Italians are NOT White!!!!
Gms

San Diego, CA

#5095 Sep 24, 2013
Then what are they? because they are not not black!
Alice

Miami, FL

#5096 Sep 24, 2013
Gms wrote:
Then what are they? because they are not not black!
Right, because human beings only fall into two neat categories, "black" and "white". LOLWUT?
Alice

Miami, FL

#5097 Sep 24, 2013
Jeff wrote:
<quoted text>
Europeans have little to NO Sub Saharan African admixture and you most definatly will NOT find African admixture in Northern Europeans since Africans never had much of a presence in Europe let alone freaken Northern and Central Europe, you self hating idiot.
I'm baffled beyond belief as to how you assume this person is "self-hating" because s/he believes there is African admixture in his/her genetic lineage. As if African admixture is something someone should hate about himself?

Of course this stems from your obvious bias that African genetics are somehow inferior and shameful.

If I found out I was half sub-Saharan (it would have to be black albino as I'm very pale and Irish-looking), I would be like, "Okay, what's it to me? Why should I give a flying fuck?" LOL! Whatever I am, I like myself a lot, so whatever genes contributed to my being this way, I'm grateful for them... Whereas you waste too much time pondering your relative level of "blackness", like a lack of "blackness" somehow increases your human value and self-worth... it's rather pathetic, ridiculous, useless, and an irrelevant waste of time.
Alice

Miami, FL

#5098 Sep 24, 2013
Unless you're saying you think s/he is "self-hating" because s/he thinks having purely European genes is something to be hated and thus wants to claim African ancestry s/he doesn't have, which is an equally ridiculous idea.

Only desperate wigger kids waste their time inventing fake African ancestry. The rest of us are just realistic.

You're very weird.

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#5099 Sep 24, 2013
Alice wrote:
<quoted text>
And that brings up the question of whether the Irish are white? Nowadays everyone agrees that they are, but 150 years ago that was NOT the case. We were lumped in with African-descended people...
This is so wrong. Where this b.s. comes from is that long ago in the "official" ethnic categories pertaining to immigration policy Irish were separated into their own ethnic group. This was a political move that had everything to do with religion (Irish were Roman Catholic and they did the same thing with Italians) than it had to do with race. Irish were not "lumped in with Africans." What you are repeating is mendacious rhetoric of the left, specifically the race deniers. There was great resistance to Irish immigration, but they were not seen as non-white.
Alice wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm convinced that "white" and "nonwhite" are social constructs, largely useless in our society anymore and based on total bullshit.
The only bullshit is the kind of stuff you are spreading on this forum.
Alice wrote:
<quoted text>
Unless you're talking about social disenfranchisement because of assigned "nonwhite" status related to culture, in which case it's still an important issue.
I'm also thinking this post is way too common-sense and well-thought-out for this thread, and why did I even bother, LOL.
-Anthropology major
Blah, blah, blah. So you are an anthropology major who is thoroughly indoctrinated I see. Tell me this: Are the Jews a distinct people whose DNA can be traced back to Israel? Are there DNA studies on this?

Also, compare the genetic distance between an Irishman and and Englishman, and an Irishman and a Jew.

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#5100 Sep 24, 2013
Alice wrote:
<quoted text>
"White"
BTW, stop putting White in scare quotes.

Level 5

Since: Sep 12

Congo, The Democratic Republic of the

#5101 Sep 25, 2013
http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.13...

Uniparental Markers of Contemporary Italian Population Reveals Details on Its Pre-Roman Heritage

Francesca Brisighelli ,
Vanesa Álvarez-Iglesias,
Manuel Fondevila,
Alejandro Blanco-Verea,
Ángel Carracedo,


Autosomal ancestry in Italy

A panel of 52 AIMs was genotyped in 435 Italian individuals in order to estimate the proportion of ancestry from a three-way differentiation: sub-Saharan Africa, Europe and Asia. Structure analyses allowed us to infer membership proportions in population samples, and these proportions can be graphically displayed, as in Figure 2.

This analysis indicated that Italians have a basal proportion of sub-Saharan ancestry that is higher (9.2%, on average) than other central or northern European populations (1.5%, on average).

The amount of African ancestry in Italians is however more comparable to (but slightly higher than) the average in other Mediterranean countries (7.1%).

I have always wondered why the one drop rule does not apply to Mediterraneans peoples, including Italians.
Lameisha

Cleveland, MS

#5102 Sep 25, 2013
Jeff wrote:
<quoted text>
Lying "motts" or "KiloEcho" or 'becky' or whatever other FAKE username you post under next in your obsession to claim Europeans as 'not white'. Europeans did not mix with your Sub Saharan African types, dumbass, that is why Europeans have little to NO Sub Saharan African admixture and you most definatly will NOT find African admixture in Northern Europeans since Africans never had much of a presence in Europe let alone freaken Northern and Central Europe, you self hating idiot. Europeans mostly intermixed with other Europeans and Eurasian types, NOT with Sub Saharan Africans like you who never really had any presence in Europe, hence why even Southern Europeans have little to NO Sub Saharan African admixture.
The majority of e1b1b in Europe is the Eurasian EV13 marker that did NOT arise among you Sub Saharan types and that is why YOU Sub Saharan Africans do not carry this marker, stupid. EV13 is European marker. The Neolithics that Europeans mixed with were mostly Eurasians from the Near East, not Sub Saharan Africans. In fact Neolithic farmers were mainly of Haplogroup G carriers mixed in with carriers of Haplogroups J, EV13, T, etc. tests conducted on prehistoric Neolithic remains in Europe and the Middle East show them to be predominately Haplogroup G carriers a marker NOT common among you Sub Saharan African types.
Italian history is European and genetically Italians cluster with all other Europeans and FAR AWAY from you Sub Saharan types. That is why the study YOUR stupidass posted showed Italy to have little to NO Sub Saharan African admixture from any "black Africans", and those Moors who were in the region were North African Berbers to begin with, not Sub Saharan African types like, you scientifically challenged, MooRon.
"To me, the differences among Southern European populations were really interesting. Populations in southwestern Europe, such as Spain and Portugal, showed clear evidence of North African gene flow,----> BUT THERE WAS LITTLE <--- in south-central regions such as Italy, or in the southeastern populations of Greece or Turkey. We attribute this to relatively recent gene flow in historical times (most likely during the period of Moorish inhabitation in Iberia) that differentially impacted European regions." ~ Stanford geneticist Carlos Bustamante
ok you lost me.
Jeff

Framingham, MA

#5104 Sep 25, 2013
KiloEcho wrote:
http://www.plosone.org/article /info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone .0050794
Uniparental Markers of Contemporary Italian Population Reveals Details on Its Pre-Roman Heritage
Francesca Brisighelli ,
Vanesa Álvarez-Iglesias,
Manuel Fondevila,
Alejandro Blanco-Verea,
Ángel Carracedo,
Autosomal ancestry in Italy
A panel of 52 AIMs was genotyped in 435 Italian individuals in order to estimate the proportion of ancestry from a three-way differentiation: sub-Saharan Africa, Europe and Asia. Structure analyses allowed us to infer membership proportions in population samples, and these proportions can be graphically displayed, as in Figure 2.
This analysis indicated that Italians have a basal proportion of sub-Saharan ancestry that is higher (9.2%, on average) than other central or northern European populations (1.5%, on average).
The amount of African ancestry in Italians is however more comparable to (but slightly higher than) the average in other Mediterranean countries (7.1%).
I have always wondered why the one drop rule does not apply to Mediterraneans peoples, including Italians.
Lying 'mott' or 'truthseeker'....oops you are still posting as the Afroclown "KiloEcho". The one drop rule doesn't apply to Mediterraneans peoples, including Italians because many Mediterraneans peoples, including Italians do not have Sub Saharan African admixture, stupid. Even in colonial America people with predominate European ancestry were still viewed as white, even those who had black ancestry,you stupidass. Its only those racist KKK types who believed in the 'one drop rule' but then again they also believed you black people were inferior but I don't see your dumbass talking about THOSE idiotic beliefs of theirs.

BTW, idiot, the study you quoted also states that Italians cluster predominately with other Europeans and FAR AWAY from you Sub Saharan African types, proven what an illiterate idiot you are. The study only found a MINOR to NO SS African element in Italians, and that MINOR element plays no part in Italians genetics or their phenotypes that is why Brisighelli showed -----> Italians profile tightly with ALL OTHER EUROPEANS and that Italians also show CLEAR CUT DIFFERENCE with YOU SUB SAHARAN AFRICANS <----!! HA!

"PCA observations confirmed the results from Structure analysis, clustering Italian profiles tightly with other European ones. Thus, PCA indicated that North, Central and South Italy do not show differences between them, nor from other European populations (Figure 2). PCA also indicated clear-cut differences between Italians, Africans and Asians (Figure 2)."

Italians are Europeans therefore they are white. Genetically Italians cluster with all other Europeans and FAR AWAY from you Sub Saharan types. That is why the study YOUR stupidass posted showed Italy to have little to NO Sub Saharan African admixture from any "black Africans", and those Moors who were in the region were North African Berbers to begin with, not Sub Saharan African types like, you scientifically challenged, MooRon.

"To me, the differences among Southern European populations were really interesting. Populations in southwestern Europe, such as Spain and Portugal, showed clear evidence of North African gene flow,----> BUT THERE WAS LITTLE <--- in south-central regions such as Italy, or in the southeastern populations of Greece or Turkey. We attribute this to relatively recent gene flow in historical times (most likely during the period of Moorish inhabitation in Iberia) that differentially impacted European regions." ~ Stanford geneticist Carlos Bustamante
Jeff

Framingham, MA

#5105 Sep 25, 2013
Alice wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm baffled beyond belief as to how you assume this person is "self-hating" because s/he believes there is African admixture in his/her genetic lineage. As if African admixture is something someone should hate about himself?
Of course this stems from your obvious bias that African genetics are somehow inferior and shameful.
If I found out I was half sub-Saharan (it would have to be black albino as I'm very pale and Irish-looking), I would be like, "Okay, what's it to me? Why should I give a flying fuck?" LOL! Whatever I am, I like myself a lot, so whatever genes contributed to my being this way, I'm grateful for them... Whereas you waste too much time pondering your relative level of "blackness", like a lack of "blackness" somehow increases your human value and self-worth... it's rather pathetic, ridiculous, useless, and an irrelevant waste of time.
You are a fraud and a liar. You aren't white and neither are you an "Anthropology major", you are some Afroclentric clown. For one no white person believes they are derived from any 'black Albinos' and neither is that ridicoulse claim something a TRUE Anthropology major would make cause REAL Anthropology major know that's is a bunch of nonsense. That rhetoric of white people being derived from 'black Albinos' is the crap Afrocentric idiots believe in.
Alice

Miami, FL

#5106 Sep 25, 2013
Jeff wrote:
<quoted text>
You are a fraud and a liar. You aren't white and neither are you an "Anthropology major", you are some Afroclentric clown. For one no white person believes they are derived from any 'black Albinos' and neither is that ridicoulse claim something a TRUE Anthropology major would make cause REAL Anthropology major know that's is a bunch of nonsense. That rhetoric of white people being derived from 'black Albinos' is the crap Afrocentric idiots believe in.
You have Asperger's if you actually believe I wasn't being facetious suggesting I might have black albino ancestry... Aspies? On MY internet? It's more likely than you think!

And yes, I am in college and my major is anthropology.

Level 2

Since: Sep 13

Stockton, CA

#5107 Sep 25, 2013
Italians are white because they're from Europe. Some people migrated to Italy and aren't Italian.
Lameisha

Cleveland, MS

#5108 Sep 25, 2013
Jeff wrote:
<quoted text>
Lying 'mott' or 'truthseeker'....oops you are still posting as the Afroclown "KiloEcho". The one drop rule doesn't apply to Mediterraneans peoples, including Italians because many Mediterraneans peoples, including Italians do not have Sub Saharan African admixture, stupid. Even in colonial America people with predominate European ancestry were still viewed as white, even those who had black ancestry,you stupidass. Its only those racist KKK types who believed in the 'one drop rule' but then again they also believed you black people were inferior but I don't see your dumbass talking about THOSE idiotic beliefs of theirs.
BTW, idiot, the study you quoted also states that Italians cluster predominately with other Europeans and FAR AWAY from you Sub Saharan African types, proven what an illiterate idiot you are. The study only found a MINOR to NO SS African element in Italians, and that MINOR element plays no part in Italians genetics or their phenotypes that is why Brisighelli showed -----> Italians profile tightly with ALL OTHER EUROPEANS and that Italians also show CLEAR CUT DIFFERENCE with YOU SUB SAHARAN AFRICANS <----!! HA!
"PCA observations confirmed the results from Structure analysis, clustering Italian profiles tightly with other European ones. Thus, PCA indicated that North, Central and South Italy do not show differences between them, nor from other European populations (Figure 2). PCA also indicated clear-cut differences between Italians, Africans and Asians (Figure 2)."
Italians are Europeans therefore they are white. Genetically Italians cluster with all other Europeans and FAR AWAY from you Sub Saharan types. That is why the study YOUR stupidass posted showed Italy to have little to NO Sub Saharan African admixture from any "black Africans", and those Moors who were in the region were North African Berbers to begin with, not Sub Saharan African types like, you scientifically challenged, MooRon.
"To me, the differences among Southern European populations were really interesting. Populations in southwestern Europe, such as Spain and Portugal, showed clear evidence of North African gene flow,----> BUT THERE WAS LITTLE <--- in south-central regions such as Italy, or in the southeastern populations of Greece or Turkey. We attribute this to relatively recent gene flow in historical times (most likely during the period of Moorish inhabitation in Iberia) that differentially impacted European regions." ~ Stanford geneticist Carlos Bustamante
Ok I'm still lost, please explain
Capet

Falls Church, VA

#5109 Oct 1, 2013
Italians are most definitely "white" people. They are considered "Latin's" Along with Spaniards, Portuguese other Area's that speak romance languages etc..., as opposed to Anglo Saxon, Germanic or "Slavic peoples" Russians, Greeks, Czech's etc.

Oftentimes however "white" is used to describe simply peoples of Anglo Saxon origin, however that doesn't mean Anglos are the exclusive members of the "white"/European race, which is where the confusion probably comes from.

Anyhow race is a non tangible thing. It exists in our minds being a product of the culture in which we were raised. Racial classifications are often subjective to who's doing the classifying.

Level 5

Since: Sep 12

Congo, The Democratic Republic of the

#5110 Oct 2, 2013
Capet said

Racial classifications are often subjective to who's doing the classifying.

KiloEcho replies

The genetic map of Europe is available on the Internet.

Millions of Europeans have distant and not so distant African ancestors because they carry African signature genes like the E3b Somalid haplogroup.

The presence of the E3b haplogroup, which originates in East Africa reached 47% in Southern Greece (Peloponnese Region). It has been attributed to an Egyptian colony that used to live in Southern Greece a long time ago.

There is also a presence of the E3b haplogroup in Northern Iberia in the Pasiego Valley that historians have hard time figuring out why. During the golden age of the Moors in Iberia, they did not reach Northern Iberia. There must be a very ancient African presence in Iberia that is lost to history.

http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_E1b1...

We all have eyes to see that among Southern Europeans, including Greeks, Italians, Portuguese, Spaniards, there are quite a number of people who look no different than light skinned mulattoes, quadroons, octoroons and quintroons, that is Afro-Europeans.

There is no need to deny it, it is crystal clear that Southern Europeans have absorbed A LOT OF African genes and for quite a long period of time and it still shows in millions of them.

As for me, unmixed Italian are White; those who are mixed with Africans and the African admixture is quite visible are not White.

Jeff

Natick, MA

#5111 Oct 2, 2013
KiloEcho wrote:
The genetic map of Europe is available on the Internet.
Millions of Europeans have distant and not so distant African ancestors because they carry African signature genes like the E3b Somalid haplogroup.
The presence of the E3b haplogroup, which originates in East Africa reached 47% in Southern Greece (Peloponnese Region). It has been attributed to an Egyptian colony that used to live in Southern Greece a long time ago.
There is also a presence of the E3b haplogroup in Northern Iberia in the Pasiego Valley that historians have hard time figuring out why. During the golden age of the Moors in Iberia, they did not reach Northern Iberia. There must be a very ancient African presence in Iberia that is lost to history.
http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_E1b1...
We all have eyes to see that among Southern Europeans, including Greeks, Italians, Portuguese, Spaniards, there are quite a number of people who look no different than light skinned mulattoes, quadroons, octoroons and quintroons, that is Afro-Europeans.
There is no need to deny it, it is crystal clear that Southern Europeans have absorbed A LOT OF African genes and for quite a long period of time and it still shows in millions of them.
As for me, unmixed Italian are White; those who are mixed with Africans and the African admixture is quite visible are not White.
You are an fn tool.'mott' oops your stupidass is posting as "KiloEcho" still. Southern Europeans are white and you are a dumbass. There is no " East African" marker that reached 47% ANYWHERE in Europe. There are no 'millions' of Europeans have distant and not so distant African ancestors because Europeans do not carry any "Somalid haplogroup", you stupidass. Neither are any Southern Europeans who are "Afro-Europeans", you dumbass, including Greeks, Italians, Portuguese, Spaniards, they all look like your typical European aka white people, that is why they cluster genetically and phenotypically far away from Sub Saharan African types like your stupidass,
Most of Europe, including Balkans regions like Greece, Macedonia, Albania, Serbia have less then 1% of any 'Sub Saharan African' haplogroup. The only place that has over 10% of North African haplogroup is Iberia and that is mostly the Berber North African marker, NOT any Sub Saharan African marker, stupid. Big difference. But even in Iberia over 90% of the region still has European halpogroups, you dumb idiot. The E3b haplogroup subclade that is the third in Europe is the Eurasian EV13 marker, stupid. The majority of e1b1b in Europe is the Eurasian EV13 marker that did NOT arise among you Sub Saharan types and that is why YOU Sub Saharan Africans do not carry this marker, stupid. EV13 is European marker. The Neolithics that Europeans mixed with were mostly Eurasians from the Near East, not Sub Saharan Africans.

"Sudies of the ancient Y-DNA from the earlier Neolithic cave burials of Cardium pottery culture men shows they were mainly haplogroup G2a. These 'Neolithic lineages' accounted for 22% of the total European Y chromosome gene pool, and were predominantly found in Southern Europe (Greece, Italy, southeastern Bulgaria, southeastern Iberia)."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neolithic_Europe ...

"Moors" did not hold a racial identity, stupid, it was originally meant towards North African Berbers, later on it was applied towards mostly Muslims of ANY COLOR and race including many who were white, black, brown, mixed and everything in between, moron. In other words included many Moors who were not 'black'.
http://warfare.totalh.net/Cantiga/Cantigas_de...
http://warfare.totalh.net/Cantiga/Cantigas_de...

Since: Apr 13

Richmond, CA

#5112 Oct 2, 2013
All ethnic Europeans(British,Italians,Ger mans,Spaniards,French,Portugue se,Austrians,etc.)belong to the White European race!
KiloEcho

Congo, The Democratic Republic of the

#5113 Oct 3, 2013
Jeff said

"Moors" did not hold a racial identity, stupid,

KiloEcho replies

Denying that the word moor acquired a racial connotation across Europe for dark brown skinned people from Africa LONG BEFORE THE ADVENT OF ISLAM will not make the truth go away

"White" Europeans are now ashamed to admit that they had genetic and historical connections with dark brown skinned North-East and Saharan Africans, they called Moor in a very remote period.

In the Epitome de Caesaribus (390s AD), we learn that Aemilianus was "a Moor by race." Procopius of Caesarea (500-565 AD), a Byzantine scholar who wrote in Greek, said in his History of the Wars, "beyond that there are men not black-skinned like the Moors..."

In the 6C Isidore of Seville wrote “The Moors have bodies black as night, while the skin of the Gauls is white..."in The Etymologies of Isidore of Seville, translation by Steven A. Barney, published 2007. p. 386. St.

Isidore also “underlines the fact that Moors are so named because they are black, and their blackness comes from the heat of the sun." St. Isidore (9.2.121-23)”(Ramey, L., Monstrous Alterity in Early Modern Travel Accounts. Esprit Createur,(48)1, pp. 81-952008).

6th A.D.– Procopius in his History of the Wars book IV contrasting the Germanic Vandals who had settled in North Africa with the Moors claimed the Vandals were not “black skinned like the Maurusioi”.

The tribes he classified as Maurusioi are those now classified as ancient Berbers, the Numidians, Masaesyle, Gaitules, Massyles and Mezikes several other “Berber” tribes then settled between Tunisia and Morocco.
Jeff

Natick, MA

#5114 Oct 3, 2013
KiloEcho wrote:
Denying that the word moor acquired a racial connotation across Europe for dark brown skinned people from Africa LONG BEFORE THE ADVENT OF ISLAM will not make the truth go away
"White" Europeans are now ashamed to admit that they had genetic and historical connections with dark brown skinned North-East and Saharan Africans, they called Moor in a very remote period.
In the Epitome de Caesaribus (390s AD), we learn that Aemilianus was "a Moor by race." Procopius of Caesarea (500-565 AD), a Byzantine scholar who wrote in Greek, said in his History of the Wars, "beyond that there are men not black-skinned like the Moors..."
In the 6C Isidore of Seville wrote “The Moors have bodies black as night, while the skin of the Gauls is white..."in The Etymologies of Isidore of Seville, translation by Steven A. Barney, published 2007. p. 386. St.
Isidore also “underlines the fact that Moors are so named because they are black, and their blackness comes from the heat of the sun." St. Isidore (9.2.121-23)”(Ramey, L., Monstrous Alterity in Early Modern Travel Accounts. Esprit Createur,(48)1, pp. 81-952008).
6th A.D.– Procopius in his History of the Wars book IV contrasting the Germanic Vandals who had settled in North Africa with the Moors claimed the Vandals were not “black skinned like the Maurusioi”.
The tribes he classified as Maurusioi are those now classified as ancient Berbers, the Numidians, Masaesyle, Gaitules, Massyles and Mezikes several other “Berber” tribes then settled between Tunisia and Morocco.
You are fool and an idiot. Sub Saharan Africans have always been an anomaly in Europe, stupid, hence why Sub Saharan African lineages are NOT common in Europe. "Moors" did not hold a racial identity, stupid, it was originally meant towards North African Berbers, later on it was applied towards mostly Muslims of ANY COLOR and race including many who were white, black, brown, mixed and everything in between, moron. In other words included many Moors who were not 'black'.
http://warfare.totalh.net/Cantiga/Cantigas_de...
http://warfare.totalh.net/Cantiga/Cantigas_de...
Anonymous

Whittier, CA

#5115 Oct 3, 2013
If you are truly believing they are white than you need to get off of here and go educate yourself. Anyone can have a fair complexion and light eyes and not be of Caucasian decent. Don't care what anyone says, they are not white especially if most have those honky noses, dark skin, and language different from MOST European countries (besides Spain). You're ignorant if you think just because they have light eyes and light skin, they are white. You have Latinos who have light eyes, African Americans with light eyes, Middle Eastern with light eyes. Doesn't make them white. So your point is irrelevant. I would LOVE for an Italian to go up north to Sweden and THEN tell me if you're white then. Seriously, go educate yourself and look at a map. All of the countries near Italy in the South Equator...none of those people are white or look Caucasian like the Greek or Turkish. They can have fair skin, but they aren't white as to where you go to Germany or Sweden or Ireland, and they look like night and day features and everything. In the meantime, I'll go eat some spaghetti. I swear more and more stupid people exist everyday...

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

African-American Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 6 min CHARON 1,265,124
So many white women are having sex with black men (Jan '14) 6 min Open Minded and V... 143
NEANDERTHALS made WHITES more INTELLIGENT (Apr '13) 7 min African AE 1,241
Who is this fool calling everyone NoMo and MACEO? 13 min Mister Please 1
nighur shot dead in failed robbery attempt 13 min Gentle Mikes last... 31
the moors were black africans not arabs!!! (Jun '08) 14 min JOHNS ON TOP OF IT 35,066
Racists stop your lies! White people get 69% o... 17 min Mister Please 1
BW are evil, devious, vindictive and WM can hav... 19 min Mister Please 161
Africans did not sell their own 3 hr The Black Foreigner 188
Trump will destroy America ! 3 hr PolakPotrafi 108
More from around the web