The Quietus - A new rock music and pop culture website

Black Sky Thinking

We Are All Norwegians - How Norway’s Bravery Is An Example To Us All
Wyndham Wallace , July 25th, 2011 07:11

A frequent visitor to Norway, Wyndham Wallace responds to recent events in the nation’s capital, where, even in its grief for its dead, the country has shown the rest of the world how to live…

Add your comment »

For the last three weeks, I’ve been living on the remote island of Husøy, which lies directly on the Arctic Circle in Northern Norway. This is the site of the Træna Festival, with which I have had the privilege of working since early 2009, having first attended as a writer in 2008 on behalf of The Guardian. It’s a remarkable place, an archipelago of around a thousand islands of which only four are inhabited, full of a stark, windswept beauty, its festival staffed largely by volunteers from the Træna Kommune. This year I stayed behind afterwards in order to write, trying to articulate what it is about the place that makes me compelled to return here, year after year, even - earlier this March - during a brutal winter. As with many of Norway’s smaller communities, its doors are unlocked, its cars are parked with their keys still in the ignition, and its residents say hello to one another on its streets. It’s not entirely different to the little England of yore (whatever ‘yore’ is) that the likes of The Daily Mail wistfully recall, except that this is the 21st Century. Træna has its problems, of course, as my extended visits to the island have confirmed, and as only a blind idealist would deny. But it is a homely, warm community that has always made me feel like I am part of it, even though I circulate amongst only a very small number of its inhabitants, fail to speak their language, and have never stayed more than a month. Every time I leave, however, I try to take with me a sense of what makes it so special and implement that in my own life.

I had just returned from a walk to the island’s only store last Friday afternoon when the news of Anders Behring Breivik’s appalling acts of savagery in Oslo and Utøya started to break. I saw it first on Facebook: over the years I have made friends with a great number of people in the Norwegian capital, as well as elsewhere in the country, and it was Claes Olsen, the boss of the Øya Festival, who first alerted me to the fact that something was up when he posted an update about a huge bang that had shaken his office. In the hours that followed, I watched as a stream of baffled comments transformed into a torrent of concern, fear, and ultimately outrage at what had happened in the city centre, followed by a desperate confusion as word of the shootings on the island of Utøya started to spread. The country felt under siege from an unknown enemy, and it was a feeling that I shared. Having grown up in a military family, and having lived in London for ten years, I know what it’s like to live with the spectre of terrorism, but I, like every Norwegian, had never expected to experience its horror here.

Soon people began changing their profile pictures, adopting in many cases the Norwegian flag, in others an ‘I ♥ Oslo’ logo. As my news feed swiftly transformed into a riot of red, white and indigo crosses, I, too, changed mine to a photograph I had taken of a flag flapping in the breeze at the stern of the boat on which I had buzzed back from the next door island of Sanna during the festival two weeks earlier. Initial reports hypothesised casually that the bombing was the action of an Islamic Fundamentalist organisation - it took The Guardian only two hours to publish an article under the headline ‘Suspicion falls on Islamist Militants’ – and this was seemingly confirmed when a group called the Helpers of Global Jihad claimed responsibility. But, even after it began to become clear that the vile actions had in fact been carried out by one of the country’s own, an extreme Nationalist Norwegian with former ties to the increasingly powerful but perfectly legitimate right wing party, the Fremskrittspartiet (Progress Party), the flag continued to fly on Facebook.

It was only later that evening, when another friend, the comedian and TV / Radio presenter Espen Thoresen, questioned the proliferation of the flag in such circumstances, that I started to think about the significance of its use. “A Norwegian has used today to become one of Norwegian history’s greatest mass murderers,” he wrote. “And on Facebook it’s flagged like it’s 17th May. Hooray?” May 17th is Norwegian Constitution Day, a national holiday celebrating the country’s adoption of its constitution in 1814, and he had a point of sorts: Breivik had, in a sense, hijacked the Norwegian flag, using his nationalist views as the justification for his terrorist acts. (Make no mistake, this was the conduct of a terrorist, however often the word ‘extremist’ has replaced that description since the culprit’s identity became known.) I remembered how uncomfortable I had started to become, the older I got, at the sight of the Union Jack after it was hijacked during my youth by the National Front, and I wondered whether there were parallels to be drawn. That debate has continued in Norway as Breivik’s motives become clearer: is it right for people to gather under a symbol that the culprit himself must have embraced? I have often commented to friends in the past that I believe patriotism and religion are the two forces that have been used to justify more mindless acts of violence throughout history than any other, and distancing oneself from Breivik’s actions by rejecting the flag which he claimed to be defending might have been a legitimate response. Yet I, and many of my friends, still continue to fly the flag on our profiles without shame or discomfort.

There’s a reason for this, and it lies at the heart of what makes these events so tragic. Norway is, without a doubt, the most open, friendly and civilised nation I’ve ever visited. Though there are problems within its communities, particularly in the light of growing immigration and the complications that inevitably brings - something underlined by the support that grows for the aforementioned conservative Progress Party - the Norwegian flag has not, as yet, been successfully commandeered by the country’s far right. It instead stands for the mainstream social values of the country, and Norwegian Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg’s speech late on Friday night summarised these in a breathtaking fashion: "The answer to violence is even more democracy, even more humanity."

I’m not the first to compare his reaction with George W. Bush’s comments a few months after the 9/11 attacks on New York, in which he declared, “Those who struck America think they can run and hide... I find it amazing that the al Qaeda leaders are more than willing to convince some of their brethren to commit suicide. Yet they themselves hide in caves. And that's why this phase of the war is dangerous, because we're going to hunt them down. They think they can hide, but this patient nation will do whatever it takes to bring them to justice.” It is important to note that Bush was speaking four months after the attacks, and that his initial speech on September 11th was considerably less inflammatory. But by January 2002, Bush was speaking in terms painfully reminiscent of vigilante justice. Rather than look into his heart to see whether his country’s policies might have influenced events in a negative fashion, Bush took a position of moral superiority and waged war against those who felt at odds with what America has come to represent. Arguably, the shooting of Osama Bin Laden earlier this year might be said to reflect the fact that nothing has changed in the decade since.

But Stoltenberg, within mere hours, was looking inwards, advocating a response that allowed those whose voices are in the minority to be better heard, speaking a language that promoted greater understanding between those with opposing views and which sought to include, rather than exclude, them. “Tomorrow,” he announced, “we will show the world that Norway's democracy grows stronger when it is challenged.” Two days later, during the memorial service, he repeated his conviction with the words, “Our reply is: more democracy, more openness, and more humanity”. His words were echoed by Oslo’s mayor, Fabian Stang, who said, “I don't think security can solve problems. We need to teach greater respect,” and the country’s King underlined their noble response even further: “I keep the faith that freedom is stronger than fear.”

As Stoltenberg was preparing his first speech, a picture began to circulate across Facebook showing a man of Middle Eastern appearance cradling in his arms an injured woman of most likely Asian origin on Oslo’s streets that afternoon. Most of the time it was posted without further comment. None was needed. I accept that many of my friends on Facebook are liberals, and that elsewhere rhetoric of an entirely different nature may have been expressed. But the picture seemed to sum up Breivik’s hideous failure to understand what has made his nation so great. It expressed why Norway still has the right to fly its flag with pride: it is a nation largely blessed with compassion for others, regardless of their race, creed or belief. In contrast, Britain’s Union Jack, and England’s St George’s flag, whether we like it or not, have become symbols of imperialism, right wing extremism and – thanks to Britpop – loutish hooliganism even in music. (It’s additionally worth noting that the St George’s Cross was a symbol adopted by the Knights Templar, also the name of the “international Christian military order” to which Breivik has claimed to belong.) So the anxiety expressed by Espen Thoresen at the spread of his nation’s flag was worth voicing, but it was unnecessary. Norway’s flag has not been appropriated for dubious political ends. It is simply a statement of national unity rather than anything more sinister. Or, as one of the islanders here pointed out, those waving the flag on 17th May are not only Norway’s white, Nordic residents.

When people ask where I’m from, I realise I am embarrassed – not ashamed, I hasten to add, but embarrassed – to say that I’m English. It’s a terrible admission, but it’s true. I’m proud of the land, of my family and friends, and to be a product of a country that has given so much to the world. But I cannot be proud of the antiquated values it continues to cling to or the divisionist policies it espouses. Like most countries of significant power, it has failed to recognise that today’s world, like the internet, is not a community of nations. It is instead a community of beliefs, in which borders are little more than figments of our imagination. There will be seven billion people on this planet by October this year, 5.4 billion more than a century ago, according to statistics from the UN Population Division, and huge numbers of them are drifting well beyond the frontiers of their homeland. The old order, in which a nation’s identity is defined by the nature of its historical inhabitants, is no longer relevant. The passports we hold are simply the result of an accident of geography.

What matters now are the ideologies and principles we share, and how they are integrated into this community. In the days that have followed Norway’s darkest hours since the Second World War, the country has shown us a way forward. Informal polls on Facebook have rejected calls for the reinstatement of the death penalty for the likes of Breivik. From what I have seen, any initial kneejerk reaction to the atrocities pointing a finger at Islamic fundamentalists has been replaced by a recognition that evil exists within all forms of extremist belief, whether they are alien to the culture in which we have grown up or not. While the country grieves for those who have died or been injured, it has sought to understand how this could happen, and how to prevent it from taking place again, but by trying to build bridges between those with contrasting outlooks rather than extending their divisions.

The community spirit that I have seen exhibited on the island upon which I write this – an island full of typical social conflict, just as exists anywhere where people have the freedom to think for themselves – is perhaps less special than I initially thought. It is indicative of a mentality that flourishes throughout this whole country, one to which I have travelled repeatedly the last half dozen years. It is of course much easier for smaller societies to live peacefully with one another, especially one so sparsely populated, and this country’s entire population of 4.9 million is not much more than half of Greater London’s alone. Furthermore, it is not perfect here by any means: one only has to emerge from the capital’s central train station, where addicts hustle for spare change or lie slumped on the steps with needles hanging from their legs, to see that. Its treatment of the indigenous Sámi people until recently was also deeply troubling. In addition, the policies of the Progress Party are eliciting a worrying response that seeks to exclude those who are ‘other’, a policy pursued by the more radical elements of right wing parties worldwide. But the empathy for others, something still enshrined in the nation’s mentality, gives Norway the right to fly its flag without any sense of shameful, nationalist associations. To be Norwegian is a state of mind rather than a state of origin. Its compassion, its ability to embrace diversity and its belief in a sense of fellowship are not only admirable: they are enviable.

As the world continues to come to terms with the events of the last few days, it has an opportunity to learn from what has happened here. There is nothing to be gained by anyone seeking to see themselves as anything except members of a global village, as cliché as that sounds. Norway’s catastrophe is our catastrophe too. We must recognise that we share a planet populated by citizens with a variety of beliefs and values. But whatever those are, the vast majority of us share one common goal: to live side by side, despite increasingly less space to do so, without conflict or intolerance. So rather than change Norway, as many have suggested Breivik might have done by destroying the country’s innocence, these events should instead help change the world, and give us all the motivation to aspire to the values, freedoms and civilised mentality that he so callously exploited.

In the wake of Friday’s attacks, lines by Norwegian poet Nordahl Grieg, from his poem ‘May 17th 1940’, were widely circulated across Facebook: "We are so few in this country - every fallen is a friend or brother". We now number more than ever before on this planet, but we are all, in a sense, Norwegian, whatever the circumstances of our birth dictate for the purposes of paperwork. Each one of those who fell is a friend or brother to us all. The time has come to recognise that no nation has the right to consider itself better than any other. This isn’t a competition.

But if any nation currently has the right to see its values reflected elsewhere, it is Norway. The country’s dignity, humility and restraint have reminded us what it means to be alive. It has refused to be cowed by terrorism, and their politicians and royal family have continued to move freely amidst the public, quite literally embracing them in the streets. In the country’s reaction to this tragedy, those (as I write) 93 innocent victims have brought us all closer together, and we owe it to them that they continue to do so. So let us all now unite, symbolically at least, under Norway’s Nordic Cross.

Ugeine
Jul 25, 2011 12:08pm

That was a fantastic article, thanks.

Reply to this Admin


Jul 25, 2011 12:32pm

Really nice article, it all makes a lot of sense especially if you've been to Norway before. I've visited Norway twice before, and although I haven't spent anywhere near enough time there to make judgements about the country or society as a whole, the place did have an immediate impact on me unlike anywhere else I've ever been. I visited small towns in the north and they're understandably very different to London, but even Oslo seems alien compared to the capital city here. Anyway, thanks for a great article.

Reply to this Admin

Kate Pendry
Jul 25, 2011 1:48pm

A wonderful article. Sometimes you don't know what you needed to hear until you hear it. Thank you so very very much <3>

Reply to this Admin

Tom
Jul 25, 2011 9:08pm

Thank you for posting this.
It is a beautiful essay, pertinent and true to life and particularly encouraging in the face of such a horrific occurrance.
Very positive thoughts to you all in Norway; Bless you and be strong.

Reply to this Admin

Dan
Jul 25, 2011 9:32pm

Excellent article, but something somewhat minor to keep in mind. Bush was responding to an external threat, not an internal one. A better parallel would be Clinton's response to the Oklahoma Bombings. Regardless, I'm glad this article was written.

Reply to this Admin

A girl from Oslo
Jul 26, 2011 7:54am

Thank you for a great and well written article. You write as if you were a Norwegian yourself <3>

Reply to this Admin


Jul 26, 2011 10:08am

Thank You for your amazing article. Very good! This is what I wrote: Why don't we take nationalism away from the nationalists? I am Dutch and have lived in Norway for more than 30 years. Just now I feel incredibely proud of and deeply moved by being part of this society. So much dignity, compassion, humanity! It too became clear, how attached I am to this country and its culture, even if an important part always will stay Dutch. Thank you. All of you Norwegians/ Non-Norwegians, of every size,ethnicity, gender, colour, sexual orientation, political conviction I might, or might not share, who live in this our Norway. Let us take away nationalism from the nationalists.Trondheim, July 26th 2011. Coby Omvlee

Reply to this Admin

Christian Stranger-Johannessen
Jul 26, 2011 10:29am

This is a very well written article, which shows a great amount of insight. I am proud to read what you write, and I do hope that we as a people will continue to show as much solidarity and care as we have shown during the last few days. As evil and sad the killings on Friday were, it has in some way brought out the best in us. I also appreciate the thoughts sent to us by the entire world.
Christian, Norway

Reply to this Admin

Peter
Jul 26, 2011 11:39am

In reply to Dan:

Wonderful article.

@Dan: As was Stoltenberg. At the time of the speech you see in the video, everybody was under the assumption that it was a foreign threat, ie. al-qaeda.

The last few days have made me proud to be a Norwegian, not to mention proud of our prime minister. People have responded to this tragedy with love, and there are now even massive support groups on facebook for the lawyer who has chosen to defend the killer in court.

Reply to this Admin

Bobby S. Ocks
Jul 26, 2011 4:49pm

Great article. Thank you!

Reply to this Admin

Rich Dooley
Jul 26, 2011 4:49pm

Beautifully written article, and so full of truth. We really could learn a lot from these people, seemingly the only people on the planet who realise that unity is strength.

Reply to this Admin

Ingrid Vaalund
Jul 27, 2011 10:16am

Thank you. There are so many words in my head that I can't sort out which to write down, so for now there is only "thank you".

Reply to this Admin

Lars
Jul 28, 2011 3:53pm

Thank you so much for sharing that with us. I lost loved one's on Friday, and every tiny bit helps :)

Reply to this Admin

Kartina
Jul 29, 2011 5:37pm

This is wonderful article. I have never been to Norway but I have met many people from their and have loved the people. It is so sad that the greatest threat is not from external terrorist but the internal terrorists. They tend to be the quite, under the radar, and unnoticed that are the most dangerous because more times than not it is a person at work or at home who people think would never do such a thing.

My thoughts and prayers go out to them. Is there any way that people from abroad can provide support?

Reply to this Admin

Oh, even in a liberal society I know when it's stupid to print your name
Jul 29, 2011 10:36pm

I understand why you have written this piece and, importantly, the motivation and the spirit which it articulates. But, you, and anyone else who reads this reply, must accept that my compassion for the killed is not diminished in any way by what I am about to say: your comments are wrong, misguided and will, inevitably, lead not only to more violence but also the destruction of what you so passionately defend – liberalism. Everything you write subtly (actually not subtly at all but you’re too intelligent to attack virulently because that’s what ‘they’ do) denies the right of people in a free society to disagree with the values you hold dear. To be anti-immigration or anti-‘diversity’ is to be a fascist, a racist, an imperialist. In spite of the constable blather there is no ‘debate’ about issues like mass migration in so-called liberal western societies – one is either whole-heartedly for it or else, self-evidently, a rampant racist.

So: “an extreme Nationalist Norwegian with former ties to the increasingly powerful but perfectly legitimate right wing party, the Fremskrittspartiet (Progress Party)”

Powerful but legitimate. What would be powerful and legitimate? Is it regrettable that people might express their views on thing like immigration by voting for parties such as the Progress Party but commendable that they would vote for a soft-Left party? And who decides on whether it is regrettable or commendable ? (That’s a rhetorical question).

“I have often commented to friends in the past that I believe patriotism and religion are the two forces that have been used to justify more mindless acts of violence throughout history than any other,”

Stalinist Russia anyone? Maoist China anyone? Khmerist Cambodia anyone?

“It expressed why Norway still has the right to fly its flag with pride: it is a nation largely blessed with compassion for others, regardless of their race, creed or belief.”

And then:

“It is of course much easier for smaller societies to live peacefully with one another, especially one so sparsely populated, and this country’s entire population of 4.9 million is not much more than half of Greater London’s alone.”

That is the point. Norway can afford to be all of those things precisely because it is homogenous. What will happen when Norway ceases to be ‘Norwegian’, when demands are made that conflict with what ‘Norwegians’ (a state of mind, remember, not an ethnicity), believe constitute a nice, diverse, tolerant, liberal society? How can you say ‘This far and no further’ in a liberal society? Liberalism is predicated on the fact that you can live as you wish within the confines of the law but societies are not defined by law but by recognition of similarity. And once this disappears, or changes, then you have a different society. And what liberals consistently fail to realise because, in my opinion, they are generally so arrogant that they are utterly incapable of imagining how another person might actually think (ironic, huh, for a liberal?) is that WE ARE NOT ALL THE SAME! Which is both weird and infuriating because liberals spout on about difference sooooo much when what they really want is lots of nice black, brown, yellow and other variously shaded people to think exactly the same way they do.

So if you can accept that what I am saying is not inconsistent with despair and compassion for the loss of life I cannot agree with your analysis. In fact I believe that Western Europe may well lose the liberalism it so values because its arrogance blinds it to the very real and very substantial difference that mass immigration brings to the continent. For this reason I believe that we will see more violence of the sort we have seen so heart-breakingly in Norway.

Reply to this Admin

Arne Berg
Aug 2, 2011 10:46am

There are several myths in the reponse from "Oh, even in a liberal society I know when it's stupid to print your name" which I'd like to point out. First of all the myth that Norway in any way should be a more homogenous society than f.i. England. That is not true. First of all: We've had a large indigenous minority since forever (as he would find Wyndham Wallace pointing out in the article, if he cared to read it properly). Second: We have 600 000 immigrants in Norway at the time being, according to an article in our largest newspaper this week, roughly 13% of our population. Maybe less than England, but still not an unusual number in Europe.
Then there is the often repeated myth that the anti-immigration viewpoint in this debate is denied space. This is nonsense. In any big newspaper today, the anti-immigrations side is well represented, especially in the tabloids of countries like Denmark and England, but even in the debate page of Norway’s serious Aftenposten (where they repeat the same myth over and over again – on print (sic!).
His problem is that we, the people he characterize as “generally so arrogant that they are utterly incapable of imagining how another person might actually think”, have the right to speak of him the same way, but we restrain, because we actually believes that openness, democracy and humanism is the civilized answer to the fascist killings of Breivik.
To blame openness, democracy and humanism for the growth of his ideas (and the movement of those who support them) is utterly stupid. But that’s my opinion. You have yours. And here is my name.
Arne Berg, Oslo

Reply to this Admin

Fabian
Aug 13, 2011 9:33am

A lot of the obviously wrong "facts" of mr. anonymous have been pointed out, thank you, but I was mainly struck by a sentence I always sort of sensed in all that me-nation blabla but never read it that blatantly uttered and that is this one:

"Societies are not defined by law but by recognition of similarity."

This is, I'm sorry, utter bullshit. A society is usually defined as a large group of people that live in the same territory and are "subject to the same political authority and dominant cultural expectations." (quoted from wikipedia) "subject to dominant cultural expectations" doesn't even point to a "dominant culture", but simply means that the majority more or less has comparable manners - that is: living in houses, going to work to earn a living, going to the cinema, whatever - even if you'd try to define a dominant culture in terms of common conservative beliefs this would not include any kind of recognisable similarity. Phenomenological similarity is the basis of nationalsocialist concepts from the first half of the last century and explicitly the German nazi-racism and antisemitism is where that one comes from.
From a historical point of view all European nation states, which define todays European societies, were built not along borders of whatever pseudo ethnic settlings (which never were distinct enough to serve as boundaries for the kind of nation mr anonymous is dreaming of anyway), but due to geographical coincidences which were reflected in the particular expansions of those kingdoms that were transformed into nation states at the end of the 18th/ beginning of the 19th century.

And a simple trip to any place but home in nowadays - let's say Germany - illustrates my point: no recognition of similarity whatsoever. It's easier for me to get along in Bangkok or Bejing than in the Bavarian countryside or even in the backwards bigcity of Nuremberg (I'm a Berliner, I'm a Prussian). The borders of Mr. Anons national state are contingent and attributing visible norwegianism to everyone who's been living within them in the past 100 years is absurd. And as for liberalism: there's plenty of totalitarian systems allover the world. Why doesn't he try to live in Iran for a while? If society is only about recognition of similarity, he shouldn't have bigger problems to chime in the antiliberal choir, once he's got a tan.

But one more in favour of Mr. Wallace's article: There's no anti-nationalist more convinced than me on this planet, still I agree that he's right when he says, that gathering under the Norwegian flag in the name of democracy and liberalism was a good thing to do as a reaction to the terrorist attac Norway experienced. And I believe that what mr "even in a liberal society I know when it's stupid to print your name" meant is simply to express his opinion, that Breiwick was justified in killing those kids, because he is speaking up for all those oppressed poor xenophobes which can't express how much in danger we are, as our society desintigrates due to the lack of recognition of similarity. I can only say: this is not a matter of opinion. People who feel that Breiwick was just should visit a psychiatrist. Honestly. Your insurance pays for it and you can get rid of a lot of bullshit instead of threatening foreign looking people in the tram for instance. You people misunderstand the propaganda your governments pour over you in order to get your approval to throw even more money at 'security' instead of developing the local neighbourhoods and give minorities a chance to participate.

Btw. "recognition of similarity" can be helpful though in general - during hooligan fights on the terraces or if you parked your car on one of those huge parking lots behind a mall and don't remember where.

Reply to this Admin

John Paul
Nov 17, 2011 6:07am

I really appreciate your efforts. Thanks for sharing such a great post.
Must University

Reply to this Admin

Kate Pendry
May 31, 2012 2:33pm

on the other hand to ensure that a new round of rural land circulation, and commercialization of rural industry in the implementation of justice and fairness http://www.louboutinukfashion.com/

Reply to this Admin

moonmasr
Oct 9, 2012 6:32pm

شات الاسكندرية


شات اسوان 


شات اسيوط


شات البحيرة


 شات بنى سويف


شات القاهرة


شات دمياط


دردشه الفيوم


دردشه الاسماعيلية


دردشه كفر الشيخ


شات مطروح


شات المنيا


دردشه المنوفية


شات الوادى الجديد


شات العريش


شات حلمك


شات فتكات


شات بورسعيد


شات بنها


شات قنا


شات الغردقة 


شات الشرقية


شات الزقازيق


شات سوهاج


شات سيناء


شات السويس 


شات الاقصر


شات حلوان


شات قنا 


شات المنصورة


شات 6 اكتوبر


شات الجيزة


شات طنطا 


شات السعودية


شات الكويت 


شات البحرين


شات قطر


شات الامارات


شات عمان


شات اليمن


شات العراق 


شات الاردن 


شات فلسطين 


شات لبنان 


شات سوريا 


شات مصر


شات تونس


شات المغرب


شات لبيا


شات الجزائر


شات السودان


شات موريتانيا


شات جيبوتى


شات الصومال


شات جزر القمر


شات شباب


دردشة شباب


شات شباب مصر


دردشة شباب مصر


شات بنات مصر


دردشة بنات مصر


شات بنات


دردشة بنات


شات مصر


شات مصرى


دردشة مصرية


دردشة مصر


شات بنت مصر


شات المصريين


شات مصر


دردشة مصر


شات مصرى


شات مصري


دردشة مصرية


شات مصرية


شات المصرى


دردشة بنات مصر


دردشة الجيزة


شات اسيوط


دردشة اسيوط

شات العريش

دردشة العريش


شات سيناء


دردشة سيناء


شات القاهرة


دردشة القاهرة


شات البحيرة


دردشة البحيرة


شات حلوان


دردشة حلوان


شات المنصورة


دردشة المنصورة


شات 6 اكتوبر


دردشة 6 اكتوبر


شات الاقصر


دردشة الاقصر


شات طنطا


دردشة طنطا


شات بورسعيد


دردشة بورسعيد


شات السويس


دردشة السويس


شات اليكس


شات اسكندرية


شات الاسكندرية


دردشة اسكندرية


شات الاسماعيلية


دردشة الاسماعيلية


شات قنا


دردشة قنا


شات بنها


دردشة بنها


شات المنوفية


دردشة المنوفية


شات الغربية


دردشة الغربية


شات الغردقة


دردشة الغردقة


شات اسوان


دردشة اسوان


شات الفيوم


دردشة الفيوم


شات الدقهلية


دردشة الدقهلية


شات المنيا


دردشة المنيا


شات دمياط


دردشة دمياط


شات سوهاج


دردشة سوهاج


شات مطروح


دردشة مطروح


شات بنى سويف


دردشة بنى سويف


شات الزقازيق


دردشة الزقازيق


شات كفر الشيخ


دردشة كفر الشيخ


شات الوادى الجديد


دردشة الوادى الجديد


شات الشرقية


شات بنات مصر

Reply to this Admin