97") Ebro in The Morning, (where West first mentioned his "love" for Trump,) the host Ebro Darden proclaimed that West no longer had any right to even mention anything about the black community. Darden also said he was too rich now to talk about "black victimhood" -- something he's never said about other rich black musicians like Beyoncé, Snoop Dog or any of the others that often speak up on political issues[2].

            Ta-Nehisi Coates, a national correspondent for The Atlantic declares that "Kanye West wants freedom—white freedom" resurrecting the charge that if you don't think in a particular way then you aren't legitimately black.

            Likewise the New York Times went after West insinuating that the bond between him and Trump (which apparently goes back several years) is a sign that his mental health is now up for debate[3] saying things like "those in the rapper’s orbit expressed concern for his well-being because Mr. West’s online interaction with the president" (which they linked to the recent firing of his manager) and that his wife is now concerned over his mental health -- which is a bald-face lie from the "Gray Lady" since in reality she is steadfastly defending him (calling him a "free thinker") and slamming the MSM for saying this somehow proves he's insane.[4]

            Still, this was the tactic taken by a lot on the left including sports writer Molly Knight who Tweeted: "Mental illness doesn’t care if you are rich or famous. Kanye has battled serious health issues for a long time and I wish him the best. Trump is not his friend."

            While on a CNN panel hosted by Don Lemon (mentioned earlier), where Kanye was routinely called a "token" and a "Negro" while the host laughed, CNN Political Commentator and a contributor to ABC News, Tara Setmeyer, after calling Kanye a "token Negro" herself proclaimed "Not to trivialize mental health issues, [but] obviously Kanye has taken a turn in a very strange way."

            Likewise, Guardians of the Galaxy director James Gunn tweeted "It’s nice to see black people and white people coming together to be complete freaking lunatics" while Emmy winning actor Jeffrey Wright (who describes himself as "part-time actor, full-time kook, full-time #resistance" was a bit more direct: "If you think Donald Trump is a good alternative to anything, you're out of your [misspelled f-bomb] tree."

            This apparently caused psychologist and talk-show host Dr. Phil McGraw to, while a guest on NBC's morning gab-fest The View to complain that it's unfair to try and diagnose Kanye West with mental illness based on his new pro-Trump tweets.

            After he appeared on Saturday Night Live wearing a red "Make America Great Again" hat SNL cast member Alec Baldwin (just how does a 60 year old who's been on TV and in movies since 1980 qualify for "The Not ready For Prime-Time Crew" of up and comers?) called it a "betrayal."

            Fellow rapper Snoop Dog called him an "Uncle Tom [word for a donkey][n-word] (he has called Kanye an "Uncle Tom" previously for his support of Trump)." He also went on DJ Suss One's show on Sirius XM and went on a rant that so full of expletives that I can't even begin to clean it up. When the host of the show informed Snoop Dog that his listeners didn't like it when the show turned into a political critique, he shot back "Well you need to know that a lot of your fans is racist. Ain't no [F-bomb] way around it."

            Earlier this year Snoop Dog posted pictures of Kanye in his MAGA hat with the cation "That’s mighty white of u Kanye. ![n-word] if u don’t snap out of it Get out part 2." Similarly he posted a photoshopped image of Kanye on his Instagram account, making him look white, with the caption: "The new. Kanye well allwhite [sic] now way to go dude."

            [ATTACH=CONFIG]32228[/ATTACH]

            He's pretty much implying that he better get back on the Plantation since only whites appear to be allowed to support a Republican.

            As media critic Clay Waters noted, "It’s as if the liberal press and Twitterati truly think it’s verboten for one solitary member of the fame class to voice any positive thought toward a candidate of one of the two major U.S. parties who earned 63 million votes on the way to winning the country’s presidency. Chance the Rapper, a friend of West, had to remind everyone that “Black People don’t have to be Democrats”."



            Since I spent so much time on Kanye West I'll be much briefer on the second one, Sen. Tim Scott (R-SC), the first black senator to be elected from the southern United States since 1881, and who because he is a Republican (so was the last black Senator from the south) has been repeatedly called a race traitor, "Uncle Tom" etc. by liberals.

            Adolph L. Reed Jr., a professor of political science at the University of Pennsylvania, described him twice in a New York Times Op-Ed as a "token." Similarly NAACP President Benjamin Jealous attacked Scott shortly after he became a Senator as a "token" and declaring that Scott knows nothing about and is opposed to civil rights which he backed up by simply saying that Scott is a conservative Republican which is now tantamount to opposing "civil rights" as defined by liberals these days.

            When he announced that he'd support Jeff Sessions for Attorney General Scott was labeled "a disgrace to the black race" called "Uncle Tom Scott," "a house negro like the one in Jango" and "a big Uncle Tom piece of fertilizer" (Scott actually read some of the comments on the Senate floor noting he excluded all the ones where he was called the n-word).

            Andy Ostroy, a Political and Pop Culture Analyst at Huffington Post, attacked Scott calling him nothing more than a "black ... manipulated prop" at a ceremony celebrating the passage of the Republican tax relief bill ignoring the fact he was there due to being instrumental in writing the bill and a key player in getting it passed in the Senate.


            There ya go. A whole lot more examples of how the left treats blacks if they don't conform to how they proclaim that blacks are permitted to think and act.












            1. for instance, aside from being called a "spearchucker" by the Cleveland Plain Dealer's Metro columnist Sam Fullwood, the singer Harry Belafonte, the "King of Calypso," infamously alluded to Colin Powell as being a "house nigger" which blacks like the celebrated author Walter Mosley. applauded.

            2. His mother-in-law Kris Jenner, a hard-core Hillary supporter, made a big fuss over wanting to make sure that everyone knows that West lives in a house worth $60 million, not $20 million like he had said -- as if that matters.

            3. There are many actions that one could point to in West's past which might lead one to wonder about him but they picked his friendship with Trump

            4. In a tweet Kim Kardashian wrote:

            To the media trying to demonize my husband let me just say this… your commentary on Kanye being erratic & his tweets being disturbing is actually scary. So quick to label him as having mental health issues for just being himself when he has always been expressive is not fair.

            And
            Yesterday it was announced that Kanye had parted ways with some business people and media outlets made this about Kanye’s mental health. Rather than just a simple business decision. So I’m glad he tweeted about the state of his company and all of the exciting things happening


            Seems like in the second one that she had the New York Times specifically in mind.


            A Gish Gallop. So funny.
            “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

            Comment


            • Seems that Tass is still incapable of addressing the mountain of evidence that demonstrates the racism inherent among those on the left ready to spill out at a moment's notice the instant a black person behaves in the manner that they have proscribed.
              Last edited by rogue06; 10-20-2018, 04:42 AM.

              I'm always still in trouble again

              "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
              "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
              "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Tassman View Post


                A Gish Gallop. So funny.
                I offered just 5 examples (6 if you count the brief mention of Colin Powell) and the evidence supporting each example. Sorry if that is too much.

                I'm always still in trouble again

                "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                Comment


                • Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                  I offered just 5 examples (6 if you count the brief mention of Colin Powell) and the evidence supporting each example. Sorry if that is too much.
                  I think he's unaccustomed to dealing with fact thingies. He much prefers drama.
                  The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Tassman View Post


                    A Gish Gallop. So funny.
                    You realize that a so-called "Gish Gallop" is only useful in live debates where there is limited time to respond, yes? Here you have all the time your lil heart desires to offer rebuttals. Is that beyond your capabilities?
                    Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

                    Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
                    sigpic
                    I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
                      You realize that a so-called "Gish Gallop" is only useful in live debates where there is limited time to respond, yes? Here you have all the time your lil heart desires to offer rebuttals. Is that beyond your capabilities?
                      When you're desperate for excuses any piece of straw that floats by tends to look like a life raft.

                      I'm always still in trouble again

                      "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                      "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                      "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
                        You realize that a so-called "Gish Gallop" is only useful in live debates where there is limited time to respond, yes? Here you have all the time your lil heart desires to offer rebuttals. Is that beyond your capabilities?
                        I'm not certain the "Gish Gallop" is even a legitimate logical fallacy in the first place since I've seen the term almost always used as a hand wave any time someone presents a large body of facts and research to support their argument.
                        Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                        But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                        Than a fool in the eyes of God


                        From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                          I'm not certain the "Gish Gallop" is even a legitimate logical fallacy in the first place since I've seen the term almost always used as a hand wave any time someone presents a large body of facts and research to support their argument.
                          It's when you dump dozens upon dozens of often unrelated "factoids" (probably better to call them claims) out there during an oral debate knowing full well that even if your opponent devoted his entire time addressing them he could not possibly cover them all leaving the impression he wasn't able to refute those not addressed. It is almost universally considered a disreputable tactic.

                          As the singular naughty swine noted there is no time limit in written debates so it is not relevant here but even more importantly I listed only 5 examples and then proceeded to provide the supporting evidence for those examples. Not even close to the same thing. Tass is merely seeking excuse to ignore just how much naked racism the left openly displays whenever a black person doesn't act the way they tell him to.

                          I'm always still in trouble again

                          "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                          "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                          "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                          Comment


                          • I think what John Martin did in his geocentrism threads is the closest I've gotten to a gish gallop in text form. He'd start by making twenty posts, which I responded to one by one. Then immediately after my responses he'd dump another huge load, so as to give the impression that I had only responded to a small part of it. Then the mods forced him to at least interact with the posts, so he'd respond to one post, then post four more new objects, etc...

                            If any debate on tweb was a Gish Gallop then that was clearly an instance of it.

                            But I agree with Rogue06, the key element is time to respond being the limiting factor. I'm not sure what I'd call an opponent that just offers up a wall of a bad evidence, so as to give the indication of a strong case... that's something else. I've sometimes heard of the term 'the four foot stack', in reference to UFO cases, which is the stack of the best UFO contact cases presented by ufo researchers who think there's evidence of alien/demonic visits. But I'd never call that Gish Gallopping.

                            The debates with the infamous Duane Gish were a sight to behold, mostly because he stayed to the exact same script, no matter what his opponents responded. There was at least one example of someone defending evolutionary biology who had prepared a counter script, with an answer and slide for each and everyone of Duane Gish's points. Relying on the fact that Gish always repeated himself. And Gish... just continued his gallop, never interacting with his opponent in any way.

                            Sigh... the glory days of the creationist crowd trying to convince everyone that what they were doing was science and could be taught in the public classrooms.

                            I miss those howlers. I much prefer them to the alt-right stuff we have today.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Leonhard View Post
                              I think what John Martin did in his geocentrism threads is the closest I've gotten to a gish gallop in text form. He'd start by making twenty posts, which I responded to one by one. Then immediately after my responses he'd dump another huge load, so as to give the impression that I had only responded to a small part of it. Then the mods forced him to at least interact with the posts, so he'd respond to one post, then post four more new objects, etc...

                              If any debate on tweb was a Gish Gallop then that was clearly an instance of it.

                              But I agree with Rogue06, the key element is time to respond being the limiting factor. I'm not sure what I'd call an opponent that just offers up a wall of a bad evidence, so as to give the indication of a strong case... that's something else. I've sometimes heard of the term 'the four foot stack', in reference to UFO cases, which is the stack of the best UFO contact cases presented by ufo researchers who think there's evidence of alien/demonic visits. But I'd never call that Gish Gallopping.

                              The debates with the infamous Duane Gish were a sight to behold, mostly because he stayed to the exact same script, no matter what his opponents responded. There was at least one example of someone defending evolutionary biology who had prepared a counter script, with an answer and slide for each and everyone of Duane Gish's points. Relying on the fact that Gish always repeated himself. And Gish... just continued his gallop, never interacting with his opponent in any way.

                              Sigh... the glory days of the creationist crowd trying to convince everyone that what they were doing was science and could be taught in the public classrooms.

                              I miss those howlers. I much prefer them to the alt-right stuff we have today.
                              Gish was notorious for getting cornered and being forced to admit something he said was completely wrong but then turning around in his next debate and repeating the thing he had just concede was erroneous.

                              I posted something about this on another board a few years ago:

                              Donald Prothero, in his "Evolution: What The Fossils Say and Why It Matters" (highly recommended for those interested in transitional fossils) recounts his experience debating Gish and his habit of conceding a point in one place then immediately repeating what he had acknowledged was wrong during his next debate. As he puts it on pages 47-48:
                              Gish is particularly dishonest in this regard. If he is beaten in a debate in one city and forced to admit that an argument is not true, he will still use the same invalid argument the next night in front of a different audience, since they didn't see him recant the argument the previous night.

                              He goes on to ask "How honest or truthful can a debater be if he cynically uses an argument he knows has been proven wrong on the next unsuspecting audience?" Good question.

                              Karl Fezer of Concord College who debated Gish in 1992 made a similar observation:
                              "An author concerned about getting his facts right would certainly, when accused of error by a recognized authority, seek out the relevant evidence. Yet Gish never asked Brace to cite his sources... Other scientists have also tried to straighten out Gish. There is little evidence that Gish modifies what he says to take this criticism into account. Appearance is everything. Truth seems not a high priority."

                              For instance, Gish continued to claim in debates that there are no fossil precursors to Triceratops despite being shown several obvious examples such as Monoclonius and Protoceratops -- the latter of which has been pretty well-known since the 1920s. He initially claimed that these dinosaurs occurred too close together in time for one to be ancestral to another, but in the next debate after Gish offered this excuse Kenneth Miller showed him multiple scientific sources that make it clear that there was something like 15 million years between them. Gish ignored it and continued claiming that Triceratops appears "suddenly in the fossil record, with no transitional forms."

                              Another instance of Gish admitting that one of his claims was wrong yet continuing to assert it as being true was when Drs. William Thwaites and Frank Awbrey of San Diego State University invited Gish to debate his claim publicly that the hydrogen peroxide and hydroquinone in Bombardier Beetles spontaneously explode unless an inhibitor is added to prevent the explosion in the Spring of 1978.

                              They mixed hydrogen peroxide and hydroquinone solutions together. There was no explosion; the mixture slowly turned brown as they oxidized. Gish then claimed that he had mistranslated the original German reference mistaking the German word for "unstable" for "explosive." Yet in spite of that he was still reciting the false story about this mixture spontaneously exploding in a debate with Dr. John W. Patterson at Graceland College, in Iowa in January 17, 1980.

                              This false claim that these chemicals explode is still being pushed on the AnswersinGenesis website: The Amazing Bombardier Beetle

                              Further, since 1981 Gish has claimed in debates that Lord Solly Zuckerman had examined the Australopithecus afarensis known as "Lucy" and concluded that she couldn't have walked upright. The problem is he never saw "Lucy" and when challenged on this in Ontario by Jay Ingram back in 1982 he got upset and complained that he wasn't responsible for people misinterpreting his remarks. But he continued making the false claim. Nine years later in a debate with biologist Fred Parrish, he even went from implying to outright declaring that Zuckerman had examined the Lucy skeleton itself: "For 15 years...[Zuckerman] studied fossils of Lucy and fossils of 1-2 million years younger than Lucy.

                              And then back in July of either 1982 or 1983, when San Diego public station KBPS aired an hour-long program on creationism called "Creation vs Evolution: Battle in the Classroom" Gish proclaimed the following:
                              "If we look at certain proteins, yes, man then -- it can be assumed that man is more closely related to a chimpanzee than other things. But on the other hand, if you look at certain other proteins, you'll find that man is more closely related to a bullforg than he is to a chimpanzee. If you focus your attention on other proteins, you'll find that man is more closely related to a chicken than he is to a chimpanzee."

                              This is supposedly based upon Berkeley geochronologist Garniss Curtis' remarks that he heard someone once claim that bullfrog blood proteins were similar to human blood proteins.

                              The problem is that Curtis was making a sarcastic remark. Tongue-in-cheek Curtis said that the "frog" which yielded the proteins was an enchanted prince. Obviously the claim has never been verified and the nature of the remark was explained but that didn't matter to Gish and he continued to repeat the claim at various debates.


                              I should note that AiG has recently replaced the article with another one from 2003 (they still had the original at least as late as mid 2015), but the Internet Archive Wayback machine still has the original: The Amazing Bombardier Beetle

                              I'm always still in trouble again

                              "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                              "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                              "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Leonhard View Post
                                I think what John Martin did in his geocentrism threads is the closest I've gotten to a gish gallop in text form. He'd start by making twenty posts, which I responded to one by one. Then immediately after my responses he'd dump another huge load, so as to give the impression that I had only responded to a small part of it. Then the mods forced him to at least interact with the posts, so he'd respond to one post, then post four more new objects, etc...

                                If any debate on tweb was a Gish Gallop then that was clearly an instance of it.

                                But I agree with Rogue06, the key element is time to respond being the limiting factor. I'm not sure what I'd call an opponent that just offers up a wall of a bad evidence, so as to give the indication of a strong case... that's something else. I've sometimes heard of the term 'the four foot stack', in reference to UFO cases, which is the stack of the best UFO contact cases presented by ufo researchers who think there's evidence of alien/demonic visits. But I'd never call that Gish Gallopping.

                                The debates with the infamous Duane Gish were a sight to behold, mostly because he stayed to the exact same script, no matter what his opponents responded. There was at least one example of someone defending evolutionary biology who had prepared a counter script, with an answer and slide for each and everyone of Duane Gish's points. Relying on the fact that Gish always repeated himself. And Gish... just continued his gallop, never interacting with his opponent in any way.

                                Sigh... the glory days of the creationist crowd trying to convince everyone that what they were doing was science and could be taught in the public classrooms.

                                I miss those howlers. I much prefer them to the alt-right stuff we have today.
                                yes. this is one of the reasons he was eventually banned. We have a rule about making posts with too many disparate points to address. But rogue's post with 5 or 6 examples was not such a matter.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by little_monkey, Yesterday, 04:19 PM
                                6 responses
                                45 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post whag
                                by whag
                                 
                                Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
                                42 responses
                                230 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post whag
                                by whag
                                 
                                Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
                                24 responses
                                104 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Ronson
                                by Ronson
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
                                32 responses
                                176 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
                                73 responses
                                286 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Working...
                                X