Join the discussion about Charlie Hebdo - closed

796 posts / 0 new
Last post

New anti-terror laws coming as jihadis ‘declare war,’ Harper says

Mr. Magoo

No one should have to fear being temporarily unable to post on a website just for the "crime" of being offensive.

Watch for "#jesuiswebgear" to start trending.


Fun fact:

Charlie Hebdo journalist fired for making fun of "the tribe."

The offending piece in Charlie Hebdo, a pillar of the left-libertarian media establishment, was penned last month by a 79-year-old columnist-cartoonist who goes by the name of Bob Siné. He described the plans — since denied — of Jean Sarkozy, 21, to convert to Judaism before marrying Jessica Sebaoun-Darty, an heiress to the fortune of the Darty electrical goods retailing chain.

"He'll go far in life, this little fellow!" Siné wrote of Sarkozy Jr.  ... Nobody paid attention for a week: Siné is a notorious provocateur whose strong pro-Palestinian, anti-Zionist views have in the past crossed the line into anti-Semitism. I'd say he's far from alone in that among a certain French left.

But this is the summer, news is slow, and since a journalist at the weekly Le Nouvel Observateur denounced the article as "anti-Semitic" on July 8, France has worked itself into a fit of high intellectual dudgeon.

The storm is gusting at high velocity, but I'll try to take things in order. Philippe Val, the editor of Charlie Hebdo, requested an apology from Siné, to which the veteran "chroniqueur" replied, with some brio it must be said, that he would much rather cut off his testicles.

That did it for Val, who promptly fired Siné, who shot back by bringing legal action against the paper for "defamation." 

Several political bloggers have asked why Val, in the name of free speech and solidarity with a Danish newspaper under fire, bravely republished cartoons of the Prophet Mohammad, but drew the line at Siné's caricaturing of the purported relationship between Jews, money and an opportunistic young Sarkozy with a nascent political career in the department of Hauts-de-Seine, near Paris. 


He is now facing criminal prosecution in France:

French cartoonist Sine on trial on charges of anti-Semitism over Sarkozy jibe 


It seems that there are some groups whom you cannot satirize.




Mr. Magoo wrote:

No one should have to fear being temporarily unable to post on a website just for the "crime" of being offensive.

Watch for "#jesuiswebgear" to start trending.

Love it, sign me up!

In truth though, In my time here I've heard lots of posters suggest that someone 'got what's coming to them' or should without much notice and certainly no intervention. I'm not sure I share CF's characterization of this matter and WG should himself be able to answer what he meant if necessary here on the board not off-stage somewhere and nobody the wiser as to what really came down.

Anyway, Milosevic, Saddam, Gaddafi, Joseph Kony, Osama, Bush, Putin and lots more in my dim recollection have on this board been wished off the planet. I may have even done it myself some time or another. And let's not forget that the Great Misleader of the United Snakes draws up a kill list every week.

I just noticed that the lead item on Information Clearing House, contains the same sentiments WG has been suspended for. This is a massive American site and even if you don't agree with it, it's a worthy read and suggests that other people share the point of view. The Saker will not be banned. But read. As he should be. Even if you don't agree.

 I thought that this whole matter was supposed to be about 'free expression' and free speech no?


I am NOT Charlie  - by The Saker

Okay, let's be clear. I am not a Muslim. I oppose terrorism. I don't even support the death penalty. I loathe Takfirism. I oppose violence as a means to make a political or ethical point. I fully support freedom of speech, including critical speech and humor.

But this morning I am most definitely NOT Charlie.

In fact I am disgusted and nauseated by the sick display of collective hypocrisy about the murders in France..."


NorthReport wrote:

It's time for honest discussion: We have a problem with religion. Let's figure out how we are going to deal with it

I don't think that is the case among reasonable people. Muslim groups condemned this attack. The pope sent his condolensces. This isn't about religion any more than it is about edgy satire. It is  about extremism. Why else would le Pen be rubbing his hands over this, and hard-line Christians lining up with the "I'm not Charlie" camp?

As one article says above, it is about those who want to present Islam as incompatible with western society and with free speech. Neither is true.

And since NS has already taken us across that blasphemy line, here's another (probably more accurate) take on what Charlie Hebdo thought of Islam:


British Muslims for Secular Democracy: Dismantling Nine Assumptions:




Paris Shooters Just Returned From NATO's Proxy War in Syria

"Shooters were radicalized in Europe, sent to Syria, returned, have been previously arrested by Western security agencies for terrorism and long on the watch-list of French and other Western intelligence agencies. Yet 'somehow' they still managed to execute a highly organized attack in the heart of Europe.

In the recent attack in Paris, France, the canards of 'free speech', 'condemning radical Islam,' 'tolerance' and 'extremism' have all taken center stage, displacing the fact that the terrorists who carried out the attack were long on the leash, not of 'Islamic extremists' but Western intelligence agencies, fighting in a Western proxy war, as a member of a well funded, armed and trained mercenary force that has, as recently as 2007, been an essential component of Western foreign policy.

Indeed, Al Qaeda and its various rebrandings are not the creation of 'Islamic extremism' but rather Western foreign policy using 'extremism' as part of indoctrinating the rank and file, but directed by and solely for the purpose of serving an entirely Western agenda..."


Thank you Webgear for your, intentional or unintentional, lesson on hypocrisy. 

It is okay for Charlie Hebdo to be offensive, wait...more than offensive, where on any other thread would it be okay to have a cartoon of a woman as a monkey?  Yet, Webgear is banned for offensive comments!  I would suggest that this thread be allowed to be a free for all opportunity for offensiveness, let us truly support Charlie Hebdo.



Manhunt For Paris Shooting Suspects LIVE

"Police are reported to be chasing the Paris shooting suspects who could have taken one or several hostages northeast of the capital. Suspects are reportedly ready 'to die as martyrs'


France 24 (live)


Hostage Drama Northeast of Paris as Police Reportedly Corner Shooting Suspects

"Police in Paris have reportedly closed in on the suspects in the Charlie Hebdo magazine [murders], who have taken one or several hostages with injuries also reported. Two of four runways have been closed at the airport as the operation to neutralize the Paris shooting suspects is underway."

Watch the manhunt live:


NorthReport wrote:

Why does terrorism work? Because we let it.

By Michael Harris 

As Europe staggers toward scapegoating, paranoia and bigotry in the wake of the unspeakable mass murder of journalists in Paris, there's one thing that every Canadian can take to the bank: When Parliament returns, Stephen Harper will be bringing forward new anti-terror legislation. Like Stephen Rigby before them, the new national security tandem of Dick Fadden and David McGovern will be one of the most potent forces in the PM's re-election plans. Fear is Harper's most powerful vote magnet; security…

Exactly. As long as there are politicians willing to exploit it for their policy ends, and media willing to exploit it for their financial ends, it will succeed.


Gawker - How Much Did We Need This Blasphemy?

I too am a free-speech advocate, and am therefore in favor of people spewing absolutely the most heinous bullshit, if they must. It's a relief, however, to see people realizing that lot of the stuff that Charlie Hebdo published was really gross and racist. The massacre took place against the backdrop of an ugly strain of xenophobia in France, and the rise of Marine Le Pen, who represents a faction substantially worse in its virulent racism even than our most rabid right-wing partisans. It will be terrible if this massacre results in any kind of traction for Le Pen's National Front (founded by her dad, the truly repulsive bigot, anti-Semite and Holocaust denier Jean-Marie Le Pen, and I still can't believe a real political party can even be called that). Such a result would be diametrically against the avowed leftist politics (such as they were) of Charlie Hebdo.

Marine Le Pen's party is a party of hate. And Charlie Hebdo—however legitimate its position about free speech, however much the staff may have styled themselves freewheeling leftists—trafficked in hateful images and ideas that often tracked uncomfortably closely with the ultragarbage peddled by the fascistoid National Front.

I want the Charlies Hebdo of the world to say every revolting thing they want to say. But here is the exercise of my own free speech: Those guys were gross. Fanning the flames of xenophobia at a time of increased violence against Muslims and their places of worship is stupid. Not because it endangered the writers of Charlie Hebdo!—it was their look-out, if they thought these things needed saying—but because it endangered innocent Frenchmen working abroad and made it harder to fight the very grave problem of xenophobia at home. Because a bunch of idiots would be like, très très drôle, it's so funny to hate Mohammed (mdr)! Surely journalists should at least try to take some responsibility for how bigoted, ignorant people are going to "take the joke."

And a particularly pertinent comment below the article:

I agree. Its possible to be a free speech martyr and an unfunny racist at the same time. Its tragic, but its not like these guys were speaking truth to power. They were shitting upon one of the most oft shat upon groups in France, and I don't consider that brave.

And perhaps even more on-the-nose:

Satire works best against the powerful, not those with no power.


Rick Salutin's Star column:


I’m uneasy calling the massacre in Paris an attack on journalism. Journalism is a vast flabby entity, practised by many. The slaughter at Charlie Hebdo was aimed at satire, birthed along with journalism in the enlightenment era (Swift in England, Moliere and Voltaire in France, many others). More precisely, it was aimed at political cartooning, which the French adore. Daumier was the great precursor to the martyrs — I think that’s the right word — this week.

Cartoons are pure commentary, they contain no, or minimal, information. They’re unique in newspapers in that sense. Even movie reviews, which are meant to be opinion, convey lots of data: plot, cast, venue, etc. Cartoons aren’t sententious the way columnists are, cloaked in erudition and pseudo-evidence. It’s kind of amazing that they’ve survived in dailies at all, like refugees from 18th-century coffee houses. The cartoonist usually has no equivalents at the paper, he (or she) sits in an isolated space, he’s really a satirist employed by a newspaper.

I’m also uneasy with describing the work of these people as mockery (Doug Saunders in the Globe) or “the serious work of making fun” of fanaticism and “totalitarian ideologues” (Andrew Coyne in the National Post) or blasphemy (Ross Douthat in the New York Times). It makes them sound like precocious but limited adolescents venting their rage against authority. Basically a phase.

Their range is wider and their content more sophisticated. The three-word response of the Onion in the U.S. to 9/11 — Holy F---ing S--- — laid over a graphic of the devastation, brilliantly foreshadowed all the counterproductive hysteria that followed: invasions, occupations, Abu Ghraib, reactions in the Muslim world, right down to Islamic State and the murders near the Place de la République this week.

Contributors to Charlie Hebdo held clear, passionate political views, many were “children of May 68,” explicitly left-wing or anarchist. For that reason they loathed the official “socialist” parties and often refused to vote in hollow elections. You can practically hear them weep in their 2013 response to charges of racism (reprinted in the Star).

They didn’t just hate fanatics and “despots” but also the respectable mindbenders of the church, “democratically” elected governments and the press itself. Charlie Hebdo extended its sympathy not just to Arabs and Muslims but even to Muhammad — he was a guest editor — for having to put up with the adoration of “idiots” (cons) like Islamic State and Al Qaeda.

In a way they and their cognates elsewhere carry the ethical burden of journalism (afflict the comfortable and comfort the afflicted) that mainstream media so often shuck. In the U.S. today the most insightful sources by far are Jon Stewart, Stephen Colbert and John Oliver. I know a teen addicted to them who resents the charge (which Stewart at least accepts) that they aren’t doing news, they’re doing comedy about the news. If there is a mix, it’s tending more toward the former, especially with Oliver’s brilliant Last Week Tonight.

If I’ve implied purity and uniformity on their part, je m’excuse. They grew up in the same society we all did and are susceptible to taboos and blind spots. In 2008, Charlie Hebdo management told the cartoonist Siné to apologize for anti-Semitism, on specious grounds. He said he’d rather cut his own balls off; they fired him and he sued the paper, winning a healthy award. That’s the kind of intelligent passions involved. Nothing snotty or adolescent. Nobody wants to die for their work or beliefs but these guys surely understood the stakes better than most. That’s why I think of them as martyrs, not victims.

The Canadian equivalent would be Frank magazine. It, too, arouses violent (literally) response. When Brian Mulroney was prime minister, he said he wanted to get a gun or choke “that little guy,” presumably editor Michael Bate. For fathomable reasons the police never questioned or charged him. Frank went through financial crises and lawsuits (like Charlie Hebdo), occasionally ceased publication (ditto) and recently returned. It’s as indispensable as ever. Some of it is sublime (much of cartoonist Charles Jaffe’s work), some is puerile sewage, as ever. That’s the nature of journalism, you can’t wait till you get it perfect. You have to keep pushing it out and hope at least some of it will be redemptive.





You can practically hear [CH contributors] weep in their 2013 response to charges of racism (reprinted in the Star).

Can anyone provide that response?


Breaking: New reports of another hostage taking and injuries in Paris Kosher supermarket. Same shooter is reportedly responsible for the killing of a policewoman.


I would be at those vigils in France for Charlie Hebdo.

And I would expect to see all those people at the demonstrations against the rising violent Islamaphobe hysteria.


While I agree with Salutin, I also feel that it is sanguine to say that CH viciously satirized all religions and all fanatics [and this is more about fanatics]. And Rick Salutin did not join in mouthing that banal obfuscation.

True, Islamist fanatics provide far more material. The Catholic Church is increasingly just plain boring.

Still- my final position is that I dont give a fuck about Voltaire.... 

When they were alive, Charlie Hebdo cartoonists showered the public space with images that would be shunned by all but neo-Nazis here. Fuck the cultural relativism that this is France. There is a lot about being French that the fuckers need to get over- most of all their appaling complacency about their racism.

It is just one of the many ironies that isnt what the cartoonists were killed for. They were killed for satirizing fanatics that deserved 100 times more ridicule.

Thats what they died for. And I dont think Salutin is off in calling them martyrs.

But they were also part of the army of French racism stoking the Islamaphobia of the masses. They deserved shunning and villification for that [assuming they were still alive].

Todrick of Chat...

Catchfire wrote:
Hey everyone! Apologies for the lack of explanation above. Based on the number of complaints, I thought it was self explanatory, but perhaps I was wrong. I'm on my phone so I'll have to be brief, but essentially WG's initial post alleges that the CH journalists deserved what they got. It was so appalling I thought it might be a joke. Not only did WG clarify that it was NOT a joke, he turned his post into what read to me as a rather nasty attack on Timebandit. Now some people i tend to think are pretty sharp appear to think I got it wrong, so I'm willing to hear them out--preferably by PM please! Thanks.

Just curious, how many people complained about Webgear's post? What is the quantitative line in the sand for being suspend? Is it 3,5 or 10 complaints because others and myself want to make sure we don't cross that line in the sand?

If nasty attacks are a reason for being suspend why isn't this being equally applied to other users? There are weekly (often cases of daily) incidents of members being nasty to each other and yet there is hardly a warning give out but Webgear is suspend within 20 minutes of making a post? How many complaints did he get? 


left blank intentionally


First comment by Webgear

Webgear wrote:

Those reporters and police officers got what they deserve, why be concerned over them?  They were all well past their prime and really didn't offer anything of substance to the world. 

I read it as satire, this thread is about satire and the dreadful consequences when some do not comprehend that.  I laughed but then I am not a mouthy journalist taking it personally.


rhubarb wrote:
I read it as satire,

Me too.


Second comment by Webgear

Webgear wrote:

France's strict firearms laws prevailed today, however I am not sure how these criminals got assault rifles and a rocket propelled grenade launcher.

Guns didn't kill these people, cartoons did. 

Again, sarcasm, irony...perhaps not so funny but not nearly as offensive as some of the cartoons.


Third and final comment before banning

Webgear wrote:

Timebandit wrote:

Why was the thread title changed? If that was what I'd meant, I'd have said that. Frankly, I'd be delighted if a few participants here hadn't actually joined the discussion. Specifically you, Webgear, with your victim-blaming.

Why so sensitive? It is because some of your colleagues were killed? These forums have been filled with victim blaming for years, why should there be a change in policy now?

These journalists knew what they were doing and were attempting to provoke a response for years from the Muslims they knew they were offending. 

This I read as hostile but I wonder if I might feel hostile if I was specifically targeted as unwelcome. 



Finally, I think Timebandit owes Webgear an apology and I think the ban should be lifted. 

Please excuse the many posts, I haven't figured out how to do multiple quotes.




Gawker? The only reason why they are in business, and free to pretend that their shit doesn't stink this morning is because another "gross guy" and pornographer  decided to shell out $3 million of his own money to take his case to the US Supreme Court (and eventually got shot and crippled for his troubles).

Evidently these high-minded arbiters of journalistic principles don't mind taking advantage of that so that they can make money off of smearing, insulting, and embarrassing people.

And repeat that mealymouthed "nobody deserves it, but they shouldn't have been wearing that dress"  crap.

You know, Charlie Hebdo's style of humour really isn't my cup of tea, but I have to say I am getting an appreciation I didn't have before for it's power to show what people are made of.

Certainly does it a bit better than "edgy"  jokes about mickey mouse watches.



The perps will get their wish it seems which is too bad. Why don't the police just wait them out all the time, but particularly here as there is a hostage involved as well? 

Charlie Hebdo attack: Suspects cornered with a hostage

Brothers Cherif and Said Kouachi are suspects in Charlie Hebdo attack that left 12 dead, 11 injured

Two brothers suspected in the Charlie Hebdo newspaper attack were cornered inside a printing house northeast of Paris on Friday, taking a hostage and telling police they "want to die as martyrs," a lawmaker said.

Meanwhile, a gunman, who police believe is linked to the newsroom massacre, has also taken hostages at a kosher market in eastern Paris. He is also suspect in the killing Thursday of a policewoman.

Security forces streamed into the small industrial town near Charles de Gaulle airport in a massive operation to seize the two men at the printing house suspected of carrying out France's deadliest terror attack in decades. One of the men had been convicted of terrorism charges in 2008, the other had visited Yemen and a U.S. official said both brothers were on the American no-fly list.


The 2 incidents in France may be coordinated according to a present CBC interview with Claude Moniquet

Al Qaeda planning ‘mass casualty attacks’ against West



All shops are now to be closed in a or the Jewish neighbourhood of Paris.


The “blame the left” crew: What the right’s new Hebdo attack is really about

It was predictable that the awful attacks on a satire magazine would be blamed on the "decadent left." Here's why


They’ll come for “The Daily Show” next: Why satirists always threaten fundamentalists

Satirists always enrage fundamentalists. That's why they are so essential, and why we must defend them so fiercely


Totally in agreement. And I'm talking about all religions.

Religion is a “medieval form of unreason”: Salman Rushdie responds to Paris attacks

In a statement, the author defended satire and called for "fearless disrespect" of all religions


“The blasphemy of ideas”: Why everyone should read this graphic novel in the wake of the Charlie Hebdo attacks

Miss Lasko Gross' "Henni" offers a stinging critique of religious extremism -- and it's even more powerful now


As for Salutin's ode to Charlie's, and the likening of that awful toxic shit  to Swift or Voltaire, that is nought but simple shit fer shure. Nor do I recall Frank Mag being nearly so vile. Though I note  one of its originators, Michael Coren has gone on to do similar work to Charlie's at Sun news.

Speaking of which - here's their latest offering towards the present problems, interviewing an old Nazi friend of JDL Meir's. But first some suitable intro music...


The Rise of Islam in Europe (and vid)

"Geert Wilders talks to Marissa Semkiw about the rise of terror in Europe and what we can do about it..." Get used to this kind of thing, because it's plain to see his carnivorous kind is on a roll and  'tomorrow belongs, tomorrow belongs tomorrow belongs' to he...

Jihadists 'Declared War' On Those That Disagree Stephen Harper Says

"Prime Minister Stephen Harper warned the 'international jihadist movement' has declared war on countries around the world, vowing Canada will do what it can to eliminate the threat and protect Canadians..."

Oh, and the RCMP will do whatever they need to to protect Tom too

Tom Mulcair Asked For More Security After Multiple Threats

"NDP leader Tom Mulcair says he has faced threats separate from the Oct 22 Ottawa attack on Parliament Hill, and that they have prompted him to ask the RCMP for added protection.

Mulcair was speaking in Ottawa at a press conference on the Wednesday terrorist attack in Paris, France, in which 12 died."


Paris police said a gunman who took hostages Friday at a kosher supermarket in eastern Paris was threatening to kill them if security forces stormed a second location where suspects in this week's attack on satirical newspaper Charlie Hebdo also held a hostage, the Associated Press reported.

Senior police official Christophe Tirante said the gunman killed two people and took five people hostage, including women and children, according to the New York Times.

Tirante identified the attacker as Amedy Coulibaly, whose name and photograph French authorities released in connection with the fatal shooting of a female police officer they considered to be an act of terror. Authorities on Friday began to link that shooting, in turn, to Wednesday's attack on Charlie Hebdo.


Frank magazine? Perhaps you missed the Caroline Mulroney piece they ran. Not sure how the degree of offense has any bearing on the right to publish. 


Timebandit wrote:

NS wrote:


These guys knew what they were doing

They courted controversy by constantly baiting and provoking depictions of Muslims and Arabs

"Charlie Hebdo was launched in 1969 but folded in 1981. However it was resurrected in 1992. Its circulation was not very big."

Gee I wonder how they boosted circulation and profit?


Fuck you.

Will you follow up with "She knew he was a violent asshole, but she stayed anyway."?

Thanks for your support of censorship by non-governmental means.


I think this analogy has the power dynamics backward.

Bec.De.Corbin Bec.De.Corbin's picture

Hostage-taker at Paris market linked to newspaper attack   


A police official says the man who has taken at least five people hostage in a kosher market on the eastern edges of Paris Friday appears linked to the newsroom massacre earlier this week that left 12 people dead.

The official, who was not authorized to speak about the situation, said the man opened fire in the kosher market, near Paris' Porte de Vincennes, and declared "you know who I am."

Paris police released a photo of Amedy Coulibaly as a suspect in the killing Thursday of a policewoman, and the official named him as the man holed up in the market. He said the man is armed with an automatic rifle and some hostages have been gravely wounded.

He said a second suspect, a woman named Hayet Boumddiene, is the gunman's accomplice.


Apparently, police have launched an attack on site where the CH suspects are holed up.


And now at the kosher supermarket.






The Associated Press     ‏@AP                                 

BREAKING: Police official: Suspects in Charlie Hebdo massacre killed, hostage freed.

Hurtin Albertan

Bon travail GIGN!! 

Hopefully all the hostages made it out safely and no police were hurt.  Too bad GIGN couldn't capture anyone alive out of the 3 terrorists.

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

Question to me is,how did the gunmen get their hands on weapons which are banned in France?

Maybe this is another reason to abandon the drug war and use these resources to combat illegal weaponery smuggling and on better intelligence.

Sadly instead what I see is the inevitable militarization of virtually everything.


Apparently, the kosher market gunman has been killed and at least "some" of the hostages freed.


Well said alan.


Of course I would have preferred to have the suspects taken alive than be "martyrs", but I'm relieved that the hostage is safe and sound.

I hope the people at the supermarket are as well. I haven't read any confirmation (in French) of the two hostage deaths; one person reported wounded.

There are several Parisian neighbourhoods and suburbs with significant Jewish populations, but I don't think any of them have a Jewish majority. Part of Le Marais is the "historic", and touristy, "Jewish neighbourhood". In many places in eastern Paris Jewish and Muslim Maghrebis live side by side.


The leader of the Lebanese Hezbollah group says Islamic extremists have insulted Islam and the Prophet Muhammad more than those who published satirical cartoons mocking the religion.

Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah did not directly mention the Paris attack on the offices of Charlie Hebdo that left 12 people dead, but he said Islamic extremists who behead and slaughter people - a reference to the IS group's rampages in Iraq and Syria - have done more harm to Islam than anyone else in history.

Save the link, because you're not likely to read this elsewhere in the North American press.


Four of the hostages may be dead.


Or in critical condition.        

4 people in critical condition after assault on Jewish supermarket in Paris, security source tells #AFP



The_Fifth_Column wrote:

Charlie Hebdo journalist fired for making fun of "the tribe."

Nice try. I suppose that's a handier spin for the International Jewish Conspiracy theorists than considering that it might have to do with a specific person who happened to be the son of the president.

Check out this interview  with Art Spiegelman recounting, among other things, Charlie Hebdo's "How can they call it a concentration camp if there isn't an orchestra?" cover. Can't make fun of the tribe?

It is well worth reading - the whole thing.


Catchfire Catchfire's picture

Thanks to those who took my advice and wrote to me on their thoughts re: Webgear. His suspension has been lifted, but I have to ask that if he wants to keep posting in the vein he has done, he should avoid posting in this thread. I still don't know if his initial post was meant to be satirical, but even if it was, it is extremely bad taste and not appropriate for this thread (babble, after all, is not Charlie). At any rate, using satire to attack other babblers who feel very invested in this emotionally charged issue, is definitely not on. That's how I read WG's subsequent posts, and I don't think I'm wrong there.

At any rate, let's please keep this discussion going with a degree of sensitivity, yes? I think for the most part that's happened, despite the fraught content, so let's keep it that way.

Catchfire Catchfire's picture




Topic locked