Your "left-wing biased BBC" whines are invalid

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 8:24 am

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 51191.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 8:43 am

Ah would that be the Pro-EU march that the police requested was re-arranged due to the incident at Westminster?
One march was cancelled but the other went ahead.

Guich · Post by **Guich** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 9:05 am

I didn't realise the EU Referendum vote was a left wing/right wing choice

ClaretMoffitt · Post by **ClaretMoffitt** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 9:05 am

It's probably because these people have had that many they don't consider it newsworthy anymore.

claretdom · Post by **claretdom** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 9:36 am

** breaking new at turtle towers**

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 10:00 am

Not sure why anyone would think the Pro-EU march was left wing. The traditional Labour heartlands were pretty solid for Brexit - Burnley 66%, for example. I think the march was probably more Blairite-Liberal in tendency, not left wing.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 10:00 am

One thing that unites everybody on twitter is the perception that the BBC is biased against them.

That alone suggests that they are doing a fair and balanced job.

Chobulous · Post by **Chobulous** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 10:03 am

Slow night for Burnley's answer to the esteemed leader of the Tooting Popular Front, Citizen Turtle. Trawling the interweb all night and that's all he can come up with. Hardly what you would call polemic (in his head maybe).

Go to bed Wolfie, and straight to sleep or you'll go blind.

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 10:04 am

http://news-watch.co.uk/category/bbc-bias/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 10:09 am

Listened to bbc 5live this morning.

The topic -"how you feel on the triggering of Article 50 tomorrow "

2 Remoaners and 1 brexiteer. As this ratio neither reflects the referendum result nor is it neutral. It actually breaks the BBC's own guidelines on impartiality and balance. The BBC is a biased establishment propaganda machine . Populated by metropolitan London Borough of ivory towers dwellers.

Champagne socialist central that should have been shut down years ago OR gone to either advertising or subscribsription.

It's a bloated left wing dinosaur, with no justifiable place in the 21st century.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 10:17 am

Some pretty impressive liars posting in this thread already. Nice to see Chobulous back in the game too. It's been a while since he's fantasised publically about what I get upto at night.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 10:38 am

Thing is Ringo, it may be all that, but at least it has to try to be impartial.

As in the example quoted by IT, a march by 100,000 people was below UKIP losing their one and only MP on the BBC website.

On my twitter feed, it was 50/50 between people complaining about one or the other being biased because it wasn't (or was) the main news.

How much more impartial can you get if you completely divide opinion like that?

SammyBoy · Post by **SammyBoy** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 11:56 am

Lancasterclaret wrote:Thing is Ringo, it may be all that, but at least it has to try to be impartial.

As in the example quoted by IT, a march by 100,000 people was below UKIP losing their one and only MP on the BBC website.

On my twitter feed, it was 50/50 between people complaining about one or the other being biased because it wasn't (or was) the main news.

How much more impartial can you get if you completely divide opinion like that?

That's all true, Lancaster but it doesn't fit in with Ringo's preconceived view of things so ya'know - whatever!

KateR · Post by **KateR** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 12:33 pm

its a none news event, load of people marching regarding something that has happened as is not going to change, bit like the idiot north of the border, people didn't vote how I want so let's have another go, and another, and another and so on until you all get it the way I want it.

Nothing to see here, waste of money and to say its news is just wrong, move on please.

Andingle · Post by **Andingle** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 12:43 pm

Left wing bias indeed , i'd prefer Gudmundsson in there

JohnMcGreal · Post by **JohnMcGreal** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 12:48 pm

KateR wrote:people didn't vote how I want so let's have another go, and another, and another and so on until you all get it the way I want it.

Well, yes. That's kind of how our democracy works. When one side loses an election/referendum, they don't just give up and let the other side do whatever they want. They challenge them and oppose them.

It would be exactly the same if the vote was 52-48 the other way.

KateR · Post by **KateR** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 12:58 pm

a referendum is nothing to do with general/by elections. we would be having one every week if we followed your simplistic guidelines, many referendums never even materialize, such as the one on hanging that was promised many moons ago. The same for Scotland's once in a generation vote, with an election people and policy change and that is how it works. If the referendum saw Scotland leave but then the SNP out of favor a couple of years later should it be then that another referendum is called to bring them back in? I think not and just the cost of yo yoing in and out would prohibitive, so no, not like an election at all in my opinion of course.

KateR · Post by **KateR** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 12:59 pm

quick question, does anyone know of where a referendum resulted in a major change and then it was later changed back, I don't so just curious!!

JohnMcGreal · Post by **JohnMcGreal** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 1:08 pm

KateR wrote:a referendum is nothing to do with general/by elections. we would be having one every week if we followed your simplistic guidelines, many referendums never even materialize, such as the one on hanging that was promised many moons ago. The same for Scotland's once in a generation vote, with an election people and policy change and that is how it works. If the referendum saw Scotland leave but then the SNP out of favor a couple of years later should it be then that another referendum is called to bring them back in? I think not and just the cost of yo yoing in and out would prohibitive, so no, not like an election at all in my opinion of course.

The thing is, even though the referendum has happened, we haven't even started the process to leave yet (until tomorrow) and even then, it will be 2 years of 'negotiations' before we actually leave the EU. So until that has happened, there will be strong protest and pressure on the government to change course, because many will feel it still isn't too late to avoid a social and economic catastrophe.

If this pressure leads us to a softer Brexit, where we still have the same access to the single market, where we're still in the customs union and where EU citizens living in the UK still have the same rights as before, then it will have been worth it.

claretdom · Post by **claretdom** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 1:09 pm

"a social and economic catastrophe"

Let it go

JohnMcGreal · Post by **JohnMcGreal** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 1:16 pm

claretdom wrote:"a social and economic catastrophe"

Let it go

No, but thanks for your contribution.

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 1:17 pm

claretdom wrote:"a social and economic catastrophe"

Let it go

They won't do that, not until they get the vote reversed or there is an actual social and economic catastrophe, which means they can be all smug and sit there telling everyone they were right.

claretdom · Post by **claretdom** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 1:20 pm

I am convinced John sits in a chair rocking backwards and forwards saying brexit we are all doomed.

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 1:25 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:Thing is Ringo, it may be all that, but at least it has to try to be impartial.

As in the example quoted by IT, a march by 100,000 people was below UKIP losing their one and only MP on the BBC website.

On my twitter feed, it was 50/50 between people complaining about one or the other being biased because it wasn't (or was) the main news.

How much more impartial can you get if you completely divide opinion like that?

With respect lancs, your twitter feed is probably not a good guide .

This is what news watch found in their 130, 000 word transcripts based research showed with regards to post brexit coverage.

"That there were three times more anti-Brexit speakers than pro-Brexit ones invited by the BBC to participate in the prestigious slot breaks its charter requirements to be impartial."

The bbc is utterly biased when it comes to brexit. When good economic data has come out ( and there's been lots) the bbc can't help say "Despite brexit".... They simply can't help themselves.

In the 21st century it's way past its sell by date. The decision not to extend John Holmes, of the Now Show, on radio 4, cos he was "WHITE AND MALE" sums it up.

The licence fee is not a TV licence. It's a BBC licence. If I buy a washing machine, why should I be forced to pay Persil, for instance, when I could be using a multitude of other washing powders , who I'm not obliged to pay a tax for?

Subscription or advertising. Then they can give up the pretence of neutrality. Advertisers could then choose to support them or otherwise. And I would be free of having to pay 150 quid a year towards leftwing, anglophobic and very often blatant misandry.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 1:25 pm

I like John and agree with him but that imagery is pretty funny.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 1:49 pm

With respect lancs, your twitter feed is probably not a good guide .

And with respect Ringo, I'm on here often enough telling everyone that I make sure I have a mix of opinions of my twitter feed. Its the only way to stop thinking that only your opinion is relevant.

I'm not saying my twitter feed is perfect, far from it, but judging by some of the people I follow, I at least try to get a balanced view. That is not the case with the extremes of the right or the left I find.

Hipper · Post by **Hipper** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 2:14 pm

KateR wrote:quick question, does anyone know of where a referendum resulted in a major change and then it was later changed back, I don't so just curious!!

Apart from the EU referendum you mean!

I think Switzerland would be the place to look.

Sweden too like a referendum. They chose to retain driving on the left side of the road but their government ignored them and changed to the right in 1967.

Quickenthetempo · Post by **Quickenthetempo** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 2:20 pm

The BBC is clearly left wing and doesn't try to hide it.

Anyone notice how left wing and anti Brexit the Burnley Express is?

KateR · Post by **KateR** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 2:23 pm

JohnMcGreal wrote:The thing is, even though the referendum has happened, we haven't even started the process to leave yet (until tomorrow) and even then, it will be 2 years of 'negotiations' before we actually leave the EU. So until that has happened, there will be strong protest and pressure on the government to change course, because many will feel it still isn't too late to avoid a social and economic catastrophe.

If this pressure leads us to a softer Brexit, where we still have the same access to the single market, where we're still in the customs union and where EU citizens living in the UK still have the same rights as before, then it will have been worth it.

So John,
just so I completely understand your view (which many subscribe to) if we have a country wide (UK) and the referendum passes or fails you believe those in the minority should cost the public annoyance, clogging streets, noise, disrupting traffic, etc., and tax payers money, policing etc. so that the actual vote in the first place can be done again? If this is the case then what are your follow on thoughts, still leave win, is it a 2 out of 3 you are looking for or 3 out of 5, please advise. Or should we vote second time to remain and then all the leave people start to demonstrate and force another referendum such that we have one every 2 years say?

We have been leaving since the referendum, end of March for triggering A50 was known then to anyone who listened and thought, ohh we're leaving.
Soft issues have little to nothing to do with you, me or the minority who are banging there drums so annoyingly. Soft issues are for the elected officials to work out and are bargaining chips that one does not throw on the table at the opening gambit, or before as many want.

I 100% agree people with the right credentials should stay, like a grandfathering clause in many mergers/buyouts such that you can get the best deal, I feel at times people like yourself just believe we are going to say yes, thank you sir to everything the EU want. However you need to firmly understand that there will be casualties along the way but the idea is to make the change better for the majority, this is simply a fact of life, get used to it, NO means NO and NO means change, change means you win some and lose some. Trick is to make sure you do not lose to much, which I would be very confident Scotland would do if they elect to leave the UK.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 2:30 pm

Sidney1st wrote:They won't do that, not until they get the vote reversed or there is an actual social and economic catastrophe, which means they can be all smug and sit there telling everyone they were right.

But we'll still be right.

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 2:31 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:But we'll still be right.

If it happens.

If it all goes reasonably well I doubt we will get many people holding their hands up and saying they were wrong about it all, vice versa if it all goes wrong.

We will just have to wait and see.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 2:32 pm

All fair points Kate, but the right to protest is a fundamental part of any democratic society.

And there is no way, absolutely no way on this planet that the likes of Farage et al would have accepted and stopped campaigning if the result had been 52/48 the other way.

And it would be absolutely wrong for me to say that it wasn't their democratic right to do so, it is.

But the fact that they don't show people like me the same consideration sends big, massive, huge warning signals about what kind of UK that they want outside of the EU.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 2:40 pm

Sidney1st wrote:If it happens.

If it all goes reasonably well I doubt we will get many people holding their hands up and saying they were wrong about it all, vice versa if it all goes wrong.

We will just have to wait and see.

Brexiteers can't even accept that the entire Leave campaign was based on complete lies (£350m/week for NHS, single market access, significantly reduced immigration etc) and willful ignorance ("had enough of experts"), but sure, the real problem will be that Remain voters won't admit it if they got things wrong.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 2:43 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:All fair points Kate, but the right to protest is a fundamental part of any democratic society.

And there is no way, absolutely no way on this planet that the likes of Farage et al would have accepted and stopped campaigning if the result had been 52/48 the other way.

And it would be absolutely wrong for me to say that it wasn't their democratic right to do so, it is.

But the fact that they don't show people like me the same consideration sends big, massive, huge warning signals about what kind of UK that they want outside of the EU.

Farage literally said that of it was 52-48 that it "won't be the end of the issue", or words to that effect. But that was before Leave won. Obviously afterwards, being the piece of **** hypocrite that he is he's changed his mind about whether 52-48 should be the end of it or not.

hampsteadclaret · Post by **hampsteadclaret** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 2:58 pm

20...'Let it go'....fat chance.

No chance of that on here with some of them.

- some of them will keep going on this one forever.

The lady above who spoke about the difference between General Elections and Referendums was absolutely correct - they are not the same thing at all.

The day after the Election result all the opposition parties should be doing all they can to have some impact on incoming government policy, and trying to dilute the changes that are going to be made. Depending on the size of the new government's majority they will have greater or lesser success with this. The opposition parties should certainly keep battling away nonetheless, if only to try and influence public opinion for the next Election...which will only be 4/5 years away.

Referendums have a totally different purpose.

The whinging and whining that has taken place since June 23 last year is unseemly, embarrassing and tedious.

The EU for decades has been expensive, inefficient, wasteful [check out the details of the Common Agricultural Policy for example] and corrupt....it has hardly been a raging success.

Everyone must have noticed the debt problems of the P.I.I.G.S in recent years [not to mention our own] which very nearly brought the EU project down.

Germany happily bailed out Greece [no surprises there as Germany has the greatest vested interest in keeping the whole shambolic edifice going].

The Germans have twice tried to take control of Europe and failed...they are trying a different route these days...who do you think largely controls the Greek economy these days...the Greeks or the Germans?

Leaving the EU will present in the medium term and onwards, [maybe not the short term] excellent new trading opportunities for us.

Businesses within the EU will still want to sell us their BMWs, Belgian chocolate, and dairy produce...we will still be welcome on Spanish and Portuguese beaches....London will retain a massive portion of the financial services industry.

We were asked our opinions pre-referendum...we knew what it was essentially about [IN or OUT] and there was months and months of chatter about it so we knew what the main issues were that we were voting on...

BOTH sides lied in the build up..[that tool Osborne and his bullying threatening 'budget that never was and never would have been'] - he is now busy re-inventing himself after his atrocious FAILED 'austerity policy' confusion and disarray.

The UK economy hasn't collapsed in the last nine months [much to the dismay of some] despite comments from the doom-mongers and others who would talk the economy down.

There may be some short term turbulence in the next couple of years, but down the line a while, we will see that the democratic Referendum decision was a sound one for the UK, I believe.

Quickenthetempo · Post by **Quickenthetempo** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 3:03 pm

Groundhog day starring Imploding Turtle. Just re-visit any Brexit thread and read the replies to the last time you wrote that.

Nobody on this messageboard has budged an inch on their stance either way, so reposting it is pointless.

Chobulous · Post by **Chobulous** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 3:05 pm

Just got in from work and saw this little gem.

Imploding Turtle wrote:Some pretty impressive liars posting in this thread already. Nice to see Chobulous back in the game too. It's been a while since he's fantasised publically about what I get upto at night.

Bless him, he (mistakenly) feels wanted.

Wolfie, the only fantasy I have about you is that one day we'll meet face to face so that we can have a frank exchange of views, I'm pretty sure I'll find a way to get my point across in a way that even you will understand.

Hipper · Post by **Hipper** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 3:08 pm

JohnMcGreal wrote:The thing is, even though the referendum has happened, we haven't even started the process to leave yet (until tomorrow) and even then, it will be 2 years of 'negotiations' before we actually leave the EU. So until that has happened, there will be strong protest and pressure on the government to change course, because many will feel it still isn't too late to avoid a social and economic catastrophe.

If this pressure leads us to a softer Brexit, where we still have the same access to the single market, where we're still in the customs union and where EU citizens living in the UK still have the same rights as before, then it will have been worth it.

Even though it will take two years to reach an agreement, and presumably many more to implement it all, if we end up with very little change, what would have been the point? It will definitely not have been worth all the costs and effort which will have been diverted from everyday running of the country.

As I see it, many wanted to leave the EU because of immigration and sovereignty issues.

Frankly I think immigration was a bit of a canard set up by Farage. What concerns us really is population increase which is perceived as uncontrolled immigration but whilst this contributes, birth rate and living longer also do. In fact net immigration increased our population by one million from 2005 to 2017 but the total population went up five million.

Germany had about half the number of immigrants over a similar period but their population went down slightly because of a low birth rate and despite a larger increase in longevity:

http://www.worldometers.info/world-popu ... opulation/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.worldometers.info/world-popu ... opulation/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Increased population means pressure on housing, schools, NHS and care of older people, and we all suffer from this.

This increase in population is surely unsustainable but I don’t think it is caused by our membership of the EU. The world population is increasing at double our rate.

In other words, leaving the EU will not greatly affect the population issue. And I can’t see anyone wanting to tackle the issue properly.

On sovereignty, it’s true the EU issues edicts on subjects like the environment but I have no issue with that as on the whole these measures seem sound. Indeed on the environment I can’t help thinking we’d be better off in the EU.

I voted to remain but accept we are leaving. I hope our negotiators get a deal which satisfies everyone - ha ha!!!

hampsteadclaret · Post by **hampsteadclaret** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 3:09 pm

37..That sadly, sounds very much like a threat to me.

Can the moderators on here please do something about those who behave in this way..?

- as someone said the other day, the content on this forum is deteriorating.

Mattster · Post by **Mattster** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 3:13 pm

Bleurgh. As with the majority of political issues the people at both ends are pr***s and it's the people in the middle that have suffer through the arguements.

No matter which way it went there were going to be successes and failures and if we could experience a sliding doors-esque experience I think very little difference would be seen in the long term outcome.

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 3:14 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:Brexiteers can't even accept that the entire Leave campaign was based on complete lies (£350m/week for NHS, single market access, significantly reduced immigration etc) and willful ignorance ("had enough of experts"), but sure, the real problem will be that Remain voters won't admit it if they got things wrong.

Lies/humourous claims on both sides, from the NHS rubbish to the financial collapse/emergency budget that was predicted.

JohnMcGreal · Post by **JohnMcGreal** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 3:22 pm

claretdom wrote:I am convinced John sits in a chair rocking backwards and forwards saying brexit we are all doomed.

So you've seen me on the Turf, then?

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 3:24 pm

Quickenthetempo wrote:Groundhog day starring Imploding Turtle. Just re-visit any Brexit thread and read the replies to the last time you wrote that.

Nobody on this messageboard has budged an inch on their stance either way, so reposting it is pointless.

So?

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 3:28 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:And with respect Ringo, I'm on here often enough telling everyone that I make sure I have a mix of opinions of my twitter feed. Its the only way to stop thinking that only your opinion is relevant.

I'm not saying my twitter feed is perfect, far from it, but judging by some of the people I follow, I at least try to get a balanced view. That is not the case with the extremes of the right or the left I find.

OK. Fair enough

Chobulous · Post by **Chobulous** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 3:28 pm

hampsteadclaret wrote:37..That sadly, sounds very much like a threat to me.

Can the moderators on here please do something about those who behave in this way..?

- as someone said the other day, the content on this forum is deteriorating.

Not a threat at all. I know I can argue with Wolfie more convincingly when I can see that whites of his eyes. That way he can't spend all night trawling the internet, he can't throw out sarcasm and bile from behind his keyboard and he wouldn't use his usual last line of defence, personal abuse. Not if he had any sense. He would have to think on his feet, instead of on his backside in the comfort of his gaming chair.

hampsteadclaret · Post by **hampsteadclaret** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 3:38 pm

I got it wrong Chobulous didn't I?

- though parts of your second statement, sound similarly threatening..

It must be me, that's losing it.

JohnMcGreal · Post by **JohnMcGreal** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 3:38 pm

In response to KateR (#29), If you re-read my post (#19) you'll see that I didn't say anything about stopping Brexit from happening, and I didn't say anything about a second referendum.

I don't agree with Brexit, but that is what the majority of people voted for, so I have accepted that we will leave the European Union as a result of that vote.

But the way in which we leave is far from certain. There is no way that anybody can say that a vote to leave meant X Y or Z. A vote to leave meant just that. A vote to leave the EU. Which we are doing.

As far as I and many others are concerned, the way in which we do that is still very much up for debate. If you want to shut down that debate and stop people from protesting, then that's quite a troubling view.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 3:53 pm

Chobulous wrote:Just got in from work and saw this little gem.

Bless him, he (mistakenly) feels wanted.

Wolfie, the only fantasy I have about you is that one day we'll meet face to face so that we can have a frank exchange of views, I'm pretty sure I'll find a way to get my point across in a way that even you will understand.

Classic Chobulous.

hampsteadclaret · Post by **hampsteadclaret** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 4:09 pm

Yes JM I get what you are saying there..

You say though.. 'I have accepted that we will leave the European Union as a result of that vote..'

What if though...the weight of powerful opinion, the support of some press and television, some other media, some politicians, the Governor of the Bank of England..and so on all conspire over the next 18-24 months so that we get, in the end, a very SOFT Brexit...such that say three quarters of what we have now, we retain after leaving the EU...everything gets seriously watered down.

- such that,...we will have left the EU, but little will have changed.

In that scenario, the 52% majority will not have got what they have voted for, it will be another nail in the coffin of democracy [have you seen the voter turnout in some local elections, some bye-elections, some General Election constituencies..?] and referendums [which if used sparingly can be very useful] will get a poor reputation and then hardly ever used.

I think that, with respect, you and nils_d and others on here, since the day after the referendum result have wanted such an outcome as I have described.

IE. that we leave the EU, but we don't really leave it....very little changes if we have a very watered down Brexit.

- that though is CLEARLY NOT WHAT THE MAJORITY VOTED FOR.

Change has to occur.

The rich, the powerful, the liberal elites [and others] got a bloody nose on Referendum Day....and they really didn't like it....and they have been whinging ever since, and attempting to thwart what was a fair voting result.

One person one vote, on a single issue, really made a difference.

Have you any idea what damage will have been done to our democratic [sic] processes, if the Referendum result is effectively ignored/ overturned?

Damo · Post by **Damo** » Tue Mar 28, 2017 4:14 pm

While we are on the subject of the left. Which one of you lot did this?
I'm not having the 'black bloc anarchists' excuse either charlie

: IMG_20170328_161136.jpg (454.97 KiB) Viewed 4070 times