Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Political/War Lounge > Sad Irony

Sad Irony
Thread Tools
msuper69
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Columbus, OH
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 10, 2009, 06:37 PM
 
     
Uncle Skeleton
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Rockville, MD
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 10, 2009, 06:43 PM
 
Holy ****! I bet that soccer mom understands moderation and nuance! She's a reTARD!
     
Chuckit
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 10, 2009, 07:05 PM
 
I don't see it. Appreciating children means you must want them to be created in as great numbers as possible regardless of any other factors? Is that it?
Chuck
___
"Instead of either 'multi-talented' or 'multitalented' use 'bisexual'."
     
msuper69  (op)
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Columbus, OH
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 10, 2009, 07:23 PM
 
You don't "Celebrate Kids" by killing babies.

This picture is the height of irony.
     
Chuckit
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 10, 2009, 08:07 PM
 
Oh, so you the real point here is that you use a weird definition of "baby" and think it's "ironic" when people use a different one. I think it's ironic when people say something is ironic but actually just mean to say that they disagree with a person's politics.
Chuck
___
"Instead of either 'multi-talented' or 'multitalented' use 'bisexual'."
     
msuper69  (op)
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Columbus, OH
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 10, 2009, 08:19 PM
 
Originally Posted by Chuckit View Post
Oh, so you the real point here is that you use a weird definition of "baby" and think it's "ironic" when people use a different one. I think it's ironic when people say something is ironic but actually just mean to say that they disagree with a person's politics.
Not sure where I used a "weird definition of "baby". I should have said "newly created human being" rather than baby.

Politics aside, that picture is ironic.
     
OldManMac
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: I don't know anymore!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 10, 2009, 08:56 PM
 
Originally Posted by msuper69 View Post

Politics aside, that picture is ironic.
In this case, you can't put politics aside, because that's the apparent intent of the OP.
     
turtle777
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 10, 2009, 09:59 PM
 
Would it have been more ironic if the license plate read "Celebrate Abortion" and the sticker "Keep kids legal" ?

-t
     
TheWOAT
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 11, 2009, 01:57 AM
 
This person is obviously anti-aviation
.......
     
LegendaryPinkOx
Senior User
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: petting the refrigerator.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 11, 2009, 02:22 AM
 
I agree, everyone knows North Carolina is the birthplace of aviation.
are you lightfooted?
     
ebuddy
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 11, 2009, 07:38 AM
 
This isn't an example of irony because the kids pictured in the "Celebrate Kids" license plate appear to be upper middle-class white kids; not necessarily those for which abortion was originally designed to eliminate.
ebuddy
     
OldManMac
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: I don't know anymore!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 11, 2009, 09:59 AM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
This isn't an example of irony because the kids pictured in the "Celebrate Kids" license plate appear to be upper middle-class white kids; not necessarily those for which abortion was originally designed to eliminate.
You forgot your sarcasm tag.
     
Chuckit
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 11, 2009, 02:53 PM
 
Originally Posted by msuper69 View Post
Not sure where I used a "weird definition of "baby". I should have said "newly created human being" rather than baby.
You should have said "handful of undifferentiated cells that might eventually grow into a human being but now has less in common with a complete person than a corpse does." Because that would likely be closer to the view of the person we're talking about here.
Chuck
___
"Instead of either 'multi-talented' or 'multitalented' use 'bisexual'."
     
msuper69  (op)
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Columbus, OH
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 11, 2009, 03:03 PM
 
Originally Posted by Chuckit View Post
You should have said "handful of undifferentiated cells that might eventually grow into a human being but now has less in common with a complete person than a corpse does." Because that would likely be closer to the view of the person we're talking about here.
Hardly. Life begins at conception.

Now we are never going to agree on that so you believe what you want and I'll accept the word of God.
     
Wiskedjak
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Calgary
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 11, 2009, 03:06 PM
 
just out of curiousity, where does your god say that "life begins at conception"?
     
Chuckit
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 11, 2009, 03:39 PM
 
Originally Posted by msuper69 View Post
Hardly. Life begins at conception.

Now we are never going to agree on that so you believe what you want and I'll accept the word of God.
Precisely. That was my point from the beginning. You're not actually pointing out an irony, you're saying that you and this person disagree on this matter.
Chuck
___
"Instead of either 'multi-talented' or 'multitalented' use 'bisexual'."
     
msuper69  (op)
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Columbus, OH
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 11, 2009, 03:53 PM
 
Originally Posted by Wiskedjak View Post
just out of curiousity, where does your god say that "life begins at conception"?
While there is no direct quote from the Bible that explicitly says life begins at conception, it is a basic tenet of my Catholic faith and has been taught since the beginning of the church starting with St. Peter.

And "my" God is everyone's God, at least for those who believe in Him. If you don't, well then that's your right.
     
msuper69  (op)
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Columbus, OH
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 11, 2009, 03:55 PM
 
Originally Posted by Chuckit View Post
Precisely. That was my point from the beginning. You're not actually pointing out an irony, you're saying that you and this person disagree on this matter.
Sigh, it is ironic that this person would display two apparently contradicting/opposing viewpoints.

I happen to disagree with the pro-abortion one.
     
Chuckit
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 11, 2009, 04:24 PM
 
They only appear to contradict if you look at it with assumptions that this person would not make. It's much like if an atheist were to come in here and post a "Jesus is love" sign and go "Ha ha ha, how ironic!" I'm sure you wouldn't see it, because you don't come to the thread with the assumption that Jesus represents hate.
Chuck
___
"Instead of either 'multi-talented' or 'multitalented' use 'bisexual'."
     
Wiskedjak
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Calgary
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 11, 2009, 04:24 PM
 
Originally Posted by msuper69 View Post
Sigh, it is ironic that this person would display two apparently contradicting/opposing viewpoints.
People who support abortion must also hate children?
     
Wiskedjak
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Calgary
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 11, 2009, 04:29 PM
 
Originally Posted by msuper69 View Post
there is no direct quote from the Bible that explicitly says life begins at conception, .
that's what I thought. So, really, you're basing your opinion on a human's interpretation of the word of your god rather than an actual statement from your god.
     
ort888
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Your Anus
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 11, 2009, 05:33 PM
 
How many children do you have msuper69?

My sig is 1 pixel too big.
     
msuper69  (op)
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Columbus, OH
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 11, 2009, 05:35 PM
 
Originally Posted by ort888 View Post
How many children do you have msuper69?
None yet.
     
stupendousman
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 11, 2009, 05:38 PM
 
Originally Posted by OldManMac View Post
You forgot your sarcasm tag.
I wish the same could be said of early "birth control" advocates like the founder of Planned Parenthood, Margret Sanger

"The most merciful thing that a large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it."

Margaret Sanger, Women and the New Race (Eugenics Publ. Co., 1920, 1923)
"We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population," she said, "if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members." Woman's Body, Woman's Right: A Social History of Birth Control in America, by Linda Gordon
Margaret Sanger, Founder of Planned Parenthood, In Her Own Words

I didn't see any sarcasm tags there either.
     
Chuckit
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 11, 2009, 06:05 PM
 
Originally Posted by stupendousman View Post
I wish the same could be said of early "birth control" advocates like the founder of Planned Parenthood, Margret Sanger





Margaret Sanger, Founder of Planned Parenthood, In Her Own Words

I didn't see any sarcasm tags there either.
Um…you want me to just start quoting random Christian hatemongers now and pretend it makes a relevant point rather than just being an assocation fallacy?
Chuck
___
"Instead of either 'multi-talented' or 'multitalented' use 'bisexual'."
     
ort888
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Your Anus
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 11, 2009, 06:16 PM
 
Originally Posted by msuper69 View Post
None yet.
I weep for all the potential lives you could have created. Such a pity.

My sig is 1 pixel too big.
     
Chuckit
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 11, 2009, 06:22 PM
 
Originally Posted by ort888 View Post
I weep for all the potential lives you could have created. Such a pity.
Could have created? The sperm and ova were there, and apparently that's all you need to be a human being. So all these human beings were split in two and killed.
Chuck
___
"Instead of either 'multi-talented' or 'multitalented' use 'bisexual'."
     
stupendousman
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 11, 2009, 09:14 PM
 
Originally Posted by Chuckit View Post
Um…you want me to just start quoting random Christian hatemongers now and pretend it makes a relevant point rather than just being an assocation fallacy?
Margret Sanger is "random" when we are talking about "birth control" rights?

Especially in the context of my reply? Really?
     
Shaddim
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 11, 2009, 09:31 PM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
This isn't an example of irony because the kids pictured in the "Celebrate Kids" license plate appear to be upper middle-class white kids; not necessarily those for which abortion was originally designed to eliminate.
You win, sir.
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
OldManMac
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: I don't know anymore!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 11, 2009, 09:44 PM
 
Originally Posted by Chuckit View Post
Um…you want me to just start quoting random Christian hatemongers now and pretend it makes a relevant point rather than just being an assocation fallacy?
Of course he does.
     
Chuckit
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 11, 2009, 11:38 PM
 
Originally Posted by stupendousman View Post
Margret Sanger is "random" when we are talking about "birth control" rights?

Especially in the context of my reply? Really?
Since this thread is about somebody who as far as we know is not related to Sanger at all, yes, bringing up Sanger seems a little out-of-left-field.
Chuck
___
"Instead of either 'multi-talented' or 'multitalented' use 'bisexual'."
     
ort888
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Your Anus
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 12, 2009, 12:18 AM
 
From what I understand, Sanger was also anti-abortion. So my guess is that Stupendousman just has a big problem with birth control, or something.

My sig is 1 pixel too big.
     
stupendousman
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 12, 2009, 06:54 AM
 
Ebuddy inferred that the promotion of certain birth control practices had been forwarded in the early days not as a way to stop healthy, white babies from being born, but rather to curb the less desirable "human weeds" from overpopulating the country. He was accused of "sarcasm".

Sanger, the woman responsible for Planned Parenthood, was one of the people who very publicly supported this position. Much like how she advised people not to let the "negroes" in on the effort to ween their race down via different types of "birth control" in order to create a race of "thoroughbreds," she would often downplay the role of more controversial methods for her potentially squeamish white supporters - but as the quotes show, she supported all methods of keeping a eugenically cleansed world free from "human beings who never should have been born."

Again, in the context and flow of the discussion, it wasn't really out of "left field". What Ebuddy wrote needed no sarcasm tag.
     
nonhuman
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Baltimore, MD
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 12, 2009, 10:26 AM
 
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 12, 2009, 10:28 AM
 
Wow, this thread feels like its straight out of these forums in '05.
     
ort888
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Your Anus
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 12, 2009, 10:39 AM
 
Originally Posted by stupendousman View Post
Ebuddy inferred that the promotion of certain birth control practices had been forwarded in the early days not as a way to stop healthy, white babies from being born, but rather to curb the less desirable "human weeds" from overpopulating the country. He was accused of "sarcasm".

Sanger, the woman responsible for Planned Parenthood, was one of the people who very publicly supported this position. Much like how she advised people not to let the "negroes" in on the effort to ween their race down via different types of "birth control" in order to create a race of "thoroughbreds," she would often downplay the role of more controversial methods for her potentially squeamish white supporters - but as the quotes show, she supported all methods of keeping a eugenically cleansed world free from "human beings who never should have been born."

Again, in the context and flow of the discussion, it wasn't really out of "left field". What Ebuddy wrote needed no sarcasm tag.
Well then surely we can then infer that the modern day pro-choice movement is just a well disguised system designed to reduce the inferior black population. Thanks for clearing that up.
( Last edited by ort888; Oct 12, 2009 at 11:08 AM. )

My sig is 1 pixel too big.
     
Wiskedjak
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Calgary
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 12, 2009, 10:50 AM
 
I don't understand what Margaret Sanger has to do with the abortion debate, unless you're trying to argue that using birth control also equals killing babies (which could be an extension of the conception argument).
( Last edited by Wiskedjak; Oct 12, 2009 at 11:33 AM. )
     
ort888
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Your Anus
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 12, 2009, 11:13 AM
 
I'll run down the logic.

Sanger founded Planned Parenthood
Sanger was a big crazy racist
Planned Parenthood is a huge player in the pro-choice/abortion movement

THEREFORE...

The modern day Pro-Choice movement is being perpetuated by powerful secret liberal puppetmasters who want nothing more then to exterminate the inferior black race. Which is obviously the entire hidden agenda of the liberal movement. To keep the poor desperate and dependent on the government so that they can remain in power and continue to oppress us all.

It's all so obvious.

My sig is 1 pixel too big.
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 12, 2009, 11:49 AM
 
ort888: when do we get turned into cat food?
     
CRASH HARDDRIVE
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Zip, Boom, Bam
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 12, 2009, 12:18 PM
 
Originally Posted by ort888 View Post
Which is obviously the entire hidden agenda of the liberal movement. To keep the poor desperate and dependent on the government so that they can remain in power and continue to oppress us all.
That's definitely one of the results of modern liberalism.
     
olePigeon
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 12, 2009, 12:57 PM
 
Originally Posted by msuper69 View Post
Hardly. Life begins at conception.
In your opinion.

Originally Posted by msuper69 View Post
Now we are never going to agree on that so you believe what you want and I'll accept the word of God.
God didn't say that, a man claimed that God said that.

Originally Posted by msuper69 View Post
And "my" God is everyone's God, at least for those who believe in Him.
Jews and Muslims might disagree.

Originally Posted by msuper69 View Post
Sigh, it is ironic that this person would display two apparently contradicting/opposing viewpoints.
Supporting a woman's right to choose is not contrary to supporting the well being of children in general.
"…I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than
you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods,
you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Stephen F. Roberts
     
olePigeon
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 12, 2009, 01:00 PM
 
Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE View Post
That's definitely one of the results of modern liberalism.
And Conservatism is about keeping the wealthy in power with the everyone else to support them. It's rather strange how similar the two philosophies are when it comes to power.
"…I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than
you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods,
you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Stephen F. Roberts
     
CRASH HARDDRIVE
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Zip, Boom, Bam
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 12, 2009, 01:26 PM
 
Originally Posted by olePigeon View Post
And Conservatism is about keeping the wealthy in power with the everyone else to support them. It's rather strange how similar the two philosophies are when it comes to power.
The difference is, the conservative constituents are the ones expected to keep their wealth. (Power, in some cases, but definitely not all in the hands of big government).

With the Democrat philosophy, the constituents are the ones expected to be poor, with politicians and an ever growing big government holding on to both wealth and power.

Why anyone would want to hitch their wagon to the side that would rather you be poor and powerless, and wanting an ever more powerful and bigger government in order to be a good member of the party, is beyond me, but there you have it.
     
olePigeon
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 12, 2009, 01:37 PM
 
Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE View Post
The difference is, the conservative constituents are the ones expected to keep their wealth. (Power, in some cases, but definitely not all in the hands of big government).

With the Democrat philosophy, the constituents are the ones expected to be poor, with politicians and an ever growing big government holding on to both wealth and power.
It is the exact same system, the only difference is who you label as the constituents. The conservative constituent is the group that ensures wealth and power to a select few at the expense of the poor. The liberal constituent is the poor, kept poor at the expense of the groups in charge of protecting the wealth and power of a select few.

Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE View Post
Why anyone would want to hitch their wagon to the side that would rather you be poor and powerless, and wanting an ever more powerful and bigger government in order to be a good member of the party, is beyond me, but there you have it.
It's the same wagon, you're just arguing over using a donkey or a mule. You're either oppressed by the government, or you're oppressed by the aristocracy. Pick one.
"…I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than
you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods,
you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Stephen F. Roberts
     
stupendousman
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 12, 2009, 01:44 PM
 
Originally Posted by ort888 View Post
Well then surely we can then infer that the modern day pro-choice movement is just a well disguised system designed to reduce the inferior black population. Thanks for clearing that up.
That wasn't my argument.

You're welcome.

Again, Ebuddy mentioned the fact that in the past, people like Sanger pushed the idea that the "less desirable" (code word for the poor and minorities) should not be able to pro-create and in fact that it would be a good thing if their offspring were just killed.

Someone replied inferring that he wasn't being serious, when in fact what he said was true.

While that doesn't mean that people who currently support abortion rights feel the same way as many did back when this crazy left-wing stuff was being proposed, it is a part of the historical context of the discussion.
     
ort888
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Your Anus
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 12, 2009, 01:47 PM
 
Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE View Post
The difference is, the conservative constituents are the ones expected to keep their wealth. (Power, in some cases, but definitely not all in the hands of big government).

With the Democrat philosophy, the constituents are the ones expected to be poor, with politicians and an ever growing big government holding on to both wealth and power.

Why anyone would want to hitch their wagon to the side that would rather you be poor and powerless, and wanting an ever more powerful and bigger government in order to be a good member of the party, is beyond me, but there you have it.
Okay then, so the conservative movement is all about removing all government intervention so that big business can continue to oppress us while big religion is allowed to dictate the law of the land. The conservative movement is the wealthy using religion, fear and ignorance to convince the poor to vote for them, even though they do not have their best interests at heart.

Making broad insulting generalizations is FUN!
( Last edited by ort888; Oct 12, 2009 at 02:08 PM. )

My sig is 1 pixel too big.
     
SpaceMonkey
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Washington, DC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 12, 2009, 01:50 PM
 
It's ironic because Saturn is an aborted GM brand. Clearly the "keep abortion legal" sticker is a pro-Saturn rallying cry.

In the same way, "legalize gay" t-shirts are really a statement in support of hipster fashion trends.

"One ticket to Washington, please. I have a date with destiny."
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 12, 2009, 02:14 PM
 
I honestly envy those who can be satisfied living in a world where everything is as simple as they say it is, it would make things so much easier!
     
Shaddim
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 12, 2009, 02:55 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
I honestly envy those who can be satisfied living in a world where everything is as simple as they say it is, it would make things so much easier!
I feel that way when I speak with most atheists.
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
Chuckit
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 12, 2009, 02:56 PM
 
Originally Posted by olePigeon View Post
It's the same wagon, you're just arguing over using a donkey or a mule. You're either oppressed by the government, or you're oppressed by the aristocracy. Pick one.
WTF is "the aristocracy" in the context of American politics?
Chuck
___
"Instead of either 'multi-talented' or 'multitalented' use 'bisexual'."
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:40 PM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,