Separatist Movements

[Yanitza]

The amount of racist anglophobes in this thread is almost impressive... Seriously If you wish ill on a people because of percieved wrongs perpetrated by their past governments you need to take a good long look at your own country/ethnicity and apply the same thing to you. Should all Serbs be held accountable for the crimes perpetrated by some? Should all russians be held accountable for Stalins actions? Should all Indians be held accountable for systematic oppression of the people in their country through the cast system? No? Then British people aren't responsible for the settlement of northern Ireland by protestants, Or for Scottish nobles signing a treaty on the Union because they wanted a bigger empire. These things happened, they were bad. The now is important, not the past.

What could conceivably be argued as important is the opinion of the current populace of the areas that want to secede. If they have suitable grievances with the current state of things maybe they should be able to leave the unions of countries/countries they live in or if they are being oppressed by an unelected government. But if their grievances are imagined, or based on "historical grievances" rest assured I am still opposed to their pointless secession. I find it very hard to justify secession in democratic countries... It stinks of rage quitting just because things currently going the way you want which will ALWAYS happen in a democracy at some point.

and yet what Varijnland said about Serbs is exactly what you just said no one does, I mearly pointed out all the crimes that Anglos could be held accountable for so perhaps they should lay of the Serbs?

In any case I find it amusing that someone only says this because of the perceived offence against anglos

[Olivaero]

The amount of racist anglophobes in this thread is almost impressive... Seriously If you wish ill on a people because of percieved wrongs perpetrated by their past governments you need to take a good long look at your own country/ethnicity and apply the same thing to you. Should all Serbs be held accountable for the crimes perpetrated by some? Should all russians be held accountable for Stalins actions? Should all Indians be held accountable for systematic oppression of the people in their country through the cast system? No? Then British people aren't responsible for the settlement of northern Ireland by protestants, Or for Scottish nobles signing a treaty on the Union because they wanted a bigger empire. These things happened, they were bad. The now is important, not the past.

What could conceivably be argued as important is the opinion of the current populace of the areas that want to secede. If they have suitable grievances with the current state of things maybe they should be able to leave the unions of countries/countries they live in or if they are being oppressed by an unelected government. But if their grievances are imagined, or based on "historical grievances" rest assured I am still opposed to their pointless secession. I find it very hard to justify secession in democratic countries... It stinks of rage quitting just because things currently going the way you want which will ALWAYS happen in a democracy at some point.

and yet what Varijnland said about Serbs is exactly what you just said no one does, I mearly pointed out all the crimes that Anglos could be held accountable for so perhaps they should lay of the Serbs?

In any case I find it amusing that someone only says this because of the perceived offence against anglos

Note the word "should" used in the first paragraph. I was addressing the people who go on about the crimes of the British Empire, seemingly the leading cause of anglophobia.

"perceived"? It has been stated in this thread at least once that a poster hated the British/English and implied another time that the English are the source of all problems on the British isles and should be wished Ill upon because of historical grievances, I was replying to that sentiment.

[Kemalist]

I'd like South Ossetia, Abkhazia, Northern Cyprus, Transnistria, Somaliland, West Papua, Western Sahara, Wales and Scotland to gain their independence. I also think that South Korea should be annexed by North Korea, Chinese Taipei by China, Kosovo by Serbia, East Jerusalem by Palestine and Northern Ireland by Ireland.

I've dropped my support for Azawad after the secular left-wing nationalist MNLA lost the control over territories against islamist pro-Sharia Ansar Dine.

[Varijnland]

The amount of racist anglophobes in this thread is almost impressive... Seriously If you wish ill on a people because of percieved wrongs perpetrated by their past governments you need to take a good long look at your own country/ethnicity and apply the same thing to you. Should all Serbs be held accountable for the crimes perpetrated by some? Should all russians be held accountable for Stalins actions? Should all Indians be held accountable for systematic oppression of the people in their country through the cast system? No? Then British people aren't responsible for the settlement of northern Ireland by protestants, Or for Scottish nobles signing a treaty on the Union because they wanted a bigger empire. These things happened, they were bad. The now is important, not the past.

What could conceivably be argued as important is the opinion of the current populace of the areas that want to secede. If they have suitable grievances with the current state of things maybe they should be able to leave the unions of countries/countries they live in or if they are being oppressed by an unelected government. But if their grievances are imagined, or based on "historical grievances" rest assured I am still opposed to their pointless secession. I find it very hard to justify secession in democratic countries... It stinks of rage quitting just because things currently going the way you want which will ALWAYS happen in a democracy at some point.

and yet what Varijnland said about Serbs is exactly what you just said no one does, I mearly pointed out all the crimes that Anglos could be held accountable for so perhaps they should lay of the Serbs?

In any case I find it amusing that someone only says this because of the perceived offence against anglos

So it didn't occur to you that I was defending my country because you two Anglophobes were making false accusations? You think that jumping on the anti-USA/UK bandwagon makes you the moraly correct victim, it doesn't. See, what I said about the Serbs, it was a taste of your own medicine and a perfect example.

[Priory Academy USSR]

The amount of racist anglophobes in this thread is almost impressive... Seriously If you wish ill on a people because of percieved wrongs perpetrated by their past governments you need to take a good long look at your own country/ethnicity and apply the same thing to you. Should all Serbs be held accountable for the crimes perpetrated by some? Should all russians be held accountable for Stalins actions? Should all Indians be held accountable for systematic oppression of the people in their country through the cast system? No? Then British people aren't responsible for the settlement of northern Ireland by protestants, Or for Scottish nobles signing a treaty on the Union because they wanted a bigger empire. These things happened, they were bad. The now is important, not the past.

What could conceivably be argued as important is the opinion of the current populace of the areas that want to secede. If they have suitable grievances with the current state of things maybe they should be able to leave the unions of countries/countries they live in or if they are being oppressed by an unelected government. But if their grievances are imagined, or based on "historical grievances" rest assured I am still opposed to their pointless secession. I find it very hard to justify secession in democratic countries... It stinks of rage quitting just because things currently going the way you want which will ALWAYS happen in a democracy at some point.

Dude, haven't you heard? If something bad happened before 1900 it's the fault of the English.

[Hurdegaryp]

The amount of racist anglophobes in this thread is almost impressive... Seriously If you wish ill on a people because of percieved wrongs perpetrated by their past governments you need to take a good long look at your own country/ethnicity and apply the same thing to you. Should all Serbs be held accountable for the crimes perpetrated by some? Should all russians be held accountable for Stalins actions? Should all Indians be held accountable for systematic oppression of the people in their country through the cast system? No? Then British people aren't responsible for the settlement of northern Ireland by protestants, Or for Scottish nobles signing a treaty on the Union because they wanted a bigger empire. These things happened, they were bad. The now is important, not the past.

What could conceivably be argued as important is the opinion of the current populace of the areas that want to secede. If they have suitable grievances with the current state of things maybe they should be able to leave the unions of countries/countries they live in or if they are being oppressed by an unelected government. But if their grievances are imagined, or based on "historical grievances" rest assured I am still opposed to their pointless secession. I find it very hard to justify secession in democratic countries... It stinks of rage quitting just because things currently going the way you want which will ALWAYS happen in a democracy at some point.

Dude, haven't you heard? If something bad happened before 1900 it's the fault of the English.

That goes without saying. Other European countries willingly refrained from having colonies in the 19th century, while the United States decided to not go for any territorial expansions at all. This is why no other languages have a word for "imperialism", they just don't understand the concept!

[The Anglecynn Kingdom]

Dude, haven't you heard? If something bad happened before 1900 it's the fault of the English.

while the United States decided to not go for any territorial expansions at all.

Puerto Rico, The Phillipines, Guam, Panama, American Samoa, American Virgin isles, Hawaii. All US territorial expanses.

[Hurdegaryp]

while the United States decided to not go for any territorial expansions at all.

Puerto Rico, The Phillipines, Guam, Panama, American Samoa, American Virgin isles, Hawaii. All US territorial expanses.

Duh. I was trying to be ironic. Apparently you didn't get the memo. It happens.

[Slembana]

Scotland. However, we Scots are not being violent by blowing up places in England.

However, as a proud Scot, I'd love it if my country became independence. If we somehow fail to gain independence in 2014, we Scots should start a proper seperatist movement.

[Maroza]

Scotland. However, we Scots are not being violent by blowing up places in England.

However, as a proud Scot, I'd love it if my country became independence. If we somehow fail to gain independence in 2014, we Scots should start a proper seperatist movement.

I can't wait till the U.K. is out of the way, one less competitor.

[Ircona]

I'm biased as a Turkish Cypriot but I support Northern Cypriot independence or rather international recognition of Northern Cypriot independence. I wouldn't normally support a large minority in a country gathering to a region and declaring independence but it has already happened under understandable circumstances and I don't think a solution that's agreeable to everybody will ever be reached.

Greek Cypriots want to return to the north which would turn the Turkish Cypriots back into a minority when they've been living as a majority in their own country for decades. It's more unfair to take away a country from someone who was born and raised in it than it is fair to give back a country to someone who has spent most of their life living somewhere else.

I also support the independence of Catalonia, Kosovo, Iraqi Kurdistan, Palestine and Basque Country among others.

The only movements that I don't really support are ones like Texas, Northern Ireland or Scotland where a majority of the people don't want to secede and/or their reasons for secession are silly/nonexistent.

[Dilange]

I'd like South Ossetia, Abkhazia, Northern Cyprus, Transnistria, Somaliland, West Papua, Western Sahara, Wales and Scotland to gain their independence. I also think that South Korea should be annexed by North Korea, Chinese Taipei by China, Kosovo by Serbia, East Jerusalem by Palestine and Northern Ireland by Ireland.

I've dropped my support for Azawad after the secular left-wing nationalist MNLA lost the control over territories against islamist pro-Sharia Ansar Dine.

Thats a lot. I hope you dont mind I attack you on some.

1) Northern Cyprus is a lulzy situation. I find that the TUrkish government did a dumb thing in launching a militayr inveterntion in Cyprus, but I find the Greek junta's action unexcusable. A prefer a united Cyprus rather than a divied one.

2) Wales and Scotland are neutral to me. I really do not see why they should gain independence.

3) Give the economic sound South Korea, to the hemmoraging North Korea? Why?

4) Kosovo is another one I'd rather see free. They are the second largest recgonized non-nation government in the world (first being Palestine). I also have a deep bias to the plight of Kosovo. But hwy would you want it returned to Serbia?

5) Isnt East Jerusalem part of Palestinian control in West Bank?

[Martean]

1) That movement will die in 5 years. Catalonia won't archieve anything.

2) I don't know anything about Quebec.

3) Basque... land? anyway, separatism isn't the mayor option in Euskadi.

PS: Galicia.

1) Maybe, but it seems the move viable one now.
2) Quebec may rise again, but it seems unlikely
3) The name I found online. I think the Basque should declare independence. They are not French or Spanish.

1) No considering Catalonia is begging €3 billion to the spanish government.
2) -
3) No? just look at their passports...

[Greater Nilfgaard]

Yes and yes.

In this context democracy is weakness.

Do you consider any other factors apart from "might makes right" or is that your sole guiding principle? For example, if a dude beat you up and stole your money would you just tell him " Well played, good sir" because he's better at beating people up and taking their money than you or would you call the police?

I'd fight back and try to call the police. I'd use every tool at my disposal to get my shit back and make him pay.
If all these measures failed and he still kept the money and evaded the police then objectively I think it could be said that he'd earned it.

[Varijnland]

I'd like South Ossetia, Abkhazia, Northern Cyprus, Transnistria, Somaliland, West Papua, Western Sahara, Wales and Scotland to gain their independence. I also think that South Korea should be annexed by North Korea, Chinese Taipei by China, Kosovo by Serbia, East Jerusalem by Palestine and Northern Ireland by Ireland.

I've dropped my support for Azawad after the secular left-wing nationalist MNLA lost the control over territories against islamist pro-Sharia Ansar Dine.

Why? just why? Wales have no reason to leave the Union. Some Scots have a shit reason for leaving the Union. Northern Ireland is inhabited by British people, giving it to Ireland would be foreign occupation.

[Aalnordhavn]

I move that we separate those who can spell "Separatist Movements" and those who can not.

[South East Europe]

Alaska, most of Texas and the deep south (excluding South Carolina and parts of North Carolina) should be forcibly separated from the union because they only make the USA look bad. Hawaii should be returned to its rightful owners, the native Hawaiians. Furthermore, a large portion of the west should be given to the Native Americans who should not be held accountable for the atrocious US debt in compensation for the atrocities the white man committed. Finally, the states mostly at fault for the debt should be held accountable or left out to dry. We can probably give New York to the Nation of Islam. There, US problems solved but we only have like 20 states left.

[Aalnordhavn]

Alaska, most of Texas and the deep south (excluding South Carolina and parts of North Carolina) should be forcibly separated from the union because they only make the USA look bad.

Right... because their farming, fishing, industrial sectors and oil makes the US "look bad"

Hawaii should be returned to its rightful owners, the native Hawaiians.

There's a sustainable economic model here... somewhere...

Furthermore, a large portion of the west should be given to the Native Americans who should not be held accountable for the atrocious US debt in compensation for the atrocities the white man committed.

Right, because you want to give 20-40% of the US landmass to 0.9% of the population... Makes a ton of sense.

Finally, the states mostly at fault for the debt should be held accountable or left out to dry. We can probably give New York to the Nation of Islam. There, US problems solved but we only have like 20 states left.

Not sure if trolling or just a moron.

[SD_Film Artists]

I'd like South Ossetia, Abkhazia, Northern Cyprus, Transnistria, Somaliland, West Papua, Western Sahara, Wales and Scotland to gain their independence. I also think that South Korea should be annexed by North Korea, Chinese Taipei by China, Kosovo by Serbia, East Jerusalem by Palestine and Northern Ireland by Ireland.

I've dropped my support for Azawad after the secular left-wing nationalist MNLA lost the control over territories against islamist pro-Sharia Ansar Dine.

Why? just why? Wales have no reason to leave the Union. Some Scots have a shit reason for leaving the Union. Northern Ireland is inhabited by British people, giving it to Ireland would be foreign occupation.

Considering that not even Russia would support a strong North Korea, perhaps Kemalist is just being a left-wing Hippostania.

[South East Europe]

Alaska, most of Texas and the deep south (excluding South Carolina and parts of North Carolina) should be forcibly separated from the union because they only make the USA look bad.

Right... because their farming, fishing, industrial sectors and oil makes the US "look bad"

Hawaii should be returned to its rightful owners, the native Hawaiians.

There's a sustainable economic model here... somewhere...

Furthermore, a large portion of the west should be given to the Native Americans who should not be held accountable for the atrocious US debt in compensation for the atrocities the white man committed.

Right, because you want to give 20-40% of the US landmass to 0.9% of the population... Makes a ton of sense.

Finally, the states mostly at fault for the debt should be held accountable or left out to dry. We can probably give New York to the Nation of Islam. There, US problems solved but we only have like 20 states left.

Not sure if trolling or just a moron.

We don't need the deep south, its mostly religious extremists anyways, also i said a large portion of the west, i didnt say how many square kilometers so don't assume I meant 20-40% of the landmass, further insulting people doesn't help get your point across.

[Aalnordhavn]

We don't need the deep south, its mostly religious extremists anyways, also i said a large portion of the west, i didnt say how many square kilometers so don't assume I meant 20-40% of the landmass, further insulting people doesn't help get your point across.

You claim insulting people doesn't get my point across in the same sentence as where you condemn a large portion of the United States as "religious extremists" that "we don't need".

[Saint-Thor]

2) Quebec may not be as known as it should be. Quebec has advocated its independence and has even brought it up for vote recently, but failed by a small margin. As we know, Quebec is the majority French speaking providence of Canada that seems different than the others.

1993, federal election. The Bloc Quebecois, a federal party that runs only in Quebec, and represents only Quebec interests, and for whom the separation of Quebec is the focal point of their party platform, receives 1.85 million votes.

1995, Quebec votes 50.58% in a provincial referendum to stay a part of Canada. Roughly 2.31 million people voted to separate.

2011, federal election. The Bloc received 800,000 votes. Popular support dropped from 10% to 6%, country wide.

Eighteen years, and the Bloc has lost about 57% of it's support base. Quebec separatism is, for the most part, dead.

That logic is flawed. Before the end of the 60s in Québec, there were almost no sovereignist movement at all. The PQ were the first one to talk about independence in 130 years. They gained support because the right leader was there at the right time, galvanizing the nationalist sentiment in 10 years or so following the creation of the PQ. While the result of the 1980 referendum was modest, to say the least, the one of 1995 was so close that the federalists can not say: SEE? NO ONE WANTS TO SEPARATE!

Actually, it might be more accurate to say that it's hibernating. What is very obvious though, to everyone, is that support for Quebec separatism is dropping, both within and without. The reason? I believe it's because the people pushing for separation are being proven wrong, day after day. The separatism movement uses scare-tactics to convince people that separatism is a good, viable idea (it is neither)

I have yet to see one single argument that can prove the separation to be wrong. The truth is that there is no valid argument except maybe one. Someone who feel more Canadian and love Canada. The thing is that 60% of Québécois feel more Québécois than Canadian. I think the only other place in North America with such "provincial sense of belonging" would be Texas. Now, about the scare-tactics, I suggest you take a look at the tactics employed by the federalists in 1995 to scare the sovereignists, especially the old people. But you know, it's always the same crap served by all the democratic countries in the world who don't want to see one of their province secede. Madrid said the same thing to the Catalonians. You can't survive without us, we'll send the troops (not sure Spain used that argument but Ottawa did), we'll cut off our treaties, etc. In Canada, they even add: We will partition your land, you won't get your retirement pension (even though it's our money), we'll stop trading with you, we won't protect the linguistic rights of the French speaking minority outisde of Québec, separation = nazi Germany reborn, etc. Look, I heard them all.

They say that the "Quebec way of life" (or some-such) is in danger of being destroyed by the rest of Canada. Yet, this hasn't happened in the last 150+ years. What's more, the unique culture in Quebec is being allowed to thrive, thanks to the somewhat model of asymmetrical federalism that the Canadian government tends to adopt, with regards to provincial rights.

150 years ago, Québec was nearly half of the Canadian population. Now, it's 22%. It wasn't "allowed to thrive". Québec had to fight for it. Before 1969, French was forbidden in various institutions in most provinces. The Manitoban official language act was revoked in 1979, almost 100 years later. Ontario forbade French in school in early 1900s like they did in Louisiana. Same thing in New-Brunswick, French was not recognized until 1969. We didn't turn out like Louisiana because we have been a majority much more longer than them.

[Camicon]

1993, federal election. The Bloc Quebecois, a federal party that runs only in Quebec, and represents only Quebec interests, and for whom the separation of Quebec is the focal point of their party platform, receives 1.85 million votes.

1995, Quebec votes 50.58% in a provincial referendum to stay a part of Canada. Roughly 2.31 million people voted to separate.

2011, federal election. The Bloc received 800,000 votes. Popular support dropped from 10% to 6%, country wide.

Eighteen years, and the Bloc has lost about 57% of it's support base. Quebec separatism is, for the most part, dead.

That logic is flawed. Before the end of the 60s in Québec, there were almost no sovereignist movement at all. The PQ were the first one to talk about independence in 130 years. They gained support because the right leader was there at the right time, galvanizing the nationalist sentiment in 10 years or so following the creation of the PQ. While the result of the 1980 referendum was modest, to say the least, the one of 1995 was so close that the federalists can not say: SEE? NO ONE WANTS TO SEPARATE!

Yes, because the massive drop in support of the Bloc, both in the most recent election and since 1995, is completely insignificant. Right.

Actually, it might be more accurate to say that it's hibernating. What is very obvious though, to everyone, is that support for Quebec separatism is dropping, both within and without. The reason? I believe it's because the people pushing for separation are being proven wrong, day after day. The separatism movement uses scare-tactics to convince people that separatism is a good, viable idea (it is neither)

I have yet to see one single argument that can prove the separation to be wrong. The truth is that there is no valid argument except maybe one. Someone who feel more Canadian and love Canada. The thing is that 60% of Québécois feel more Québécois than Canadian. I think the only other place in North America with such "provincial sense of belonging" would be Texas. Now, about the scare-tactics, I suggest you take a look at the tactics employed by the federalists in 1995 to scare the sovereignists, especially the old people. But you know, it's always the same crap served by all the democratic countries in the world who don't want to see one of their province secede. Madrid said the same thing to the Catalonians. You can't survive without us, we'll send the troops (not sure Spain used that argument but Ottawa did), we'll cut off our treaties, etc. In Canada, they even add: We will partition your land, you won't get your retirement pension (even though it's our money), we'll stop trading with you, we won't protect the linguistic rights of the French speaking minority outisde of Québec, separation = nazi Germany reborn, etc. Look, I heard them all.

Well, aside from the fact that it is illegal under Canadian law, and not protected under international law, then there are still a plethora of reasons why Quebec should not separate. One of the most significant is that, if Quebec were to secede, there is the matter of First Nations people who live in Quebec, that would still be Canadian. Would they be forcibly relocated from their homes? Again? In this day and age? Or do they still not count for anything? Just because the Europeans came over here and took want they wanted from the First Nations, doesn't mean Canadians or Quebecois can do it now.

Those so called scare tactics that you claim the feds used aren't so much scare tactics, as they are the simple truth. Just because you don't like it, and just because it frightens some people, doesn't make it a scare tactic. It needs to be blown out of proportion and misrepresented in order to be a scare tactic.

And you're forgetting that Quebec is a financial sinkhole. They receive massive payments through the equalization process. They pay nothing, and receive a helluva lot more than is their fair share. That isn't to say they don't contribute to Canada, because they do, and both of us would be weaker without the other, but by no means does the rest of Canada owe Quebec anything.

They say that the "Quebec way of life" (or some-such) is in danger of being destroyed by the rest of Canada. Yet, this hasn't happened in the last 150+ years. What's more, the unique culture in Quebec is being allowed to thrive, thanks to the somewhat uncommon model of asymmetrical federalism that the Canadian government tends to adopt, with regards to provincial rights.

150 years ago, Québec was nearly half of the Canadian population. Now, it's 22%. It wasn't "allowed to thrive". Québec had to fight for it. Before 1969, French was forbidden in various institutions in most provinces. The Manitoban official language act was revoked in 1979, almost 100 years later. Ontario forbade French in school in early 1900s like they did in Louisiana. Same thing in New-Brunswick, French was not recognized until 1969. We didn't turn out like Louisiana because we have been a majority much more longer than them.

I said it is being allowed to thrive, not that is was being allowed to thrive. Is, not was. Present tense, not past.

Not exactly sure what your point was, in citing the shift in Canadian demographics with regards to Quebec. What, are we supposed to be forcing all French-speaking immigrants into Quebec, to bolster their population? Just a heads up, Quebec has their own set of immigration laws. Nobody is to blame for the fact that they don't account for half the country anymore, but if you were to point the finger at anyone, point it at Quebec for being too choosy as to what kind of immigrant they let into the province.

Or perhaps you could blame the Quebec society for being extraordinarily hostile to anyone that doesn't speak French. Thanks to Bill 101, English was wiped from street signs, from menus, from store windows. Being educated in English was, and still is, extraordinarily difficult to manage. Far more so than being educated in French in a city outside of Quebec. Hell, even Calgary, mistakenly called the "Texas" of Canada, has a couple different elementary, junior and senior high schools for Francophones to attend. And, unlike Quebec, nobody else mandates that ones parents have been educated in French, in order for said parent's children to also receive an education in French.


Simple fact is, despite all the hollering some Quebecers might make, they are Canadian. They are a nation, within the nation-state of Canada. And the asymmetrical federalist approach that the federal government takes towards the provinces in Canada adequately addresses this. Quebec does not benefit by seceding, nor do they have any right to.

[Yanitza]

I'd like South Ossetia, Abkhazia, Northern Cyprus, Transnistria, Somaliland, West Papua, Western Sahara, Wales and Scotland to gain their independence. I also think that South Korea should be annexed by North Korea, Chinese Taipei by China, Kosovo by Serbia, East Jerusalem by Palestine and Northern Ireland by Ireland.

I've dropped my support for Azawad after the secular left-wing nationalist MNLA lost the control over territories against islamist pro-Sharia Ansar Dine.

East Jerusalem is Palestinian, just occupied by Israel like the rest of the territories

[Yanitza]

and yet what Varijnland said about Serbs is exactly what you just said no one does, I mearly pointed out all the crimes that Anglos could be held accountable for so perhaps they should lay of the Serbs?

In any case I find it amusing that someone only says this because of the perceived offence against anglos

So it didn't occur to you that I was defending my country because you two Anglophobes were making false accusations? You think that jumping on the anti-USA/UK bandwagon makes you the moraly correct victim, it doesn't. See, what I said about the Serbs, it was a taste of your own medicine and a perfect example.

Hahaha very funny considering I only got involved when you said he couldn't talk about massacres cuz hes a Serb, I fail to see I i was trying to victimise myself especially considering your little tantrum, yes yes all the world is against the Anglos.... I think you have events confused