INTENSITY²
Start here => Free For ALL => Topic started by: El-Presidente on February 17, 2014, 03:11:57 PM
-
Guilty or not, nobody would give a fuck about this individual were she not a white American woman. Had it been a black man from a country in Africa accused of the crime and then found innocent and then found guilty again it would have been a complete non-story.
I am also confused why so many Americans refuse to accept that Italy has a functioning legal system and the possibility that Knox is indeed a murderess.
My opinion, she is guilty as sin and had the audacity to blame an innocent man for the act. It disgusts me that she chose a black man she was associated with to scapegoat for the crime. She knew that a pretty white girl blaming a 'nigger' (apologies, but that is what that mentality thinks) would have a good chance of getting away with.
The evidence is compelling and that is what most supporters of Knox are deliberately ignoring.
-
And furthermore, the real victim, Meredith Kercher has been forgotten. We are just left with another example of a failed superpower treating any of its citizens who happen to have the right colour skin as somehow better than other human beings.
-
I don't really know if she is guilty of murder. She is guilty of false allegations and causing drama.
Meredith Kercher has been forgotten. They were supposed to be friends. Yet Knox was doing handstands and yoga poses at the police station. Not a normal display of grief.
I feel sorry for the guy who was accused.
-
Guilty or not, nobody would give a fuck about this individual were she not a white American woman. Had it been a black man from a country in Africa accused of the crime and then found innocent and then found guilty again it would have been a complete non-story.
I am also confused why so many Americans refuse to accept that Italy has a functioning legal system and the possibility that Knox is indeed a murderess.
My opinion, she is guilty as sin and had the audacity to blame an innocent man for the act. It disgusts me that she chose a black man she was associated with to scapegoat for the crime. She knew that a pretty white girl blaming a 'nigger' (apologies, but that is what that mentality thinks) would have a good chance of getting away with.
The evidence is compelling and that is what most supporters of Knox are deliberately ignoring.
WHER DA WHITE WIMMIN AT
(https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRem0opMDoJbIdAUQ62iJiwyUoW4S1yTpBZusNU8YmRZyEV_w4V)
I'm totally for social engineering because inequality = equality. :laugh:
-
The Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution. prohibits double jeopardy so that could explain why she has as much support in the US as she does whether she is guilty or not, yes she was in Italy and it's their legal system but Americans see trying her again as cheating.
I am also confused why so many Americans refuse to accept that Italy has a functioning legal system
This...
ROME — Seven prominent Italian earthquake experts were convicted of manslaughter on Monday and sentenced to six years in prison for failing to give adequate warning to the residents of a seismically active area in the months preceding an earthquake that killed more than 300 people.
Link (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/23/world/europe/italy-convicts-7-for-failure-to-warn-of-quake.html?_r=0)
-
I don't know if she is guilty or not, but I disagree about the Italians having a functioning legal system. El Pres, you might want to have a closer look at how they do things. Their infamous inefficiency, their overcrowded prisons filled with people awaiting trial, their politicised judges, ...
Amanda Knox, I believe, was first sued for damages in a civil case before her case actually went to trial. Her chance at a fair hearing by a criminal court, then, was close to nil. You might want to read up on how that happened, too.
And mind, I don't know if she is guilty or not. I really don't. I just think that, for her sake and for the victim's, there should have been a legal procedure worth the name because now it's too late.
-
Guilty or not, nobody would give a fuck about this individual were she not a white American woman. Had it been a black man from a country in Africa accused of the crime and then found innocent and then found guilty again it would have been a complete non-story.
Link (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rudy_Guede#Rudy_Guede) to a black man from a country in Africa accused of this crime. He isn't as famous as Amanda Knox, so I don't know whether this proves or disproves your theory.
I am also confused why so many Americans refuse to accept that Italy has a functioning legal system and the possibility that Knox is indeed a murderess.
My opinion, she is guilty as sin and had the audacity to blame an innocent man for the act. It disgusts me that she chose a black man she was associated with to scapegoat for the crime. She knew that a pretty white girl blaming a 'nigger' (apologies, but that is what that mentality thinks) would have a good chance of getting away with.
The evidence is compelling and that is what most supporters of Knox are deliberately ignoring.
It is up to a jury of her peers to judge her guilt or innocence. To me, the American public distrusts this case because of the amount of evidence of Amanda Knox's innocence, the idea of the prosecution appealing an acquittal and the accused misbehavior of some of the Italian officials in the case. I have read online (although I can't verify) that Italy's criminal system is based on fascist law.
-
The notion of appeal to an acquittal is in no way unique to Italy and is, IMHO, not necessarily a problem in itself even though some Americans may disagree. You shouldn't expect US criminal law when not in the US.
The problem here, again IMHO, is that the Italian criminal justice system didn't work, not because it can't or that it's fundamentally flawed, but because in this as in many other cases it isn't followed very well.
-
From the media coverage I've seen of knox's trial, one of the pigs involved in the investigation in italy is already known to have been a nasty piece of work, a shady character at best, possibly outright corrupt as shit.
And as far as atypical emotional responses to situations go, who are any of us to cast that stone?
-
She didn't get a fair trial, which doesn't help the victim's family.
-
I still think the negative aspects of the trial have been overstated because of who she is. If she'd been a fat black middle aged man the media would have reported nothing.
-
Oh yes, I agree, but I also think that the problems with the trial are just as obvious.
-
OTOH, a middle-aged black American citizen might have gotten some attention anyway. The US of A tends to react when their citizens are convicted abroad.
-
I reckon she is guilty as sin and I reckon that if you do a crime overseas, then you should be charged and if found guilty, convicted on THAT country's laws then the tourist's country's laws are not even worth entertaining. If you get caught spraying the side of a wall in US, you will likely get a community work order and or a fine or whatever. In Singapore you get caned and probably a bit of jail time as well. Whilst they are winding back on prosecuting on use of marihuana, in Thailand you will see the inside of a prison for many years and not a nice prison at that, In US, ladies need not cover up. In Saudi Arabia you better or risk getting beat and/or stoned.
Now some may say that the laws are no good, but I say, if tourists do not like the laws they ought not visit.
Amanda Knox got the result to her crime in Italy and I have not understood the fuss really. I do not see why anyone else is invested in it.
-
I reckon she is guilty as sin and I reckon that if you do a crime overseas, then you should be charged and if found guilty, convicted on THAT country's laws then the tourist's country's laws are not even worth entertaining. If you get caught spraying the side of a wall in US, you will likely get a community work order and or a fine or whatever. In Singapore you get caned and probably a bit of jail time as well. Whilst they are winding back on prosecuting on use of marihuana, in Thailand you will see the inside of a prison for many years and not a nice prison at that, In US, ladies need not cover up. In Saudi Arabia you better or risk getting beat and/or stoned.
Now some may say that the laws are no good, but I say, if tourists do not like the laws they ought not visit.
Amanda Knox got the result to her crime in Italy and I have not understood the fuss really. I do not see why anyone else is invested in it.
Well said. Never even heard of her until this thread.
-
In other words, if you find a legal system of a country objectionable, you should not visit it? What if you aren't guilty, what if you didn't commit the crime but were convicted anyway? I don't know about you, but I sure as hell would like my country to act and help me.
Hell, let's just ignore everything that happens abroad, let's just let them do what they want and look the other way. Let's stop trading with them, let's just forget they exist.
Crimea situation solved, for one.
-
Hell, let's just ignore everything that happens abroad,
No, just hyper-focus on the US.
-
Hell, let's just ignore everything that happens abroad,
No, just hyper-focus on the US.
We already do. Where I live at least.
-
In other words, if you find a legal system of a country objectionable, you should not visit it? What if you aren't guilty, what if you didn't commit the crime but were convicted anyway? I don't know about you, but I sure as hell would like my country to act and help me.
Hell, let's just ignore everything that happens abroad, let's just let them do what they want and look the other way. Let's stop trading with them, let's just forget they exist.
Crimea situation solved, for one.
Well, that is a position. Not my position by a position.
Consider two minor media celebrities. One from Australia and one from US. Shapelle Corby and Michal Fay.
They chose to do the wrong thing in the wrong country to do it and suddenly it is so sad and such a travesty. Shapelle carries in a bogeyboard cover crammed with marihuana in Indonesia. Michael Fay decided to graffiti the walls of Singapore.
They did the wrong thing and knew they were doing the wrong thing. Whatever vicarious thrill they got was short lived because they were caught. Everyone up in arms because the law in both instances was "harsh".
Michael ended up despite huge protests and such, in getting a heap of whippings with the rottan.
Shapelle ended up doing some serious jail time. She was let out on parole recently with a lot of very strict prohibitions, especially in respect to talking with the media and selling her story...guess what she did? Now she is facing more jail time and she cannot bear it and is so hard done by....
Enough already. Why is the respective country's media so interested and why are people making such a fuss over losers like this. It is not even really up for question whether they were guilty or not, but rather how unfair it is that they are not either punished as per the country's laws that they came from or sent back to their own country.
No, no, no. I will not have. Do the crime and do the time. Regardless of anything else, you do X in Y country, then THAT country gets to punish you, by the laws in their country relating to crime X.
I have no pity. I also believe that celebrities ought not be afforded more right, nor the rich. Do the crime and do the time. It is fair and equitable.
That leads on to the next question, what if they did not? Then they ought not do the time. How do you determine that? By the court system there, same as they would in their home country.
-
Hell, let's just ignore everything that happens abroad,
No, just hyper-focus on the US.
We already do. Where I live at least.
Yes. That's why I said it. It's weird.
-
In other words, if you find a legal system of a country objectionable, you should not visit it? What if you aren't guilty, what if you didn't commit the crime but were convicted anyway? I don't know about you, but I sure as hell would like my country to act and help me.
Hell, let's just ignore everything that happens abroad, let's just let them do what they want and look the other way. Let's stop trading with them, let's just forget they exist.
Crimea situation solved, for one.
Well, that is a position. Not my position by a position.
Consider two minor media celebrities. One from Australia and one from US. Shapelle Corby and Michal Fay.
They chose to do the wrong thing in the wrong country to do it and suddenly it is so sad and such a travesty. Shapelle carries in a bogeyboard cover crammed with marihuana in Indonesia. Michael Fay decided to graffiti the walls of Singapore.
They did the wrong thing and knew they were doing the wrong thing. Whatever vicarious thrill they got was short lived because they were caught. Everyone up in arms because the law in both instances was "harsh".
Michael ended up despite huge protests and such, in getting a heap of whippings with the rottan.
Shapelle ended up doing some serious jail time. She was let out on parole recently with a lot of very strict prohibitions, especially in respect to talking with the media and selling her story...guess what she did? Now she is facing more jail time and she cannot bear it and is so hard done by....
Enough already. Why is the respective country's media so interested and why are people making such a fuss over losers like this. It is not even really up for question whether they were guilty or not, but rather how unfair it is that they are not either punished as per the country's laws that they came from or sent back to their own country.
No, no, no. I will not have. Do the crime and do the time. Regardless of anything else, you do X in Y country, then THAT country gets to punish you, by the laws in their country relating to crime X.
I have no pity. I also believe that celebrities ought not be afforded more right, nor the rich. Do the crime and do the time. It is fair and equitable.
That leads on to the next question, what if they did not? Then they ought not do the time. How do you determine that? By the court system there, same as they would in their home country.
I completely agree with you re "do the crime, do the time". According to that country's laws, too. Graffiti on the walls, marijuana, smuggling, murder, ... If you do the deed, be prepared to face the consequences and don't count on escaping because you are a foreigner.
But I don't necessarily agree with you as for the rest, because in reality, the court systems are sometimes lacking in the very basics needed for a fair trial. Italy, to discuss the matter at hand (not avoiding your Singapore/Indonesia examples but I don't know enough of either case or the court systems used to comment), has a system well known for its problems, yet the country is part of the western world and should be able to do better since people travel there all the time, for business, for holidays, for studying and more.
Amanda Knox may well be guilty but IMHO did not get a fair trial, and that's what I'm talking about here.
-
Hell, let's just ignore everything that happens abroad,
No, just hyper-focus on the US.
We already do. Where I live at least.
Yes. That's why I said it. It's weird.
It's very odd.
-
In other words, if you find a legal system of a country objectionable, you should not visit it? What if you aren't guilty, what if you didn't commit the crime but were convicted anyway? I don't know about you, but I sure as hell would like my country to act and help me.
Hell, let's just ignore everything that happens abroad, let's just let them do what they want and look the other way. Let's stop trading with them, let's just forget they exist.
Crimea situation solved, for one.
Well, that is a position. Not my position by a position.
Consider two minor media celebrities. One from Australia and one from US. Shapelle Corby and Michal Fay.
They chose to do the wrong thing in the wrong country to do it and suddenly it is so sad and such a travesty. Shapelle carries in a bogeyboard cover crammed with marihuana in Indonesia. Michael Fay decided to graffiti the walls of Singapore.
They did the wrong thing and knew they were doing the wrong thing. Whatever vicarious thrill they got was short lived because they were caught. Everyone up in arms because the law in both instances was "harsh".
Michael ended up despite huge protests and such, in getting a heap of whippings with the rottan.
Shapelle ended up doing some serious jail time. She was let out on parole recently with a lot of very strict prohibitions, especially in respect to talking with the media and selling her story...guess what she did? Now she is facing more jail time and she cannot bear it and is so hard done by....
Enough already. Why is the respective country's media so interested and why are people making such a fuss over losers like this. It is not even really up for question whether they were guilty or not, but rather how unfair it is that they are not either punished as per the country's laws that they came from or sent back to their own country.
No, no, no. I will not have. Do the crime and do the time. Regardless of anything else, you do X in Y country, then THAT country gets to punish you, by the laws in their country relating to crime X.
I have no pity. I also believe that celebrities ought not be afforded more right, nor the rich. Do the crime and do the time. It is fair and equitable.
That leads on to the next question, what if they did not? Then they ought not do the time. How do you determine that? By the court system there, same as they would in their home country.
I completely agree with you re "do the crime, do the time". According to that country's laws, too. Graffiti on the walls, marijuana, smuggling, murder, ... If you do the deed, be prepared to face the consequences and don't count on escaping because you are a foreigner.
But I don't necessarily agree with you as for the rest, because in reality, the court systems are sometimes lacking in the very basics needed for a fair trial. Italy, to discuss the matter at hand (not avoiding your Singapore/Indonesia examples but I don't know enough of either case or the court systems used to comment), has a system well known for its problems, yet the country is part of the western world and should be able to do better since people travel there all the time, for business, for holidays, for studying and more.
Amanda Knox may well be guilty but IMHO did not get a fair trial, and that's what I'm talking about here.
Agreed
As for a fair trial in Italy :lol1: They convicted and sentence to jail 7 scientists for not adequately predicting and warning people of an earthquake months in advance that does say something about their legal system. Link (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/23/world/europe/italy-convicts-7-for-failure-to-warn-of-quake.html?_r=1&)
Anyone ever watch Locked Up Abroad? It will defiantly give you a list of places you don't want to go or at least to be very careful in. Link (http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/channel/locked-up-abroad/)
-
Hell, let's just ignore everything that happens abroad,
No, just hyper-focus on the US.
We already do. Where I live at least.
Yes. That's why I said it. It's weird.
It's very odd.
There's probably a good psychology term for that, but can't think of what it would be.
-
Anyone ever watch Locked Up Abroad? It will defiantly give you a list of places you don't want to go or at least to be very careful in. Link (http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/channel/locked-up-abroad/)
Yes, I have watched it on occasion. I wouldn't dream of visiting most of those countries.
-
Yes, I have watched it on occasion. I wouldn't dream of visiting most of those countries.
In other words, if you find a legal system of a country objectionable, you should not visit it?
Yes.
-
Yes, I have watched it on occasion. I wouldn't dream of visiting most of those countries.
In other words, if you find a legal system of a country objectionable, you should not visit it?
Yes.
Not sure I understand why you choose to quote both of my posts, above.
-
Yes, I have watched it on occasion. I wouldn't dream of visiting most of those countries.
In other words, if you find a legal system of a country objectionable, you should not visit it?
Yes.
Not sure I understand why you choose to quote both of my posts, above.
Seemed to be answering your own question. Jack agrees.
-
Yes, I have watched it on occasion. I wouldn't dream of visiting most of those countries.
In other words, if you find a legal system of a country objectionable, you should not visit it?
Yes.
Not sure I understand why you choose to quote both of my posts, above.
Seemed to be answering your own question. Jack agrees.
It was something I asked Sir Les, really.
-
In other words, if you find a legal system of a country objectionable, you should not visit it? What if you aren't guilty, what if you didn't commit the crime but were convicted anyway? I don't know about you, but I sure as hell would like my country to act and help me.
Hell, let's just ignore everything that happens abroad, let's just let them do what they want and look the other way. Let's stop trading with them, let's just forget they exist.
Crimea situation solved, for one.
Well, that is a position. Not my position by a position.
Consider two minor media celebrities. One from Australia and one from US. Shapelle Corby and Michal Fay.
They chose to do the wrong thing in the wrong country to do it and suddenly it is so sad and such a travesty. Shapelle carries in a bogeyboard cover crammed with marihuana in Indonesia. Michael Fay decided to graffiti the walls of Singapore.
They did the wrong thing and knew they were doing the wrong thing. Whatever vicarious thrill they got was short lived because they were caught. Everyone up in arms because the law in both instances was "harsh".
Michael ended up despite huge protests and such, in getting a heap of whippings with the rottan.
Shapelle ended up doing some serious jail time. She was let out on parole recently with a lot of very strict prohibitions, especially in respect to talking with the media and selling her story...guess what she did? Now she is facing more jail time and she cannot bear it and is so hard done by....
Enough already. Why is the respective country's media so interested and why are people making such a fuss over losers like this. It is not even really up for question whether they were guilty or not, but rather how unfair it is that they are not either punished as per the country's laws that they came from or sent back to their own country.
No, no, no. I will not have. Do the crime and do the time. Regardless of anything else, you do X in Y country, then THAT country gets to punish you, by the laws in their country relating to crime X.
I have no pity. I also believe that celebrities ought not be afforded more right, nor the rich. Do the crime and do the time. It is fair and equitable.
That leads on to the next question, what if they did not? Then they ought not do the time. How do you determine that? By the court system there, same as they would in their home country.
I completely agree with you re "do the crime, do the time". According to that country's laws, too. Graffiti on the walls, marijuana, smuggling, murder, ... If you do the deed, be prepared to face the consequences and don't count on escaping because you are a foreigner.
But I don't necessarily agree with you as for the rest, because in reality, the court systems are sometimes lacking in the very basics needed for a fair trial. Italy, to discuss the matter at hand (not avoiding your Singapore/Indonesia examples but I don't know enough of either case or the court systems used to comment), has a system well known for its problems, yet the country is part of the western world and should be able to do better since people travel there all the time, for business, for holidays, for studying and more.
Amanda Knox may well be guilty but IMHO did not get a fair trial, and that's what I'm talking about here.
So who is the country that tries fairly? Who has the policemen that do not misuse their powers? Which law courts give no account to a person's social position and really are in the truest sense, fair?
I admit to a bit of cynic but if you say Italy is not fair, then at least their incompetence is transparent.
-
Yes, I have watched it on occasion. I wouldn't dream of visiting most of those countries.
In other words, if you find a legal system of a country objectionable, you should not visit it?
Yes.
Not sure I understand why you choose to quote both of my posts, above.
Seemed to be answering your own question. Jack agrees.
It was something I asked Sir Les, really.
Pardon my indifference to that. :laugh:
-
So who is the country that tries fairly? Who has the policemen that do not misuse their powers? Which law courts give no account to a person's social position and really are in the truest sense, fair?
I admit to a bit of cynic but if you say Italy is not fair, then at least their incompetence is transparent.
Very few justice systems are completely fair, if any, but I would contest that in the western world at least, Italy's is among the more random. Anything can happen. Anything has, in fact, and while there seems to be a consensus over there that the system doesn't work, there's no real attempt to fix it.
There are lots of things wrong with the Swedish system, for example, but here, the (mis-) handling of the Amanda Knox case would likely have resulted in a mistrial. I believe the same to be true in most Western countries.
Which it should, because while she may be as guilty as sin, guilt is something that needs to be proven beyond any reasonable doubt and it just wasn't. I believe there was a time when a more able court system could have made a convincing case against her, but it didn't happen and now it is what it is.
Now, that is not to say that there isn't bias in our courts--quite the contrary, and I wouldn't dream of arguing against your points re social position--but I'd like to think that they aren't quite as sloppy, quite as random.
And even if they were, so what? Is it OK if enough people do it?
-
So who is the country that tries fairly? Who has the policemen that do not misuse their powers? Which law courts give no account to a person's social position and really are in the truest sense, fair?
I admit to a bit of cynic but if you say Italy is not fair, then at least their incompetence is transparent.
Very few justice systems are completely fair, if any, but I would contest that in the western world at least, Italy's is among the more random. Anything can happen. Anything has, in fact, and while there seems to be a consensus over there that the system doesn't work, there's no real attempt to fix it.
There are lots of things wrong with the Swedish system, for example, but here, the (mis-) handling of the Amanda Knox case would likely have resulted in a mistrial. I believe the same to be true in most Western countries.
Which it should, because while she may be as guilty as sin, guilt is something that needs to be proven beyond any reasonable doubt and it just wasn't. I believe there was a time when a more able court system could have made a convincing case against her, but it didn't happen and now it is what it is.
Now, that is not to say that there isn't bias in our courts--quite the contrary, and I wouldn't dream of arguing against your points re social position--but I'd like to think that they aren't quite as sloppy, quite as random.
And even if they were, so what? Is it OK if enough people do it?
OK, I hear what you are saying. So I say, Amanda Knox is an American. An American that happens to be pretty and young and female. Had she have been from Nigeria, and was a middle aged black man, it would never had caused a ripple in international media. Her beauty and youth and being a female made her a minor celebrity (as it did for Shapelle Corby - there are plenty of Aussies and other foreigners in the same jails that we never heard about that simply did not raise any outrage).
That in itself is one point that has been raised.
The other one is the question, who is the most outraged? Americans. What are they outraged about? Their citizen in the grip of a foreign court system that is unfair? Now lets say two words on that - Guantanamo Bay.
I am a cynic in respect to law and the people that protect us. I think that it is corrupt, and discriminatory and a big part of that is cultural and societal mores,
So if I see a court here there or anywhere treat someone better because they are the "right" skin colour, or the "right" socio-economic" group, or "right" whatever else, I am not surprised. Mildly disgusted maybe. I expect it though. I expect a bad result. I believe when a cop approaches and wants information from me, he will be rude, overly personal, insulting and counter-productive. I believe that judges in the Family court will shaft Fathers. I believe that judges will continue to protect the rich and famous and be harsh on the poor and uncouth. I am a cynic.....but not without good reason.
-
Most people would not have cared if she had been a middle-aged black Nigerian man, no. The media would have looked elsewhere and we wouldn't be discussing the case or its implications now.
But I'm pretty sure that some of us would have, if we'd heard of it.
And again, is it OK if everyone is doing it? Is it OK that the Italians have a failed justice system because of Guantanamo Bay? Is it OK because Amanda Knox is an American and female and good-looking? I say no, it isn't. It's never OK.
-
Most people would not have cared if she had been a middle-aged black Nigerian man, no. The media would have looked elsewhere and we wouldn't be discussing the case or its implications now.
But I'm pretty sure that some of us would have, if we'd heard of it.
And again, is it OK if everyone is doing it? Is it OK that the Italians have a failed justice system because of Guantanamo Bay? Is it OK because Amanda Knox is an American and female and good-looking? I say no, it isn't. It's never OK.
Ah I misunderstood your position. If your position is that Italian law system is an abject failure and so is other countries system of law, and this is a terrible state of affairs, then I agree with you.
-
Pretty much, yes. Some more obviously than others, and some more dangerously than others, but basically, most systems are flawed and we'd all do well to learn from all of them.
-
Pretty much, yes. Some more obviously than others, and some more dangerously than others, but basically, most systems are flawed and we'd all do well to learn from all of them.
:clap:
Then we find ourselves agreeing again. I find it difficult to argue with people with similar viewpoints. :P
Maybe I should start talking Feminism in the Western World or Disciplining Children. :orly:
No, I joke. I like that there is a lot of commonality. I am glad too of the differences be they few inbetween.
-
Italians would do better with a couple of feminists running the show. :trollface:
-
Italians would do better with a couple of feminists running the show. :trollface:
la Cicciolina :bounce:
-
Italians would do better with a couple of feminists running the show. :trollface:
Indeed, the reintroduction of the guillotine for men and crimes by men as it is exaggerated by their privilege under the construct of Patriarchy. IF they introduced tht there, I would CHOOSE not to visit ;)
-
Italians would do better with a couple of feminists running the show. :trollface:
Indeed, the reintroduction of the guillotine for men and crimes by men as it is exaggerated by their privilege under the construct of Patriarchy. IF they introduced tht there, I would CHOOSE not to visit ;)
:arrr: