A letter to the Editor of the New Statesman

17 October 2013

I have a letter in this week’s New Statesman. It is a response to an article in last week’s magazine by Mehdi Hasan. As NS Letters appear not to be published online I am pasting it here:


The piece by Mehdi Hasan in last week’s magazine (‘Who needs Tommy Robinson and the EDL, when Islamophobia has gone mainstream?’) tries to infer that statements by various writers, including myself, are identical to those on show at some EDL demonstrations.   For instance he quotes some EDL supporters caught on camera chanting: “Burn the mosque!” and then quotes me as calling for ‘mosques accused of spreading “hate” to be “pulled down”.’  Mehdi then says ‘Spot the difference?’

I am confident that New Statesman readers can spot at least one difference that evades your writer.   Let’s try it on something else.  ‘Failing hospitals should be pulled down’.  “Burn the hospital!”  ‘Care homes in which there has been systemic abuse should be pulled down’.  ‘Burn the care home.’

Of course Mehdi has notoriously been caught on video describing non-Muslims like me as ‘Kuffar’, ‘cattle’ and (quoting the Quran) ‘people of no intelligence.’  Perhaps Mehdi does not regard accuracy as necessary when it comes to smearing us bovine creatures.

Douglas Murray

Incidentally, I was pleased to see on last Friday’s edition of Have I Got News For You the nation had another opportunity to laugh at Mehdi’s Daily Mail hypocrisy.

Give the perfect gift this Christmas. Buy a subscription for a friend for just £75 and you’ll receive a free gift too. Buy now.

Show comments
  • Age Bestma

    shenzhen girl,what is wrong

  • Rossy Jordin

    Interesting blog…thanks for share this!!!
    Business Phone Lines in UK

  • john p reid

    Hasan comparing gays to peadophiles,

  • Bloomsbury

    Douglas, I think you mean ‘imply’ rather than ‘infer’, or perhaps
    ‘invite the inference’. In the old days the New Statesman would have
    invited the writer of a Letter to the Editor to correct such a solecism.
    But then in the old days a writer from The Spectator would not have
    made it!

  • Lungfish

    70 percent

  • Guest

    I’m not going to read this article- If I did it would probably illicit an illegality.

    • Guest

      but if was conducting this trial under Sharia- its wot we did 500 years ago

  • tigerlily

    It’s only a matter of time till the Huffpo gets tired of working with him too and then what will he do after that I wonder?

    • jp99

      Re-apply to the Daily Mail for a job?

  • Julieann Carter

    There is an excellent and intelligent critique of Medhi Hassan on “The Blog of the Re-Enlightenment”. The article credits Mr Murray’s article here, as ‘excellent’.

    The article is titled, “Pack up your toys, Medhi, The Game’s up.”

    An excerpt:

    “..Hasan is now on the ropes with his I love Mecca
    boxing pants around his ankles. Three heavy punches have rained down on
    him: whether he is a “moderate” is anyone’s guess; his supposed
    leftiness is a sham; and now his arch-nemesis is being publicly
    rehabilitated at breakneck speed – and his views flooding into a very
    receptive public domain – with the help of what Hasan considered to be
    his fwend.
    On the ropes and in a tight corner Hasan has no choice but to lash out with the same old punches but they just aren’t connecting..”

  • Windwalker

    Douglas – did you mean to write “imply”, when you wrote “infer”?

    • Icebow

      See some discussion above. In dictionaries infer can mean imply, as can make things a bit tricky.

    • Daniel Maris

      Yes, for some of us that was almost as shockingly wrong as Mehdi Hassan’s bonkers claim.

  • R Able

    Mr. Murray. I recently ran across a more obscure(at least to me) Mehdi Hasan rant *ahem* video in which he vehemently and without any apparent qualification associates the “kaffir”,you and I presumably, with everything from murder & alcoholism to bestiality. As a gay man I was especially touched by his classy conflation of homosexuality with pedophilia,deviancy and even incest…even music seems to piss him off!

    And all this from the man one of whose main debate tactics is to incessantly warn opponents about the dangers of “overgeneralization”.

    Oh, the irony!

    • John of Kent

      Music is one of the things forbidden to strict Sunni Muslims of course.

      All the attitudes you mention are no doubt ones which Kingsley Martin and J.M. Keynes would have been proud to see in a senior New Statesman journalist.

    • Daniel Maris

      My God – or should that be Allah – he looks like completely out of his tree…

      • Penny

        The video of him pounding on about the moral high ground is chuckle-worthy in light of his letter to the Mail.

  • Reborn

    Hasan is a vile hypocrite.
    Sadly, Al Beeb regularly have him as a panelist, to enthusiastic applause from the self selecting lefty/islamophile audiance.
    Lying to us Kuffar (& proud to be one) is not merely second nature to his type, it is a religious requirement.
    When the enemy within were Marxists, despite their influence in the media & education, they were not subject to respect born of fear, & if not totally defeated, certainly cut down to size in their most destructive agenda – economic destruction/forming a communist state.
    Muslims, on the other hand, are taking over by stealth. Having a “faith” apparently
    putting them beyond criticism. Especially if that “faith” is backed up with acts of appalling violence from terrorist mass murder, through to the hideous death of Lee Rigsby, & hundreds of attacks, sometimes fatal, on Kuffars – often Hindus as well as Christians/Westerners.
    No TV channel or mainstream book/magazine dares to question the historical roots of this ideology.
    Channel Four had a very respectful investigation at the hands of a religionist.
    The programme is never to be shown again, or even discussed at private showings due to murderous threats, which we have seen can be carried out anywhere.
    We need a Churchill, not just for the UK, but for the West as a whole.
    Most major politicians appear to be waving pieces of paper at us, in the face of aggression by our Oldest Enemy.

    • crosscop

      Lee Rigby was an English martyr. Please do him the courtesy of spelling his name right – he wasn’t in “Rising Damp.” Otherwise – spot on.

      • Reborn

        No offence intended.
        I certainly agree that he was an English martyr.
        Our martyrs die because of their beliefs
        Their martyrs die in the process of murdering innocent people.

    • tastemylogos

      Al beeb.. ha brilliant.

  • apuleius

    “tries to infer”

    No, tries to imply. Get some basic literacy.

    • lmda

      No, I don’t think so. “Infer” implies success in
      deducing, bringing in, (from the latin inferre) which is mitigated here by
      “tries to” . Mr Murray could have used “imply”, but then
      would not have needed to use “tries to” and his meaning would be slightly altered . Mehdi Hasan’s article tries
      (and fails) to infer, though it (successfully) implies. Your
      (boorishly) suggested correction is a pleonasm.

      • foxoles

        No, Apuleius is right.

        To infer is to deduce from reasoning, rather than explicit statement (ie it is something a person does in their own head, from their own understanding)

        To imply, on the other hand, is to suggest by using an explicit statement

        Hasan is making statements – he is implying. Indeed, it could perfectly justifiably be said that he is trying to imply – ie he is attempting to suggest, but not succeeding.

        • lmda

          Thank you, I am aware of the meaning of “infer” and
          possess several respectable dictionaries. But for some reason both you and Apuleius seem reluctant to understand its use in Douglas Murray’s letter. If MH implies/suggests without convincing he nevertheless implies/suggests. (The
          question “What are you implying?”, does not imply agreement with that which is
          implied neither does it suggest “you” are failing to imply). If, on the other
          hand, MH attempts to deduce/infer that which cannot be logically deduced or
          inferred from the data, then he has failed to deduce/infer, even if he believes
          he hasn’t failed. This was

          Douglas Murray’s point and it was perfectly clearly and concisely expressed
          with the precision that English affords. Apuleius’ charmlessly offered
          “correction” would have reduced both clarity and precision.

          • Daniel Maris

            I disagree. You can wrongly infer just as you can wrongly deduce, wrongly judge etc.

      • Daniel Maris

        No, you can infer erroneously. On your interpretation, there is no doubt Hasan has made the inference, in which cases “tries to” doesn’t come into it. In that case DM should have written “wrongly infers” or even “maliciously infers” if he wants to suggest there was conscious deceit.

        • lmda

          A word may be used correctly in different ways. Douglas Murray could, as you suggest have written “infers erroneously” which would effectively, have been more or less equivalent to “tries to infer” (although longer and lacking, as you note, the possibility of leaving the question of error or malice hanging interestingly – achieved by the original). DM did not use infer to mean imply, he used it to say that MH’s article tried to deduce grounds for saying that DM’s remark was equivalent to the EDL demonstrator’s chant and as the grounds were shaky to non-existant his attempt, in DM’s view, failed.

          What should we infer from this brou-ha-ha Watson? Perhaps that those who disagree with an argument but cannot attack the substance will attack the form. However if their horror of the form is not based on understanding and linguistic delicacy but in dislike of the author or his arguments they won’t necessarily have any more luck there.

          • Daniel Maris

            “DM did not use infer to mean imply, he used it to say that MH’s article
            tried to deduce grounds for saying that DM’s remark was equivalent to
            the EDL demonstrator’s chant and as the grounds were shaky to
            non-existant his attempt, in DM’s view, failed.”

            Don’t you mean adduce rather than deduce? LOL

            I agree that might have been his intention, but he introduced unintentional ambiguity by saying he “tried to”.

            • lmda

              “but he introduced unintentional ambiguity by saying he “tried to” No he didn’t,. without “tried to” the meaning would be different and less withering. Do you think anyone mistook his meaning? Seriously?
              “Don’t you mean adduce” I think I probably meant infer but who cares I’m only me.
              “LOL” (!?!) Gawd’elpus I thought you were one of the grown ups.
              I should also have added “alleged” in “the EDL demonstrators’ (alleged) chant”.

            • lmda

              but he introduced unintentional ambiguity by saying he “tried to”. No he didn’t, without “tries to” his meaning would have been different and less withering. Do you think anyone mistook his meaning? Seriously?
              “Don’t you mean adduce rather than deduce?” I think I should have writen “infer”.
              “LOL”(!?!) Gawd’elpus I thought you were one of the grown-ups.
              I should also have added an “alleged” in “the EDL demonstrators’ (alleged) chant”.

  • James Strong

    Try a thought experiment.
    Take some verses from the revealed words of Allah. Commit blasphemy by changing them round. Instead of reading out what those verses say should be the attitude and actions of believers towards Jews, Christians polytheists, and atheists, replace those terms with m*****s.
    Then go and stand in a public space and read out those verses. We could run a sweep on how long it would take to get arrested for that speech.

  • James Strong

    The Religion of Peace makes it quite clear that non-members of the religion are not to have the same rights in society as members. Within its membership women do not have the same rights as men.
    Members of the RoP are allowed to lie to non-members if that furthers the interests of the RoP.
    Violence is not just allowed, it is encouraged.
    The founder of the RoP, whom RoPers believe was a perfect example as a man, had carnal knowledge of a 9 year old.
    That’s the theory.
    Now look at what is happening on the ground. An RoP ‘area’ in Tower Hamlets with RoP members harrassing gays and women they don’t approve of. RoP sexual grooming gangs targetting vulnerable young women in a number of English cities.
    A number of English towns and cities with large areas that are unrecognisable from what thery were 30 years ago because they are now ghettos of RoP adherents.
    Look at countries where the RoP is in control, oppressive at best, with added dashes of barbarism.
    India and Pakistan: one is a country that, for all its problems, is developing and changes its governments at the ballot box. The other is a degenerating basket case. Their populations are racially the same, what’s the difference? It’s the culture of the RoP.
    Almost every Friday of the year there are reports of a bomb at a mosque where one sect of RoP members kill members of another RoP sect.
    Civilsed society is under threat and attack from the RoP. And not just those of us who are not born into it.
    Many victims are those who are unfortunate enough to be born into the RoP. They are not allowed to leave, under pain of death. ‘Whoever changes his religion, kill him.’
    Islamophobia? Why not?

    • Shazza

      Well said!

      • Peter Stroud

        Absolutely correct.

      • Reborn

        Funny how murderous violence so often occurs after Friday Prayers.
        In the civilised world, persons leaving a Church,Synagogue or Temple are refreshed & peaceful.
        Leaving a mosque they are often murderous.
        Come to think of it, a Hindu hotel owner was murdered in East London when he requested muslims to stop parking their Mercedes
        in his car park on their way to Friday Prayers.
        So anticipation of a hate filled sermon is as effective as the actual sermon.
        I’m sure that some psychological tests have discovered this tendency.

        • Shazza

          I think the difference is that people leaving a ‘Church, Synagogue or Temple’ have received exhortations from their respective religious leaders to continue practising the peaceful doctrines as they have evolved, i.e. ‘loving your neighbour’, etc. Moslems also leave their mosques presumably with the exhortations of their leaders ringing in their ears to follow the perfect example of their perfect leader.

          We are all too familiar with the exhortations of their perfect leader and their holy book. Unfortunately.

          I put this forward as an explanation as to why ‘they are often murderous’.

          • Ghosts_of_Alba_Regalis

            The comments on here make me laugh – all so polite about the “religion of peace” – FFS just say it! ISLAM IS EVIL. And the vast majority of Muslims in the world are immoral, retarded, backward f*ckwits – no negotiation or compromise is possible – Islam defines muslims – Islam is evil – therefore F*CKING deport these evil crapheaded moronic genocidal freaks of nature from our Judeo-Christian/Atheist/tolerant/ civilised countries before they “take-over” and reduce our law and order to some dark age desert of chaos, murder, rape, theft, tribal gang mentality and all the barbarity and savagery of rabid dogs!

            • Daidragon

              ‘the vast majority of Muslims in the world are immoral, retarded, backward f*ckwits -‘

              Your post is proof that retarded fuckwittery is obviously not restricted to muslims.

              • crosscop

                He may have set off on a bit of a rant – but he does have a point.
                Take a look at this clip ( taken by Muslims themselves) of a Muslim ‘peace conference’ in Oslo the other day. I see only one man – front row – in the entire audience who fails to raise his hand when the imam asks who supports segregating men from women and carrying out the barbaric punishments described in the Koran. As the imam points out – this is mainstream Islam – not extremism.

                This is a must-see for anyone who still views Islam through rose-tinted spectacles. Go on, Daidragon. Have a look and get back to us.
                I wonder how Quilliam will explain this sort of thing to TR.

          • Daidragon

            The people leaving church are usually too old to get riled up.

        • crosscop

          I know of a bloke in one of Greater Manchester’s Muslim colonies who has to put up with his business forecourt being used as a car-park by Muslims visiting the mosque next door. When they did it the first time he politely asked them to shift their cars. They ignored him. He then told them he would have the cars removed. They told him that if he touched the cars his business premises would be burnt down. So he let’s them park there. They’ll probably burn it down anyway – when they want to expand the mosque.

          • Reborn

            I suspect many people could tell similar stories.
            Sadly, they either keep quiet, or the authorities take no action.
            Arson attacks on inhabited houses in just one of many undesirable imports of the last few decades.

    • chan chan

      A Muslim was arrested yesterday at the Prime Minister’s office in Ottawa, Canada, saying he had a bomb in a briefcase and was going to blow them up.

      His wife has said she doesn’t understand why he did it, as he’s a very religious, devout Muslim.

      Great stuff…

      Oh, and they collect three grand a month in Jizya, sorry, I mean Welfare, from the infidel Government of Canada.

    • ihs51

      why compare acceptable age of marriage with 21st century look at the English and French kings marrying 9-10 girls first

      • James Strong

        Because English and French monarchists in the 21st century do not think that earlier monarchs were perefect examples and do not follow their teachings.
        And I used to be a monarchist and am now a republican. I do not face any sanction for that from monarchists.

    • disqus_KdiRmsUO4U

      This comparison between India and Pakistan is ‘spot on’

      I do think Brahmins would not ‘fit in’ at the local UK council equality department.

      It might take the trendies some time to recognise that fact but then not have the foggiest idea as to what to do.
      After all its only whites who oppress others… isn’t it ?

      In general the Hindus can put the boot in if they have to !
      They do dress sexy so that’s a point in their favour.

  • Firdaus Kanga


    • Austin Barry


      • Greenslime


      • Firdaus Kanga


        • milliboot

          OK, but turn “CAPS LOCK” off. That wont hurt your “crumbling spine ” will it ?

          • Firdaus Kanga


      • Lungfish

        I don’t KNOW

  • Julieann Carter

    I think Medhi Hassan is jealous of Douglas Murray.

    The more fatuous elements of the Left fear educators who are far more knowledgeable and intelligent, than they. When your livelihood is earned through peddling nonsense – and it’s been a good earner for over a decade now, then people like Douglas Murray who will not be cowed, must be targeted by instigating a general consensus of hate via populist campaigning.
    We all know that same nonsense has been part of the national curriculum for well over a decade, so Mr Murray is right to address the publication’s readership, in his response to Mr Hassan.

    • Ghosts_of_Alba_Regalis

      Medhi Hassan is intimidated by Douglas because Hassan is an intellectual fraud with a small brain and probably also has some deep homosexual desires toward the charismatic and intellectual giant that is the Murray! Watch how Medhi behaves around Douglas – those looks of admiration expose the truth of it! I am completely “straight” but even I fancy Douglas! He is just so fantastic!

  • Austin Barry

    Douglas, I wouldn’t worry about the preposterous Hasan.

    He has been reduced to a poster boy for hypocrisy.

    Even the yelping, inane and wildly applauding Onanists of the Question Time audience must realise that their Islamic hero has been reduced to halal dust.

    • Shazza

      Unfortunately they don’t. Question time audiences (heavily vetted) do not read, for the most part, publications like The Spectator, etc. so are blissfully unaware of Hasan’s duplicitous oratory – and if they do, they make excuses because if they acknowledge his true islamic agenda, it will force them to admit that their beliefs have contributed toward the islamification of these once ‘sceptred isles’. They read the Guardian and swallow the BBC’s left wing propaganda hook, line and sinker. His comments about non-moslems being ‘cattle’ etc. should be on the front pages of the Mail and Sun but we all know, that won’t happen.

      I have posted before that I complained months ago to Sky about the odious, bullying Hasan being on the Newspaper review and I am not holding my breath for a reply.

    • Greenslime

      you iz only saying that coz I iz a muz!

    • Reborn

      If only —

  • andy_gill

    Medhi Hassan’s racist comments seem far worse than anything Tommy Robinson ever said.

    • Reborn

      Id love to learn the truth about Robinson’s volte face.

    • pkoduah

      Racist? Source?

      • Reborn

        Racist may not be they best term.
        Contempt & hatred for non muslims is a better term.
        This man lives & works in our country & has the evil opinion that he loves an ancient prophet of dubious morals & historicity more than his own family.
        One can see why muslims practice polygamy, it’s because they don’t like families, though enjoy procreation.

        • pkoduah

          People are throwing around the word “racist” too freely these days (as a lazy smear tactic or defense mechanism against having been called racist themselves).

          Let’s reserve the word for when it is actually appropriate.

          • Reborn

            Particularly as a smear tactic, to close down discussion leading to action on immigration & multiculturalism.

        • crosscop


    • Ghosts_of_Alba_Regalis

      All you need to know about Mehdi Hasan –

    • Lungfish

      That’s because he’s a little money grubbing creep

      • Lungfish

        I know its ‘racisct’ or whatever, but have you ever met anybody of Pakistani heritage who hasn’t been a money grubbing little creep

        • Lungfish

          oh dear , I must be a racist

          • Lungfish

            Lets have a look at the second world war. The Indians for example. Fought like, urr, Indians against fascism. plus, lets have a look at Tibet, the Gurkhas. I lly like don’t remember any muslim fighters against fascism. So you wonder why we don’t reallh public remember Burmay like the lovely muslim friends Dave. I know you are thick Dave but the Britis,h, we remember Burma.- no he’s not thick, just dumb., just observe Burma

            • Lungfish

              the british don’t really have mithy uch in common with the Muslamics

              • Lungfish

                has anybody else noticed?

  • crosscop

    Douglas – how about pointing out his lying article for the Telegraph which appeared just after Lee Rigby was murdered.

    He deliberately altered the wording of Sura 5:32 to make it appear that the verse condemns the killing, when in its entirety it plainly fully justifies the killing. He also fails to mention the following verse (5:33) which not only justifies the murder but also the crucifixion and mutilation of people like Lee Rigby.

    I can’t believe that people ( Clegg used exactly the same deceit) can get away with this sort of thing – but not one journalist and not one politician has pulled them up for it. Why do you think that should be, Douglas?

    • global city

      Nobody has pointed out, against the assertions that these guys are bad but brave, that they took Rigby out by running him down before doing the deed. He was in no condition to put up a fight when they hacked him to death. Cowards, as well as being really dumb bastards.

  • Mynydd

    Does Mr Douglas Murray not understand the meaning of ‘press freedom’ The press can publish or not publish whatever it wants. This goes equally to the New Statesmen and Spectator. It’s no good Mr Murray complaining, he want ‘press freedom’ he may not like it, but he have got it.

    • DazEng

      I suspect he does which also gives the right of reply

      • Mynydd

        If Mr Murray wanted a right of reply he should have gone to the independent body that can order a right of reply, just like the rest of us.

    • Curnonsky

      You are confused – “press freedom” does not mean the press is above criticism. In fact, wherever the press is not free it is also protected from criticism, since it is the voice of the government. The two go hand-in-hand.

      • Mynydd

        ‘Press freedom’ allows the editor of the New Statesmen to publish, or not publish, whatever he wants.

        • Baron

          It also allows Murray to criticise, or not criticise, whatever he wants.

          What’s your problem, then?

        • John of Kent

          No it doesn’t. There are all sorts of ethical, professional, humanitarian, and indeed legal boundaries to press freedom. And above all the editorial position of the paper constitutes a framework. You are telling us that the NS favours a seventh century Shari’a state system for Britain?

    • Arturaski

      Murray’s point is about misrepresentation. The construction pairs an obviously egregious example with a reasonable one in order to distort Murray’s argument. Murray understands the meaning of ‘free press’. Do you?

      • Mynydd

        ‘Press freedom’ allows misrepresentation, it happens every day and not only to Mr Murray.

        • Ilana Walsh

          So shouldn’t anyone be allowed to point out such misrepresentation? Not quite following you here.

        • John of Kent

          Questions of scale and ethics are nevertheless there.

    • tastemylogos

      there is a difference between wanting expression restricted and criticising misrepresentation.

      the term ‘stupid’ is overused but on this occasion it is a perfectly apt adjective to sum up your post.

      please think before you type.

      (note: im not calling for you to be punished for your views, just telling you they are moronic – see difference)

      • Mynydd

        In the last few weeks there has been a lot of talk about the freedom of the press. From this I understand that an editor must be free to publish, or in this case not to publish, what ever he feels fit. Is it stupid or moronic to hold the view that an editor must have this freedom?

        • HJ777

          Where did Douglas Murray suggest or imply that the editor shouldn’t have this freedom?

        • tastemylogos

          forgive me again but you seem utterly incapable of resisting the conflation of two separate issues.

          murray did not call for mehdi hasan to be sacked, have his license removed, or silenced, did he? well… did he?????

          murray is simply rebutting an accusation aimed at him by hasan… that is all. not really much to see here.

          if you are struggling with this… still, after being explained twice by me and on numerous occasions by others then there is not much more one can do other than, ‘allow’ as they say in brixton.

    • HJ777

      Where did Douglas Murray object to the New Statesman publishing Medhi Hasan’s article or imply that they should not be allowed to?

      As far as I can tell, he was merely responding to it, not objecting to its publication.

      • Mynydd

        I quote ‘NS Letters appear not to be published online’ By this comment Mr Murray is objecting to the fact that the New Statesmen doesn’t publish letters online. What the NS publish online is the responsibility of its editor, like wise what the Spectator publish on line is the responsibility of its editor.

        • HJ777

          He merely explained why he was publishing his response online. He didn’t complain that his letter wasn’t published online by the NS, just saying that they don’t publish any letters online.

          There was not even a hint of a complaint

        • tastemylogos

          ‘I quote ‘NS Letters appear not to be published online’ By this comment Mr Murray is objecting to the fact that the New Statesmen doesn’t publish letters online.’


          isn’t it no more than an observation, as in… ‘NS Letters appear not to be published online’.

          deary me.

    • Steve Lloyd

      There is a difference between freedom of speech as practised by D Murray, and hate speech, for which the majority would be arrested, as practised by M. Hassan, is there not?

      • Mynydd

        Freedom of speech is freedom of speech for all under the law.

        • R Able

          Yes,and the OIC is attempting YET again to re-define freedom of speech “under the law”.

          Bratty and non sequitur I know but you made it SO damn easy.

        • g1lgam3sh

          Tell that to Emma West.

        • Reborn

          Sadly our laws in the UK are highly restrictive.
          And going to get worse soon thanks to the BBC’s endless vendetta against News International & a corrupt bunch of politicians & “celebrities” who are pastmasters at news manipulation.
          Our libel laws are so draconian that not only do foreigners use London for alleged libels committed abroad, but the supporters of dead foreign terrorists can have books pulped that were never published in the UK.

  • brossen99
  • john p reid

    Apparently Medhi, has now soda that Tommy Robinson will be writing for the Mail,after leaving the EDL,lol

Can't find your Web ID? Click here