0
Thumbs Up |
Received: 2,268 Given: 1,561 |
Thumbs Up |
Received: 25,690 Given: 23,946 |
Thumbs Up |
Received: 2,268 Given: 1,561 |
Thumbs Up |
Received: 25,690 Given: 23,946 |
Thumbs Up |
Received: 1,020 Given: 2,574 |
Thumbs Up |
Received: 2,268 Given: 1,561 |
Thumbs Up |
Received: 25,690 Given: 23,946 |
Thumbs Up |
Received: 180 Given: 80 |
I agree with immigration based on blood (that is, someone that was born in other country but has blood relation with the country that they will go) or history of the group (for example, if the inuits wanted to go back to siberia I wouldn't say it's something that bad). Other than those two, it's a no for me.
Thumbs Up |
Received: 1,357 Given: 2,487 |
against the maghrebian ,african,paki,chechen, turkish muslimised immigration,out by force and by coercitive means
,with an exception for the evangelised western africans
never had troubles with non-muslim asians,sri-lankeses,indians,it's quite the contrary they add very valuable cultural elements like the ayurveda medicine for example
“the right of peoples to self-determination”
http://sciencenordic.com/
"talking to an asshole is like masturbating with a cheese grinder, it's painful and counterproductive" .Pierre desproges
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks