Saturday, 23 February 2019

Category » Articles

Liberal Future: Anglesey, Brecknockshire, Caernarfonshire & Ceredigion Youth Say … Blood Over Gold – BreXit Now!

.

Liberal Future: Anglesey, Brecknockshire, Caernarfonshire & Ceredigion Youth Say … Blood Over Gold – BreXit Now!

LIBERAL FUTURE – the youth wing of the National Liberal Party – believes that the end game of the European Union (EU) is the creation of a United States of Europe. This will have to be a highly centralised political and economic system. It would be just perfect for the EU which is simply a rich man’s club for powerful corporate big business and banking elites. However, it won’t be great for those of us who are opposed to gigantism and who believe that ‘Small is Beautiful’.

Whilst we’re fairly sure about the endgame of the EU, we’re still not too sure if this is by accident or design.

The EU started life as the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) in 1951 and seven years later morphed into the European Economic Community (EEC). As their names suggest, these were purely economically-driven organisations.

However, this changed when the Maastricht Treaty was signed in 1992. It created the EU with its three pillars system. They covered economic, social and environmental policy; Common Foreign and Security Policy and Police and Judicial Co-operation in Criminal Matters. This in turn led to the creation of the single European currency, the euro, which was launched in 1999.

It’s easy to see why many ordinary Welsh working folks believe that the EU effectively resembles a Superstate in waiting. With the prospect of a EU army now edging ever closer, it certainly looks like a deliberate plan of homogenisation, albeit still economically-led.

With all this in mind, Liberal Future (LF) cannot understand why Plaid Cymru – the Party of Wales – under its then leader Leanne Wood campaigned to stay in the EU during the 2016 Referendum.

In the end the majority of Welsh voters backed Leave – 854,572 voted for Brexit – 52.5% of the electorate. (interestingly, this was more than those voting for devolution in the Welsh referendums of 1979, 1997 and 2011.)

However, new Plaid Cymru leader, Adam Price AM, doesn’t like democracy when it goes against him. Therefore, he’s backing calls for the Orwellian-sounding ‘People’s Vote’. Here, he reflects the arrogance of those who want to remain in the EU.

First of all, he is the Welsh Assembly Member for the 53% Leave-voting Carmarthen East and Dinefwr constituency. Therefore, he doesn’t even represent his electorate – which indicates the farcial nature of our ‘First Past The Post’ voting system! However, he’s still intent on telling voters what they should think and do.

Secondly, as the leader of Plaid Cymru (PC), he wants to dump one relatively small Union – the United Kingdom – yet wants to stay within a much larger Union – the European Union! Why anyone – let alone a so-called Welsh nationalist – would want to surrender their nationhood to a supranational organisation like the EU is beyond us.

Furthermore, PC is a ‘left nationalist’ group (which appears to support a form of decentralist socialism) yet it wants to attain independence within the European Union! Surely the first duty of any ‘nationalist’ group is to protect its nation and people by achieving economic and food sovereignty? How can PC do this whilst it supports the capitalist (and part-globalist) EU? In fact, how can PC claim to be any sort of ‘socialist’ group whilst it collaborates with the capitalist EU enemy of Wales (indeed, the enemy of all European nations) and of ordinary Welsh workers?

Independence for Wales within the EU is also an oxymoron. Let’s be honest with ourselves – it’s not as if Wales can exert much influence on the EU. Wales has four Members of the European Parliament and only one of them – Jill Evans – represents Plaid Cymru. From this we can only conclude that Plaid are happy enough to be the underlings of big business. They’re simply acting as cheerleaders for the EU and are more than happy with the trappings of power.

Liberal Future also believes that the new PC leader also reflects the naivety of those who want to remain in the EU.

Here, Adam Price could do not better than consider the words of Matthew Goodwin, an academic (he is Professor of Politics in the School of Politics and International Relations at the University of Kent) a bestselling writer (who is the author, or co-author of several books, including one on National Populism which was the 2018 Sunday Times Bestseller) and well-known speaker.
Goodwin appears to be more interested in evidence – “as opposed to the misleading claims and stereotypes that dominate our public debate.” He is particularly interested in Brexit and Eurosceptism, which he treats in a fair and responsible manner. For, as he noted on his Twitter feed @GoodwinMJ

‘Brexit was the first moment when a majority of people outside of parliament formally asked for something that a majority of people inside parliament didn’t want to give. And leavers knew exactly what they were voting for, as almost every study has shown. They wanted powers returned from the European Union and lower immigration. But many were also asking for something else: A radical shake-up of what they see is a broken settlement, a place where London gets a lot and everywhere else gets little, where left behind workers have good reason to feel left behind, and where all of us are right to worry about inequality, corporate power, and whether our politicians are even listening.

Some people argue that all of that could be fixed while staying in the EU. But that’s misleading, and the point is that when we were in the EU it didn’t happen. Maybe Britain needs this psychological shock to bring about change, to bring politics closer to the people. Brexit will be economically disruptive but Britain will survive.

And we should remember that most people don’t only think about GDP. They care deeply about things like identity, community, belonging and tradition. And they are driven by things like recognition, voice and dignity, words that we don’t hear much about today.

I don’t think that undermining Brexit, diluting it, delaying it indefinitely or even overturning it are the way to go. Nor do I think that asking people to vote again and again until they give you the right decision is a sign of a healthy social contract. We should be able to work with this moment to explore the possibility of national renewal rather than undermine it. So Britain faces a choice, at least in my view: It can work with this moment and try to make our society fairer and our economy more equal and our politics stronger or it can lead us down a riskier path, where I just see further polarisation, division and populism.’

Liberal Future agrees with Goodwin when he notes that ‘most people don’t only think about GDP. They care deeply about things like identity, community, belonging and tradition. And they are driven by things like recognition, voice and dignity, words that we don’t hear much about today.’

There’s a saying for this type of rooted outlook on life: Blood Over Gold. In short, it means that ordinary working people cannot be bought. Plaid Cymru’s leader Adam Price – and any other member of the establishment who seeks to deny the will of the people concerning Brexit – would be wise to remember this.

• THIS ARTICLE should be read in conjunction with the following:

Liberal Future: For A Europe Of Free Nations – BreXit Now! http://nationalliberal.org/liberal-future-for-a-europe-of-free-nations-brexit-now

Liberal Future: County Londonderry, County Antrim & County Down Youth Say … Independence From the EU – BreXit Now! http://nationalliberal.org/liberal-future-county-londonderry-county-antrim-county-down-youth-say-…-independence-from-the-eu-–-brexit-now

Share:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Add to favorites
  • blogmarks
  • Blogosphere
  • Google Buzz
  • PDF
  • email
  • Live
  • MSN Reporter
  • MyShare
  • MySpace
  • Technorati
  • Webnews.de

News From Nowhere – Poverty & Homelessness in Britain & Éire

NATIONAL LIBERALS believe that everyone – regardless of wealth or social background – has the right to decent housing, proper medical care and generous provision for old age.’


The UK Conservative Party (left) and Éire’s Fine Gael (right) are brothers-in-arms when it comes to homelessness.

TOWARDS THE END OF LAST YEAR we featured an article – http://nationalliberal.org/

social-justice-the-failure-

of-capitalism – which looked at the plight of those who found themselves homeless in Tory Britain.


Our article was based on the housing charity Shelter’s third annual analysis of homelessness. In 2016, it estimated there were 255,000 homeless people in England alone, a figure it subsequently adjusted to 294,000 for Britain. This rose to 307,000 in 2017. When the 2018 analysis was conducted it found that around 320,000 people were homeless in England and Wales. Indeed, the report concluded that real figure is likely to be higher because of the plight of the ‘hidden’ homeless. This would include people ‘such as sofa-surfers, and others living insecurely in sheds or cars, for example.’


Whilst homelessness is at its highest in London, other areas also suffer. Indeed, high rates of homelessness rates were recorded in Birmingham, Luton, Brighton & Hove, Slough, Dartford, Milton Keynes, Harlow, Watford, Epsom, Reading, Broxbourne, Basildon, Peterborough and Coventry.


However, Tory Britain is not the only place people find themselves in dire straits. For a similar situation can also be found across the Irish Sea in Éire.


According to a report - https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/780000-people-living-in-poverty-in-ireland-report-finds-889404.html- which appeared in the Irish Examiner also towards the end of last year, around 780,000 people in Ireland are living in poverty – a figure which includes around 250,000 children.


The report – the National Social Monitor – is produced three times a year by Social Justice Ireland, an independent justice advocacy organisation and think-tank.


As well as looking at poverty levels in Éire it also noted increasing waiting times for treatment in hospitals and care centres. Here, the number of people on lists stands at over 700,000. In practical terms, this means that almost 95% of beds are occupied and there is no capacity within the hospital system to cope with ‘unforeseen events.’ The report also highlighted the lack of homecare services for the elderly, people with disabilities and with mental health needs.


Homelessness is another huge problem.


The National Social Monitor found that more than 11,000 people are homeless and that almost 110,000 households are in need of social housing.


At the moment Leo Varadkar’s Fine Gael government is focusing on short-term housing solutions provided through the private rented sector, rather than the investment of capital spending in social housing. Varadkar claims this is helping with an economic ‘recovery’ – however, his critics claim that massive profits are being made by ‘vultures and developers’ at the expense of ordinary people.


The issue of homelessness in Éire was also brought into sharp focus by a more recent report - https://www.newstalk.com/Number-of-homeless-families-skyrockets-in-Dublin-by-420-in-10-years- produced by Focus Ireland.


Focus Ireland is a not for profit organisation which works with people who are homeless or at risk of losing their homes across Ireland:


‘We are driven by the fundamental belief that homelessness is wrong. Wrong because it is a failure of society that creates victims out of ordinary people and robs them of their potential. Wrong because it can be prevented, it can be solved but is allowed to continue and in doing so, undermines society’.


Taking part in Facebook’s #10YearChallenge, it revealed that homelessness in Dublin has rocketed by 420% in the last ten years. The capital city now has 1,296 families registered as homeless.


Focus Ireland has also echoed existing criticism of Varadkar’s Fine Gael government and has called for more social housing to be built. Such a move would help those in difficulty by reducing demand for private rented accommodation and easing rents.

Share:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Add to favorites
  • blogmarks
  • Blogosphere
  • Google Buzz
  • PDF
  • email
  • Live
  • MSN Reporter
  • MyShare
  • MySpace
  • Technorati
  • Webnews.de

Distributism As A Means of Achieving Third Way Economics (Part 5)

THIS IS the fifth and final part of our serialisation of Richard Howard’s essay Distributism As A Means of Achieving Third Way Economics which first appeared in 2005 on the web-site http://www.hsnsw.asn.au/index.php – of the Humanist Society of New South Wales..


National Liberals believe in Self-Determination for all. This includes personal Self-Determination as well, as the more familiar national Self-Determination. It’s been noted that in order to achieve true personal Self-Determination one must first achieve economic Self-Determination. However, economic Self-Determination cannot be achieved via Capitalism nor Socialism. Both are collectivist in nature. Here the individual is either ruled (and thus effectively owned) by large corporations – Capitalism – or the State – Socialism. Distributism is different as it advocates a society marked by widespread property ownership. This is the mark of a truly free society.

As Hilaire Belloc – one of Distributism’s greatest advocates – noted:

But if we are to retain freedom, then we can only do so by keeping the determining mass of the citizens the possessors of property with personal control over it, as individuals or as families. For property is the necessary condition of economic freedom in the full sense of that term. He that has not property is under economic servitude to him who has property, whether the possessor of it be another individual or the State.

We invite our readers to share their thoughts when this article is reproduced on our Facebook site https://www.facebook.com/groups/52739504313/ It goes without saying that there are no official links between Richard Howard, the Humanist Society of New South Wales and the National Liberal Party. Readers will note that this Introduction uses the phrase ‘third position’ (not to be confused with the extreme-right philosophy of that name) and that the article uses the phrase ‘Third Way.’ Here they are used in a context that distinguishes it from capitalism and socialism – indeed, it refers to an economic position that goes way beyond both capitalism and socialism.

.

Distributism As A Means of Achieving Third Way Economics (Part 5)

“Under capitalism, man exploits man. Under communism, it’s the other way around.”
.
Relevance in Australia
.

Arthur Joseph Penty (1875 – 1937) was a English architect and writer on Guild socialism and Distributism. He was first a Fabian socialist, and a follower of Victorian thinkers William Morris and John Ruskin. He is generally credited with the formulation of a Christian socialist form of the medieval guild, as an alternative basis for economic life. As an associate of Alfred Richard Orage, Penty was also familiar with the Social Credit ideas of Major Clifford Hugh Douglas. However. Penty embraced Distributism. He published a number of texts on Guild socialism and distributism including The Restoration of the Guild System (1906); Towards a Christian Sociology (1923) and Distributism: A Manifesto (1937).

Australia is however not a nation of starving match-girls and poverty-stricken tubercular factory workers crowded six to a room. This is a rich country whose poor are still fabulously wealthy by Third World standards.

Australia is however, at the beginning of the 21st century, a country whose living standards have not been rising consistently.

Thirty years ago a single working-class income was enough to support a family. A bus driver or council labourer could reasonably expect to be able to buy a modest house and drive a late model car. Today all that has changed. While a proliferation of electrical consumer gadgets get ever cheaper and more numerous, the fundamental costs of living – accommodation, food, transport, health care and education are far less affordable now than then.

In response, both partners in most relationships have quietly gone to work full time, but even this doubling of family incomes has still not kept pace with the erosion in average income standards.
Yet this is not universally true. The living standards of professionals, managers and others on higher wages have kept pace with the increasing cost of living.

Part of the reason for this is that those on higher incomes now rarely marry outside their socio-economic class. Where once doctors and lawyers and company executives married their secretaries or people on lower incomes that they met at social gatherings today they marry each other, maintaining their combined earning power but helping to lock those on lower incomes out of one means of economic advancement.

Fundamentally however, this is a reaction rather than a cause. The fundamental problem is that over the last 35 years the purchasing power of take home pay for those on lower incomes has declined, particularly in terms of accommodation cost.

Concomitantly, waves of takeovers and mergers has seen ownership of every aspect of production, distribution and exchange concentrated more and more in fewer and fewer hands.

As “globalisation” continues to place a downward pressure on wages and conditions, this situation is likely to be exacerbated.

In Australia as in the United States, since the demise of Keynesianism in the early 70′s, the gap between rich and poor has continued to widen. In the US in 2000 the salaries of the CEOs of the 365 largest companies was 500 times the average wage and the 13,000 riches families have around the same collective income as the 20 million poorest.
Small family farms, once the cornerstone of Australian life outside the big cities, have become an endangered species as vast agribusinesses have grown up driven by the voracious fast-food industry.
.
For more and more young people today, the prospect that they will never be anything but poorly paid wage slaves living in rental accommodation is a real possibility.

Increasingly all sense of community is being lost, as the dog-eat-dog struggle to grab a few chestnuts out of the economic fire turns us into an anonymous collection of disconnected individuals – more a bus stop than a nation – in which no one cares for anyone but themselves.

Driven by the ceaseless demand for ever greater profits in ever fewer hands rather than nutritional benefit, the very foods that we eat are being genetically transformed and chemically altered, the long-term consequences of which we can only guess.

Yet what really does this profit anyone?

In the end, the purpose of material advancement cannot be simply material advancement for its own sake but must be an increase in human happiness.

As the struggle for living standards intensifies, can we really say that our society as it is today is achieving this?
Can even those few who do gain from vast profits really say their lives are better than they might be if everyone had a better life, when more and more their material enjoyment is curtailed by the need to hide behind walls and security guards and legalized violence?

Some will say that 1930s social theorists and the localized success of the co-operative system in the Basque region of Spain have little relevance to us in Australia today, but in Switzerland, Norway, Denmark and Iceland, four of the richest countries in the world, communitarian distributism in small farms and businesses and housing is alive and well.

In addition to having higher per-capita incomes than Australia, all have a tiny fraction of the levels of poverty, drug abuse, homelessness and crime of this country. They have less pollution, less traffic congestion and much less urban sprawl than Australia and a far stronger sense of community than we have here.
It is in this context that Belloc’s prescient warning of the dangers of the servile state and distributism’s alternative vision of an affluent, cohesive society of home owners and self-employed deserves to be re-examined.

Share:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Add to favorites
  • blogmarks
  • Blogosphere
  • Google Buzz
  • PDF
  • email
  • Live
  • MSN Reporter
  • MyShare
  • MySpace
  • Technorati
  • Webnews.de

From The Liberty Wall – National Liberal Trade Unionists – Trade Unionists Against Mass Immigration (Part 1)
NATIONAL LIBERAL TRADE UNIONISTS – NLTU – are opposed to both capitalism and socialism. We view the workings of both systems as fairly similar. Neither are we particularly interested in class – indeed, the NLTU regards itself as ‘beyond class’. As our Facebook site – https://www.facebook.com/groups/277840098977231 – declares:

The National Liberal Trade Unionist aims to promote a non-socialist trade unionism i.e. building employee protections rather than class revolution. The group will support the principles of liberty e.g. the protection of all individual employees, and patriotism e.g. the defence of workers from globalisation, and promote a liberal e.g. supporting greater employee share ownership, agenda.

With the NLTUs opposition to globalisation in mind, our attention was recently drawn to an article – The Left Case Against Open Borders - https://americanaffairsjournal.org/2018/11/the-left-case-against-open-borders/- written by Angela Nagle for American Affairs.

Founded in 2017, American Affairs is a ‘is a quarterly journal of public policy and political thought.’ Interestingly, it features ‘established authors and new voices, from both the Right and the Left’ who aims to ‘look beyond ossified ideological modes’ and offer a ‘more informed responses to perennial questions and immediate problems.
The NLTU might not agree with everything Nagle writes. However, in the spirit of comradeship, free speech and open debate, we feature her article below. We invite our readers to share their thoughts when this article is reproduced on the NLTU Facebook site - https://www.facebook.com/groups/277840098977231 – and the NLP Facebook site – https://www.facebook.com/groups/52739504313/ It goes without saying that there are no official links between Angela Nagle, American Affairs, the NLTU and the National Liberal Party. Please note that the NLTU has kept the original US spelling and phrases as they are.

.

National Liberal Party – From The Liberty Wall – National Liberal Trade Unionists – Trade Unionists Against Mass Immigration (Part 1)


The Left Case Against Open Borders – By Angela Nagle (Part 1)

BEFORE “Build the wall!” there was “Tear down this wall!” In his famous 1987 speech, Ronald Reagan demanded that the “scar” of the Berlin Wall be removed and insisted that the offending restriction of movement it represented amounted to nothing less than a “question of freedom for all mankind.” He went on to say that those who “refuse to join the community pf freedom” would “become obsolete” as a result of the irresistible force of the global market. And so they did. In celebration, Leonard Bernstein directed a performance of “Ode to Joy” and Roger Waters performed “The Wall.” Barriers to labor and capital came down all over the world; the end of history was declared; and decades of U.S.-dominated globalization followed.

In its twenty-nine year existence, around 140 people died attempting to cross the Berlin Wall. In the promised world of global economic freedom and prosperity, 412 people died crossing the U.S.-Mexico border last year alone, and more than three thousand died the previous year in the Mediterranean. The pop songs and Hollywood movies about freedom are nowhere to be found. What went wrong?

Of course, the Reaganite project did not end with the collapse of the Soviet Union. Reagan – and his successors from both parties – used the same triumphalist rhetoric to sell the hollowing out of trade unions, the deregulation of banks, the expansion of outsourcing, and the globalization of markets away from the deadweight of national economic interests. Central to this project was a neoliberal attack on national barriers to the flow of labor and capital. At home, Reagan also oversaw one of the most significant pro-migration reforms in American history, the 1986 “Reagan Amnesty” that expanded the labor market by allowing million of illegal migrants to gain legal status.

Popular movements against different elements of this post-Cold War vision came initially from the Left in the form of the anti-globalization movements and later Occupy Wall Street. But, lacking the bargaining power to challenge international capital, protest movements went nowhere. The globalized and financialized economic system held firm despite all the devastation it wreaked, even through the 2008 financial crisis.

Today, by far the most visible anti-globalization movement takes the form of the anti-migrant backlash led by Donald Trump and other “populists.” The Left, meanwhile, seems to have no option but to recoil in horror at Trump’s “Muslim ban” and news stories about ICE hunting down migrant families; it can only react against whatever Trump is doing. If Trump is for immigration controls, then the Left will demand the opposite. And so today talk of “open borders” has entered mainstream liberal discourse, where once it was confined to radical free market think tanks and libertarian anarchist circles.

While no serious political party of the Left is offering concrete proposals for a truly borderless society, by embracing the moral arguments of the open-borders Left and the economic arguments of free market think tanks, the left has painted itself into a corner. If “no human is illegal!,” as the protest chant goes, the Left is implicitly accepting the moral case for no borders or sovereign nations at all. But what implications will unlimited migration have for projects like universal health care and education, or a federal jobs guarantee? And how will progressives convincingly explain these goals to the public?

During the 2016 Democratic primary campaign, when Vox editor Ezra Klein suggested open borders policies to Bernie Sanders, the senator famously showed his vintage when he replied, “Open borders? No. That’s a Koch brothers proposal.” (1) This momentarily confused the official narrative, and Sanders was quickly accused of “sounding like Donald Trump.” Beneath the generational differences revealed in this exchange, however, is a larger issue. The destruction and abandonment of labor politics mean that, at present, immigration issues can only play out within the framework of a culture war, fought entirely on moral grounds. In the heightened emotions of America’s public debate on migration, a simple moral and political dichotomy prevails. It is “right-wing” to be “against immigration” and “left-wing” to be “for immigration,” But the economics of migration tell a different story.
  1. https://www.vox.com/2015/7/28/9014491/bernie-sanders-vox-conversation• ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Angela Nagle writes for the Atlantic, Jacobin, the Irish Times and the Baffler. She is the author of Kill All Normies: Online Culture Wars from 4chan and Tumblr to Trump and the Alt-Right (Zero Books, 2017).

    • CHECK OUT the National Liberal Trade Unionists here: http://nationalliberal.org/liberty-wall-3/national-liberal-trade-unionist


Share:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Add to favorites
  • blogmarks
  • Blogosphere
  • Google Buzz
  • PDF
  • email
  • Live
  • MSN Reporter
  • MyShare
  • MySpace
  • Technorati
  • Webnews.de

Where We Stand (3) The National Liberal Party Supports A Sane Foreign Policy!

.

• THIS should be read in conjunction with the following:


Where We Stand (1) The National Liberal Party Supports Real Democracy! http://nationalliberal.org/where-we-stand-1-the-national-liberal-party-supports-real-democracy


Where We Stand (2) The National Liberal Party Supports Constitutional Reform! http://nationalliberal.org/where-we-stand-2-the-national-liberal-party-supports-constitutional-reform

Share:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Add to favorites
  • blogmarks
  • Blogosphere
  • Google Buzz
  • PDF
  • email
  • Live
  • MSN Reporter
  • MyShare
  • MySpace
  • Technorati
  • Webnews.de

Christmas 2018 – NLP Community Action!

WITH CHRISTMAS just a few days away, the National Liberal Party is calling its members and supporters to undertake some local community action.

.

We want folks to print out just ten of our Christmas 2018 – Support Your Local Shops! leaflets and simply distribute them to their family, friends, workmates, neighbours and local shopkeepers.

.

Distributing just ten leaflets will take a matter of minutes – but it will alert many, many people to our campaign in support of local shops, small businesses and the self-employed.

.

To download our Christmas leaflet simply click here:

http://nationalliberal.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/shoplocal18xmas.pdf

Share:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Add to favorites
  • blogmarks
  • Blogosphere
  • Google Buzz
  • PDF
  • email
  • Live
  • MSN Reporter
  • MyShare
  • MySpace
  • Technorati
  • Webnews.de

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.

Close