India Bans Arab TV Channels Under Pressure From Israel
Moderators: Moderators, Junior Moderators
Forum rules
This General Forum is for general discussions from daily chitchat to more serious discussions among Somalinet Forums members. Please do not use it as your Personal Message center (PM). If you want to contact a particular person or a group of people, please use the PM feature. If you want to contact the moderators, pls PM them. If you insist leaving a public message for the mods or other members, it will be deleted.
This General Forum is for general discussions from daily chitchat to more serious discussions among Somalinet Forums members. Please do not use it as your Personal Message center (PM). If you want to contact a particular person or a group of people, please use the PM feature. If you want to contact the moderators, pls PM them. If you insist leaving a public message for the mods or other members, it will be deleted.
India Bans Arab TV Channels Under Pressure From Israel
BOMBAY, 6 August 2006 — In a country widely referred to as the world’s largest democracy, the Indian government has succumbed to mounting Israeli pressure and ordered a nationwide ban on the broadcast of Arab television channels.
The Indian governmentÂ’s ban on Arab television stations is in complete contrast to the friendship that Arab countries imagine exists with their neighbor across the Arabian Sea. It seems the ban is a move to ensure that Indians do not get to see the atrocities that are presently being committed by Israel in Lebanon and the occupied territories.
Nabila Al-Bassam, a Saudi businesswoman on a trip to Bombay, told Arab News how she became exasperated at not being able to watch Arab channels at BombayÂ’s leading five-star Oberoi Hotel. When she took up the issue with the hotel manager, she was told that Arab television channels had been banned across India.
A perplexed Al-Bassam then sent an SMS to Arab News Editor in Chief Khaled Almaeena to verify whether this was indeed the case. “Oberoi Hotel tells me that the government of India has banned all Arab TV channels. Why? I hate watching CNN and BBC,” she wrote to Almaeena.
Talking to Arab News, Oberoi Hotel Manager Mohit Nirula did allude to the fact that a ban was in place. “The Ministry of Information and Broadcasting has laid down certain rules. It is our duty to abide by and follow the rules of the country,” he told this correspondent.
Minister of Information and Broadcasting Priya Ranjan Dasmunshi was busy in Parliament and was unavailable for comment on the issue. However, a ministry official explained why the Indian government decided to enforce the ban. The official highlighted that India enjoys close and cordial relations with Israel and the US more than any of the Arab governments.
According to another source within the government, the ban is a clear sign to all governments in the Middle East that the Israeli, American and British governments carry far more influence in India than any of the Arab governments.
Several senior Indian journalists explained that the ban was an indication that India had succumbed to Israeli pressure rather than American.
“The whole exercise is to browbeat Arabs and show them as terrorists. The government is subscribing to the absurd argument that channels like Al-Jazeera and Al-Arabiya promote hatred and encourage terrorism,” they said.
Political analysts in India described the move as a game of double standard that India is playing. On the one hand India establishes friendship with the Arab world while simultaneously it joins with Israel and the US in defaming them. It seems that the pro-Israeli lobby wishes to drive a wedge between India and its time-tested Arab allies. The Indian governmentÂ’s present stance is in stark contrast to the late Mrs. Indira GandhiÂ’s staunch support of the Palestinian cause.
The banning of Arabic channels is a federal government decision, done under what senior Indian journalists claim to be intense pressure from the Israeli, American and British governments.
The Indian government has been vocal in its condemnation of Israeli barbarity and has offered millions of rupees in aid to refugees in Lebanon. Arabs sympathetic to India have therefore met the news with surprise.
Many Arabs draw inspiration from IndiaÂ’s heroic struggle against British imperialism and the Indian independence struggle is seen by Palestinians as a brilliant example of throwing out the yoke of imperialism. It is sad that 50 years after independence the worldÂ’s largest democracy unfairly suppresses alternative opinion and allows itself to be dictated to by foreign powers.
The analysts believe the Indian government may have used a clause within the Cable TV Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995, that certain channels or programs that can potentially cause damage to IndiaÂ’s friendly relations with foreign countries can be banned, a clear violation of democratic ideals such as freedom of expression and freedom of speech.
The response to the ban by hotel administrations across Bombay has been dismal. Chad Alberico, JW Marriott’s customer care official in Washington, said: “We have reviewed your recent inquiries regarding the television offerings at our JW Marriott Bombay. We have phoned our colleagues at the hotel to discuss the matter at hand, but as it is the weekend, we will need additional time to form a complete response.”
“I’m on my way home, it’s the weekend and I will respond on Monday,” said Shehnaz Ankelsaria from the Taj President Hotel. Annan Udeshi from The Hilton was unavailable and asked for a message to be left on her recorder. Khushnooma Kapadia of Marriott Hotel said she would get back later. Rafat Kazi from the Grand Central Sheraton said that she would answer after consulting her general manager. Puja Guleria of Sheraton Maratta said she needed time to deal with the questions. Firuza Mistry of Grand Hyatt said that she was not aware of the facts and would check and respond, and Priya Mathias of Hyatt Regency said that she would also need to check with her senior officials to comment.
http://www.arabnews.com/?page=4§ion ... m=8&y=2006
The Indian governmentÂ’s ban on Arab television stations is in complete contrast to the friendship that Arab countries imagine exists with their neighbor across the Arabian Sea. It seems the ban is a move to ensure that Indians do not get to see the atrocities that are presently being committed by Israel in Lebanon and the occupied territories.
Nabila Al-Bassam, a Saudi businesswoman on a trip to Bombay, told Arab News how she became exasperated at not being able to watch Arab channels at BombayÂ’s leading five-star Oberoi Hotel. When she took up the issue with the hotel manager, she was told that Arab television channels had been banned across India.
A perplexed Al-Bassam then sent an SMS to Arab News Editor in Chief Khaled Almaeena to verify whether this was indeed the case. “Oberoi Hotel tells me that the government of India has banned all Arab TV channels. Why? I hate watching CNN and BBC,” she wrote to Almaeena.
Talking to Arab News, Oberoi Hotel Manager Mohit Nirula did allude to the fact that a ban was in place. “The Ministry of Information and Broadcasting has laid down certain rules. It is our duty to abide by and follow the rules of the country,” he told this correspondent.
Minister of Information and Broadcasting Priya Ranjan Dasmunshi was busy in Parliament and was unavailable for comment on the issue. However, a ministry official explained why the Indian government decided to enforce the ban. The official highlighted that India enjoys close and cordial relations with Israel and the US more than any of the Arab governments.
According to another source within the government, the ban is a clear sign to all governments in the Middle East that the Israeli, American and British governments carry far more influence in India than any of the Arab governments.
Several senior Indian journalists explained that the ban was an indication that India had succumbed to Israeli pressure rather than American.
“The whole exercise is to browbeat Arabs and show them as terrorists. The government is subscribing to the absurd argument that channels like Al-Jazeera and Al-Arabiya promote hatred and encourage terrorism,” they said.
Political analysts in India described the move as a game of double standard that India is playing. On the one hand India establishes friendship with the Arab world while simultaneously it joins with Israel and the US in defaming them. It seems that the pro-Israeli lobby wishes to drive a wedge between India and its time-tested Arab allies. The Indian governmentÂ’s present stance is in stark contrast to the late Mrs. Indira GandhiÂ’s staunch support of the Palestinian cause.
The banning of Arabic channels is a federal government decision, done under what senior Indian journalists claim to be intense pressure from the Israeli, American and British governments.
The Indian government has been vocal in its condemnation of Israeli barbarity and has offered millions of rupees in aid to refugees in Lebanon. Arabs sympathetic to India have therefore met the news with surprise.
Many Arabs draw inspiration from IndiaÂ’s heroic struggle against British imperialism and the Indian independence struggle is seen by Palestinians as a brilliant example of throwing out the yoke of imperialism. It is sad that 50 years after independence the worldÂ’s largest democracy unfairly suppresses alternative opinion and allows itself to be dictated to by foreign powers.
The analysts believe the Indian government may have used a clause within the Cable TV Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995, that certain channels or programs that can potentially cause damage to IndiaÂ’s friendly relations with foreign countries can be banned, a clear violation of democratic ideals such as freedom of expression and freedom of speech.
The response to the ban by hotel administrations across Bombay has been dismal. Chad Alberico, JW Marriott’s customer care official in Washington, said: “We have reviewed your recent inquiries regarding the television offerings at our JW Marriott Bombay. We have phoned our colleagues at the hotel to discuss the matter at hand, but as it is the weekend, we will need additional time to form a complete response.”
“I’m on my way home, it’s the weekend and I will respond on Monday,” said Shehnaz Ankelsaria from the Taj President Hotel. Annan Udeshi from The Hilton was unavailable and asked for a message to be left on her recorder. Khushnooma Kapadia of Marriott Hotel said she would get back later. Rafat Kazi from the Grand Central Sheraton said that she would answer after consulting her general manager. Puja Guleria of Sheraton Maratta said she needed time to deal with the questions. Firuza Mistry of Grand Hyatt said that she was not aware of the facts and would check and respond, and Priya Mathias of Hyatt Regency said that she would also need to check with her senior officials to comment.
http://www.arabnews.com/?page=4§ion ... m=8&y=2006
-
- Posts: 120
- Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2005 9:05 pm
- michael_ital
- SomaliNet Super
- Posts: 16191
- Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2004 7:00 pm
- Location: Taranna
-
- SomaliNet Super
- Posts: 12405
- Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2001 7:00 pm
Well, maybe this wouldn't happen if the Arabs started acting like men & used their financial influence.
There is far more trade & commerce between India/Arabs than there is between India/Israel.
All it would take would be for a few Arab ministers to call India and remind them of the millions of Indians living/working in the Gulf.
Remittance-wise, that translates to a whole lot of money definitely ini the hundreds of millions or even billions..........Exactly how much money does Israel contribute to the Indian economy.
Don't worry, free speech will be reinstated once there's a complete monopoly of the mass media & press.
There is far more trade & commerce between India/Arabs than there is between India/Israel.
All it would take would be for a few Arab ministers to call India and remind them of the millions of Indians living/working in the Gulf.
Remittance-wise, that translates to a whole lot of money definitely ini the hundreds of millions or even billions..........Exactly how much money does Israel contribute to the Indian economy.
Don't worry, free speech will be reinstated once there's a complete monopoly of the mass media & press.
-
- SomaliNet Super
- Posts: 12405
- Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2001 7:00 pm
"Well, maybe this wouldn't happen if the Arabs started acting like men & used their financial influence.
There is far more trade & commerce between India/Arabs than there is between India/Israel. "
The Arabs are also dependent on that trade. The Arabs and Persians are financially all very vulnerable. They have one resource - oil. It's an important one. But they are HUGE food importers. They do not grow even close to what they need to feed themselves. That's a significant vulnerability.
"All it would take would be for a few Arab ministers to call India and remind them of the millions of Indians living/working in the Gulf. "
And the Indians would respond with "Why are you interfering in our internal affairs?" And then the Indians would remind the Arabs of their dependency on cheap and skilled labor. Remember, the Arabs don't hire Indians because they are generous and kind.
"Remittance-wise, that translates to a whole lot of money definitely ini the hundreds of millions or even billions..........Exactly how much money does Israel contribute to the Indian economy. "
Israel sells India critical weapons technology that they can only replace from American sales. But beyond that, the Indians would resent being told what to do.
"Don't worry, free speech will be reinstated once there's a complete monopoly of the mass media & press."
Islamists don't believe in free speech.
There is another factor here you are not considering. The Arab governments do not want to see Hizbollah succeed. They are very concerned about Persian influence in the region. Very concerned that Iran will try and establish hegemony in the gulf at their expense. This is a legitimate concern. Therefore, while many rank and file Muslims don't bother to calculate the political scales concerning this conflict, most Arab leaders have. They are well aware of Irans intentions and how Iran benefits if Hizbollah comes out of this looking good. They WANT Israel to hurt Hizbollah.
There is far more trade & commerce between India/Arabs than there is between India/Israel. "
The Arabs are also dependent on that trade. The Arabs and Persians are financially all very vulnerable. They have one resource - oil. It's an important one. But they are HUGE food importers. They do not grow even close to what they need to feed themselves. That's a significant vulnerability.
"All it would take would be for a few Arab ministers to call India and remind them of the millions of Indians living/working in the Gulf. "
And the Indians would respond with "Why are you interfering in our internal affairs?" And then the Indians would remind the Arabs of their dependency on cheap and skilled labor. Remember, the Arabs don't hire Indians because they are generous and kind.
"Remittance-wise, that translates to a whole lot of money definitely ini the hundreds of millions or even billions..........Exactly how much money does Israel contribute to the Indian economy. "
Israel sells India critical weapons technology that they can only replace from American sales. But beyond that, the Indians would resent being told what to do.
"Don't worry, free speech will be reinstated once there's a complete monopoly of the mass media & press."
Islamists don't believe in free speech.
There is another factor here you are not considering. The Arab governments do not want to see Hizbollah succeed. They are very concerned about Persian influence in the region. Very concerned that Iran will try and establish hegemony in the gulf at their expense. This is a legitimate concern. Therefore, while many rank and file Muslims don't bother to calculate the political scales concerning this conflict, most Arab leaders have. They are well aware of Irans intentions and how Iran benefits if Hizbollah comes out of this looking good. They WANT Israel to hurt Hizbollah.
- Somaliman%
- SomaliNet Heavyweight
- Posts: 3787
- Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 7:00 pm
- Location: The hills. England,
- Contact:
MAD MAC,
I do agree with some of your points, but that is because they haven't done much to risk-manage their situations..........Sudan itself could provide most of the food needs of the MidEast if invested in properly.
But now that I think of it, it's entirely irrelevant.......Indian opinion is not going to do much either way............even if it would, how many Indians listen to Arabic news while they're in India
It's irrelevant on so many levels.
What the Israelis need to do is to find a way to ban Arab media in Arab countries........where the demographic is young & pissed & in close proximity to Israel.
Those Arab leaders you talk about are holding on to very fragile rule themselves.
Most of the Arab street sympathizes w/ Hizbollah.
I do agree with some of your points, but that is because they haven't done much to risk-manage their situations..........Sudan itself could provide most of the food needs of the MidEast if invested in properly.
But now that I think of it, it's entirely irrelevant.......Indian opinion is not going to do much either way............even if it would, how many Indians listen to Arabic news while they're in India



What the Israelis need to do is to find a way to ban Arab media in Arab countries........where the demographic is young & pissed & in close proximity to Israel.
Those Arab leaders you talk about are holding on to very fragile rule themselves.
Most of the Arab street sympathizes w/ Hizbollah.
-
- SomaliNet Super
- Posts: 12405
- Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2001 7:00 pm
Gedo
It would not take much for the Arab street to go from sympathy to hate for Hizbollah. Right now their hate of Israel supercedes all other considerations. At least for your average Arab - the man in the gutter if you will. But if that conflict suddenly ended, and Hizbollah started targetting Arab Sunnis, the worm would turn quickly.
What Israel needs to do, and should have done some time ago, is get on with meaningful negotiations with the Palestinians and cut a deal. There are only four settlements that they have to retain. Accomodation could be reached. The only question I have is at what point is Hamas going to become practical instead of dogmatic? But assuming that a practical solution would be excepted by Hamas, then a deal could be reached that provides adequate financial compensation and allows for a reasonable two state solution. That would defuse the issue.
It would not take much for the Arab street to go from sympathy to hate for Hizbollah. Right now their hate of Israel supercedes all other considerations. At least for your average Arab - the man in the gutter if you will. But if that conflict suddenly ended, and Hizbollah started targetting Arab Sunnis, the worm would turn quickly.
What Israel needs to do, and should have done some time ago, is get on with meaningful negotiations with the Palestinians and cut a deal. There are only four settlements that they have to retain. Accomodation could be reached. The only question I have is at what point is Hamas going to become practical instead of dogmatic? But assuming that a practical solution would be excepted by Hamas, then a deal could be reached that provides adequate financial compensation and allows for a reasonable two state solution. That would defuse the issue.
MAD MAC,
If the Zionist leadership in Israel had been half-way fair to the Palestinians and acknowledged the idea of 2-state solution, there would be no MidEast crisis at the moment.
But what I seem to be getting from you is that the Zionists are negotiating in good faith.
This is all a charade that's being played, it's really a long drawn-out ethnic cleansing campaign.
If you don't believe me, look up the personality of Zionist Theodor Herzl & his initial plans for the Jewish state........it was a planned ethnic cleansing from the word 'GO".......Here's one of his statements regarding the Palestinians:
Herzl wrote an article in “The Jewish Chronicle” of London entitled a “Solution to the Jewish Question”(12) and in February his book was published. In neither of these works did Herzl suggest using the indigenous peoples to rid the country of its wild beasts! “Supposing, for example, we were obliged to clear a country of wild beasts”, wrote Herzl, “we should organise a large and lively hunting party, drive the animals together and throw a melinite bomb into their midst.”
If the Zionist leadership in Israel had been half-way fair to the Palestinians and acknowledged the idea of 2-state solution, there would be no MidEast crisis at the moment.
But what I seem to be getting from you is that the Zionists are negotiating in good faith.
This is all a charade that's being played, it's really a long drawn-out ethnic cleansing campaign.
If you don't believe me, look up the personality of Zionist Theodor Herzl & his initial plans for the Jewish state........it was a planned ethnic cleansing from the word 'GO".......Here's one of his statements regarding the Palestinians:
Herzl wrote an article in “The Jewish Chronicle” of London entitled a “Solution to the Jewish Question”(12) and in February his book was published. In neither of these works did Herzl suggest using the indigenous peoples to rid the country of its wild beasts! “Supposing, for example, we were obliged to clear a country of wild beasts”, wrote Herzl, “we should organise a large and lively hunting party, drive the animals together and throw a melinite bomb into their midst.”
-
- SomaliNet Super
- Posts: 12405
- Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2001 7:00 pm
"If the Zionist leadership in Israel had been half-way fair to the Palestinians and acknowledged the idea of 2-state solution, there would be no MidEast crisis at the moment.
But what I seem to be getting from you is that the Zionists are negotiating in good faith. "
No, the Israelis have only occassionally negotiated in good faith. I don't know why you would assume I think the Israelis are negotiating in good faith. The only place I see a real difference is concerning their populations. For a VERY LONG time the Palestinian population has said Israel has no right to exist and therefore negotiating a two state solution was not acceptable. This was not true of the Israelis, where opinion was largely split.
"This is all a charade that's being played, it's really a long drawn-out ethnic cleansing campaign. "
This was obvious. And it continues. The general Israeli attitude has been if the Arabs won't cut a deal, then we will get them out of the Levant all together.
"If you don't believe me, look up the personality of Zionist Theodor Herzl & his initial plans for the Jewish state........it was a planned ethnic cleansing from the word 'GO".......Here's one of his statements regarding the Palestinians:
Herzl wrote an article in “The Jewish Chronicle” of London entitled a “Solution to the Jewish Question”(12) and in February his book was published. In neither of these works did Herzl suggest using the indigenous peoples to rid the country of its wild beasts! “Supposing, for example, we were obliged to clear a country of wild beasts”, wrote Herzl, “we should organise a large and lively hunting party, drive the animals together and throw a melinite bomb into their midst.”"
This could just as easily have been said by Moshe Dayan or Menachim Begin. But remember it was Begin who cut a deal with the Egyptians which returned the Sinai. So it is not true that the Israelis will not make territorial concessions. But they want security guarantees tied to those concessions.
But what I seem to be getting from you is that the Zionists are negotiating in good faith. "
No, the Israelis have only occassionally negotiated in good faith. I don't know why you would assume I think the Israelis are negotiating in good faith. The only place I see a real difference is concerning their populations. For a VERY LONG time the Palestinian population has said Israel has no right to exist and therefore negotiating a two state solution was not acceptable. This was not true of the Israelis, where opinion was largely split.
"This is all a charade that's being played, it's really a long drawn-out ethnic cleansing campaign. "
This was obvious. And it continues. The general Israeli attitude has been if the Arabs won't cut a deal, then we will get them out of the Levant all together.
"If you don't believe me, look up the personality of Zionist Theodor Herzl & his initial plans for the Jewish state........it was a planned ethnic cleansing from the word 'GO".......Here's one of his statements regarding the Palestinians:
Herzl wrote an article in “The Jewish Chronicle” of London entitled a “Solution to the Jewish Question”(12) and in February his book was published. In neither of these works did Herzl suggest using the indigenous peoples to rid the country of its wild beasts! “Supposing, for example, we were obliged to clear a country of wild beasts”, wrote Herzl, “we should organise a large and lively hunting party, drive the animals together and throw a melinite bomb into their midst.”"
This could just as easily have been said by Moshe Dayan or Menachim Begin. But remember it was Begin who cut a deal with the Egyptians which returned the Sinai. So it is not true that the Israelis will not make territorial concessions. But they want security guarantees tied to those concessions.
MAD MAC,
The Israelis know they are FAR outnumbered, they have to have peace on multiple fronts at any given time to just survive.....kinda like the early US settlers making peace w/ some Indian tribes while warring outright w/ the others......the immediate issue for them now is to isolate/exterminate the Palestinians so they'll play peace with the big players like Egypt.........who posed the greatest military threat to them.........in fact, I believe they overran the Israeli military at one point but pulled back due to some shady arrangment w/ the US.....probably a veiled threat.
Although I do agree with you that there are many Palestinians who believe even a 2-state solution is unacceptable..........there are as many Israelis who are seething at the fact that Gaza/West Bank even exist.
The Israelis want more than anything to maintain the enormous power differential that exists now, and genuine compromise is compromising that differential.
The Israelis know they are FAR outnumbered, they have to have peace on multiple fronts at any given time to just survive.....kinda like the early US settlers making peace w/ some Indian tribes while warring outright w/ the others......the immediate issue for them now is to isolate/exterminate the Palestinians so they'll play peace with the big players like Egypt.........who posed the greatest military threat to them.........in fact, I believe they overran the Israeli military at one point but pulled back due to some shady arrangment w/ the US.....probably a veiled threat.
Although I do agree with you that there are many Palestinians who believe even a 2-state solution is unacceptable..........there are as many Israelis who are seething at the fact that Gaza/West Bank even exist.
The Israelis want more than anything to maintain the enormous power differential that exists now, and genuine compromise is compromising that differential.
-
- SomaliNet Super
- Posts: 12405
- Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2001 7:00 pm
"The Israelis know they are FAR outnumbered, they have to have peace on multiple fronts at any given time to just survive.....kinda like the early US settlers making peace w/ some Indian tribes while warring outright w/ the others......the immediate issue for them now is to isolate/exterminate the Palestinians so they'll play peace with the big players like Egypt.........who posed the greatest military threat to them.........in fact, I believe they overran the Israeli military at one point but pulled back due to some shady arrangment w/ the US.....probably a veiled threat. "
The reason the US destroyed the Indians was simple. Much greater numbers and technological superiority. The smart Indians, like the MicMac in Northern Maine, figured that out and quickly reached accomodation. The dumb ones did not, and as a consequence barely exist today. But that's another story. Israel has enough military power to fight the Syrians and the Egyptians at the same time, and has already demonstrated that multiple times.
And no, the Egyptians never overran the Israeli military at any point. Go back and do your homework. You are refering to the 73 war.
"Although I do agree with you that there are many Palestinians who believe even a 2-state solution is unacceptable..........there are as many Israelis who are seething at the fact that Gaza/West Bank even exist. "
About 30%. That's the percentage of Israelis who would rather see the Est Bank annexed and no deal cut.
"The Israelis want more than anything to maintain the enormous power differential that exists now, and genuine compromise is compromising that differential."
No, the Israelis want more than anything to live normal lives. And they will cut a deal to achieve that. It is a minority that sees things your way.
The reason the US destroyed the Indians was simple. Much greater numbers and technological superiority. The smart Indians, like the MicMac in Northern Maine, figured that out and quickly reached accomodation. The dumb ones did not, and as a consequence barely exist today. But that's another story. Israel has enough military power to fight the Syrians and the Egyptians at the same time, and has already demonstrated that multiple times.
And no, the Egyptians never overran the Israeli military at any point. Go back and do your homework. You are refering to the 73 war.
"Although I do agree with you that there are many Palestinians who believe even a 2-state solution is unacceptable..........there are as many Israelis who are seething at the fact that Gaza/West Bank even exist. "
About 30%. That's the percentage of Israelis who would rather see the Est Bank annexed and no deal cut.
"The Israelis want more than anything to maintain the enormous power differential that exists now, and genuine compromise is compromising that differential."
No, the Israelis want more than anything to live normal lives. And they will cut a deal to achieve that. It is a minority that sees things your way.
-
- SomaliNet Super
- Posts: 12405
- Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2001 7:00 pm
-
- Similar Topics
- Replies
- Views
- Last post
-
- 19 Replies
- 1024 Views
-
Last post by IronSheik
-
- 2 Replies
- 340 Views
-
Last post by IRONm@N
-
- 2 Replies
- 400 Views
-
Last post by union
-
- 4 Replies
- 634 Views
-
Last post by AhmedBoqor
-
- 3 Replies
- 583 Views
-
Last post by xoogSADE14
-
- 5 Replies
- 855 Views
-
Last post by hargaysaay
-
- 3 Replies
- 2129 Views
-
Last post by Bence
-
- 5 Replies
- 927 Views
-
Last post by qoraxeey
-
- 1 Replies
- 516 Views
-
Last post by OjOO