CPAC: Milo disinvited, quits Breitbart
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 04:17:24 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  U.S. General Discussion (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, Chancellor Tanterterg)
  CPAC: Milo disinvited, quits Breitbart
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12
Author Topic: CPAC: Milo disinvited, quits Breitbart  (Read 26069 times)
EnglishPete
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,605


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #225 on: February 22, 2017, 05:05:55 PM »

What would you consider to be an appropriate source?
Because everyone outside of the manosphere (and a lot of manospherians) know that Roosh was 100% serious
The references to him being accused of being a 'rape denier' that I've seen seem to center around the "How to stop rape" article. Reading that article its pretty clear that it was satirical. I'm not familiar with his writings on his whole PUA thing, that's never been something I've been into. If you've got evidence of him being a rape apologist/rapist I'll look at it.

An appropriate source would not be a newspaper. Verifiable primary sources would be appropriate sources if you can provide links.

I will, genuinely, devote time to finding screen grabs through web archive (as he tends to delete everything) this weekend.
Might be easier for you if you are able to link to an article by someone else who has already done that (I presume this would have already been done).

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.
No, but I'll then be able to review what was actually said
Logged
afleitch
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,835


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #226 on: February 22, 2017, 05:08:29 PM »
« Edited: February 22, 2017, 05:14:14 PM by afleitch »

What would you consider to be an appropriate source?
Because everyone outside of the manosphere (and a lot of manospherians) know that Roosh was 100% serious
The references to him being accused of being a 'rape denier' that I've seen seem to center around the "How to stop rape" article. Reading that article its pretty clear that it was satirical. I'm not familiar with his writings on his whole PUA thing, that's never been something I've been into. If you've got evidence of him being a rape apologist/rapist I'll look at it.

An appropriate source would not be a newspaper. Verifiable primary sources would be appropriate sources if you can provide links.

I will, genuinely, devote time to finding screen grabs through web archive (as he tends to delete everything) this weekend.
Might be easier for you if you are able to link to an article by someone else who has already done that (I presume this would have already been done).

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.
No, but I'll then be able to review what was actually said

The reason I ask is because as part of the mod team, as non plussed as I am these days, I need to know whether you actually are sticking your head out in support of paedophilia/rape apologists.

Edit: Any source I posted, would not be to your taste. But any anti 'Male Rights' blog will do. Like this one: http://www.wehuntedthemammoth.com/?s=roosh
Logged
EnglishPete
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,605


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #227 on: February 22, 2017, 05:13:23 PM »

The reason I ask is because as part of the mod team, as non plussed as I am these days, I need to know whether you actually are sticking your head out in support of paedophilia/rape apologists.
No, obviously not. Since you are part of the mod team and just for the record I do not condone or support paedophilia/rape apologism.
Logged
KingSweden
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,227
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #228 on: February 22, 2017, 05:40:12 PM »

Wow Pete is actually indirectly negatively attacking a group that publicized the videos. As if they did a bad thing instead of a public service. I see there's no low for the alt white nationalist right. Even pedophilia.

     We can laugh at the absurdity of how this came to light while also recognizing that what Milo said was legit messed up.

The Reagan Battalion is a conservative group who used the power of Google to bring down a pedophilia apologist. Good for then I say.

They're (obviously) to my right but I have respect for the solid folks at Reagan Battalion
Logged
ApatheticAustrian
ApathicAustrian
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,603
Austria


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #229 on: February 22, 2017, 05:41:15 PM »

they are of the egg mcmullin wing, even if they are separate from his campaign.

the kind of guys i thought would revolt against trump...my mistake.
Logged
15 Down, 35 To Go
ExtremeRepublican
Moderators
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,662


Political Matrix
E: 7.35, S: 5.57


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #230 on: February 22, 2017, 07:36:44 PM »

Is this thread going to actually be about CPAC, or should I start a new one to actually discuss something other than Milo?
Logged
afleitch
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,835


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #231 on: February 22, 2017, 07:49:01 PM »

Is this thread going to actually be about CPAC, or should I start a new one to actually discuss something other than Milo?

People on this forum tend not to get too excited about 'scripted reality' trash tv.
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,964
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #232 on: February 22, 2017, 11:21:48 PM »

Is literally everyone in the alt right a terrible person? You'd think there'd be at least one token decent one.

That's what differentiates the alt-right from Fascism. At least the Fascists had Rommel.

I think the distinctive feature of alt-right as a set of political and ethical principles is that it seems to encourage and even glorify attitudes that are degrading of personal moral character: malice, greed, narcissism etc all seem to be positive to their eyes. The evils of fascism, by contrast, were rooted mainly in its precepts for how society should be organized (and how such society would be better off without certain categories of people), but at the individual level, it at least paid lip service to universally recognized virtues such as self-sacrifice, dutifulness, bravery, etc.

Basically, the alt-right is what you get when you mix in old-school racism with Randian amoralism.
Logged
Unapologetic Chinaperson
nj_dem
Jr. Member
***
Posts: leet


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #233 on: February 23, 2017, 01:17:37 AM »

Milo and his kind survive off of two things - the loving adoration of their supporters and the unrepentant hatred of the rest of us. To ensure that both continue, they need a way to reach their audience. Now that that's gone for Milo - no Twitter, no Breitbart, and likely no public speeches in the foreseeable future - hopefully he starts his descent into the annals of history.
Logged
EnglishPete
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,605


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #234 on: February 23, 2017, 02:57:14 AM »

Milo and his kind survive off of two things - the loving adoration of their supporters and the unrepentant hatred of the rest of us. To ensure that both continue, they need a way to reach their audience. Now that that's gone for Milo - no Twitter, no Breitbart, and likely no public speeches in the foreseeable future - hopefully he starts his descent into the annals of history.

I'm new here, why wouldn't he have twitter as an outlet?
He got banned after making some rude remarks about Lesley Jones.
Logged
EnglishPete
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,605


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #235 on: February 23, 2017, 03:02:37 AM »

I see Bill Maher is taking credit for  the Milo media frenzy

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/22/arts/television/bill-maher-milo-yiannopoulos-interview.html

A clip from an earlier episode of his show

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sWpNqK4PJiA

An earlier interview maher did
Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.
https://www.playboy.com/articles/playboy-interview-bill-maher
Logged
Chancellor Tanterterg
Mr. X
Moderator
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,201
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #236 on: February 23, 2017, 07:28:21 AM »

What would you consider to be an appropriate source?
Because everyone outside of the manosphere (and a lot of manospherians) know that Roosh was 100% serious
The references to him being accused of being a 'rape denier' that I've seen seem to center around the "How to stop rape" article. Reading that article its pretty clear that it was satirical. I'm not familiar with his writings on his whole PUA thing, that's never been something I've been into. If you've got evidence of him being a rape apologist/rapist I'll look at it.

An appropriate source would not be a newspaper. Verifiable primary sources would be appropriate sources if you can provide links.

I will, genuinely, devote time to finding screen grabs through web archive (as he tends to delete everything) this weekend.
Might be easier for you if you are able to link to an article by someone else who has already done that (I presume this would have already been done).

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.
No, but I'll then be able to review what was actually said

The reason I ask is because as part of the mod team, as non plussed as I am these days, I need to know whether you actually are sticking your head out in support of paedophilia/rape apologists.

Edit: Any source I posted, would not be to your taste. But any anti 'Male Rights' blog will do. Like this one: http://www.wehuntedthemammoth.com/?s=roosh

Wait, is the mod team unaware of the fact that FamousMortimer is a rape apologist?  I've been wondering how he didn't get so much as temp-banned for his posts on the subject.
Logged
EnglishPete
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,605


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #237 on: February 23, 2017, 09:42:20 AM »

I wonder how many of those leftists condemning Milo for some of his rather screwed up words would also condemn the late Harvey Milk, with whom it wasn't just awful words but awful actions
Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.
http://dailycaller.com/2015/07/15/why-doesnt-obama-condemn-boy-rapist-harvey-milk/
Logged
afleitch
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,835


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #238 on: February 23, 2017, 10:23:33 AM »

Milk would have been 33 in 1963; thirteen years before homosexual acts were decriminalised in California. Nothing, consensual or otherwise was legal. Californias age of consent is still 18 to this day. It's 16 next door in Nevada which shows how arbitrary such laws are. In the USA ages of consent vary at 16, 17, 18. Not 13 etc.  I think you can have a go at Milk for a lot (Jim Jones for example) But I think there is a distinction between sexual activity/consent at 16 and at 13 particularly when 16 is the age of consent across half of the USA.

I was 16 in 2000. The age of consent was then 18. I had sexual encounters with 18 year olds. Technically I could not consent, though if I was having straight sex I could.

Logged
EnglishPete
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,605


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #239 on: February 23, 2017, 01:19:46 PM »
« Edited: February 23, 2017, 01:22:06 PM by EnglishPete »

Milk would have been 33 in 1963; thirteen years before homosexual acts were decriminalised in California. Nothing, consensual or otherwise was legal. Californias age of consent is still 18 to this day. It's 16 next door in Nevada which shows how arbitrary such laws are. In the USA ages of consent vary at 16, 17, 18. Not 13 etc.  I think you can have a go at Milk for a lot (Jim Jones for example) But I think there is a distinction between sexual activity/consent at 16 and at 13 particularly when 16 is the age of consent across half of the USA.

Well Milo did say in the video that he thought the 16 year age of consent was 'about right'. The comment about 13 year old was about himself specifically, clearly being in denial about the nature of his abuse. What he was saying, if we accept that his statement that the 16 yr age of consent was about right was indeed his honest view, was that relationships between 16 year old boys and men much older than them can be very good and healthy.  I don't agree with that at all, such relationships sound rather unhealthy to me.

However his own link to this kind of behaviour was, by his own account, as the younger not the older party. Harvey Milk, who like Milo and like George Takia, also started out being molested by older men when in his early teens. When he was well into his thirties he started a sexual relationship with a 16 year old runaway. Dude, can you not see how exploitative and ed up such a relationship is. But he is apparently a hero to the left and even to Obama himself.

I've noticed as well that those on this thread who were waxing indignant about Milo's words have had nothing to say about Bill Maher's considerably worse words in repeatedly and at length defending a woman in her early thirties molesting a twelve year old boy. I notice as well that none of the media hypocrites denouncing Milo have asked Maher to retract or apologise for his words. Its almost as if their indignation was disingenuous and cynical and that they don't actually give a sh**t about child abuse apologism.
Logged
Devout Centrist
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,100
United States


Political Matrix
E: -99.99, S: -99.99

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #240 on: February 23, 2017, 01:22:03 PM »

I wonder how many of those leftists condemning Milo for some of his rather screwed up words would also condemn the late Harvey Milk, with whom it wasn't just awful words but awful actions
Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.
http://dailycaller.com/2015/07/15/why-doesnt-obama-condemn-boy-rapist-harvey-milk/
Stop deflecting.
Logged
EnglishPete
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,605


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #241 on: February 23, 2017, 01:34:35 PM »

I wonder how many of those leftists condemning Milo for some of his rather screwed up words would also condemn the late Harvey Milk, with whom it wasn't just awful words but awful actions
Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.
http://dailycaller.com/2015/07/15/why-doesnt-obama-condemn-boy-rapist-harvey-milk/
Stop deflecting.
The question is whether those who are so keen to denounce Yiannopolous for his words are doing so because of honest reaction to those words or whether many of them don't actually give a sh**t about child abuse apologism or even actual child abuse and are just raising the issue to score political points. That's a very important aspect of this topic.

Perhaps you could help find the answer to this question by giving your own views on the Harvey Milk case and on the Bill Maher case. Of course if you don't want to answer that question you're under no obligation to do so.
Logged
Devout Centrist
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,100
United States


Political Matrix
E: -99.99, S: -99.99

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #242 on: February 23, 2017, 01:35:37 PM »
« Edited: February 23, 2017, 01:43:42 PM by Devout Centrist »

I wonder how many of those leftists condemning Milo for some of his rather screwed up words would also condemn the late Harvey Milk, with whom it wasn't just awful words but awful actions
Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.
http://dailycaller.com/2015/07/15/why-doesnt-obama-condemn-boy-rapist-harvey-milk/
Stop deflecting.
The question is whether those who are so keen to denounce Yiannopolous for his words are doing so because of honest reaction to those words or whether many of them don't actually give a sh**t about child abuse apologism or even actual child abuse and are just raising the issue to score political points. That's a very important aspect of this topic.

Perhaps you could help find the answer to this question by giving your own views on the Harvey Milk case and on the Bill Maher case. Of course if you don't want to answer that question you're under no obligation to do so.
Stop deflecting.

Okay, fine, I'll explain a bit further. What Harvey Milk did is completely extraneous to what Milo said or advocated. It had nothing to do with Milo, basically. It's a red herring.
Logged
EnglishPete
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,605


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #243 on: February 23, 2017, 01:44:23 PM »

You don't want to say what your views are of the Milk and Maher cases after posting several times your clear views on the Milo case? I understand.
Logged
The_Doctor
SilentCal1924
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,271


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #244 on: February 23, 2017, 01:46:33 PM »
« Edited: February 23, 2017, 01:49:08 PM by TD »

I wonder how many of those leftists condemning Milo for some of his rather screwed up words would also condemn the late Harvey Milk, with whom it wasn't just awful words but awful actions
Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.
http://dailycaller.com/2015/07/15/why-doesnt-obama-condemn-boy-rapist-harvey-milk/
Stop deflecting.
The question is whether those who are so keen to denounce Yiannopolous for his words are doing so because of honest reaction to those words or whether many of them don't actually give a sh**t about child abuse apologism or even actual child abuse and are just raising the issue to score political points. That's a very important aspect of this topic.

Perhaps you could help find the answer to this question by giving your own views on the Harvey Milk case and on the Bill Maher case. Of course if you don't want to answer that question you're under no obligation to do so.
Stop deflecting.

What can you expect from a bigot who wants to defend Milo Yiannopoulos but knows it's too impolitic to do so, so he finds other targets to get around that Milo is pond scum and is rightfully disgraced? Remember he came pretty close to rape/pedophilia apologia here and "denounced" it only because a mod asked him. Pete has demonstrated anti-Muslim bigotry and his writings imply he's a virulent white nationalist who hates the current prevailing paradigm of welcoming diversity.  There's no point in engaging him because he believes his sources are impeccable and refuses to acknowledge your sources are anything but the fevered dreams of angry leftists. (All of this alt-right behavior, by the way, has a strong racial component and white nationalist basis. It's not found in other areas of the ideological spectrum).

Pete is pretty deplorable. We need to appellate the same thing we do for Krazen and say "Stop feeding the Stormfront troll" in the threads he starts or tries to bait other posters in. Mockery or reminding others that engaging him is a waste of time is the best way to handle him.
Logged
Dr. Arch
Arch
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,452
Puerto Rico


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #245 on: February 23, 2017, 01:49:55 PM »

I wonder how many of those leftists condemning Milo for some of his rather screwed up words would also condemn the late Harvey Milk, with whom it wasn't just awful words but awful actions
Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.
http://dailycaller.com/2015/07/15/why-doesnt-obama-condemn-boy-rapist-harvey-milk/
Stop deflecting.
The question is whether those who are so keen to denounce Yiannopolous for his words are doing so because of honest reaction to those words or whether many of them don't actually give a sh**t about child abuse apologism or even actual child abuse and are just raising the issue to score political points. That's a very important aspect of this topic.

Perhaps you could help find the answer to this question by giving your own views on the Harvey Milk case and on the Bill Maher case. Of course if you don't want to answer that question you're under no obligation to do so.
Stop deflecting.

What can you expect from a bigot who wants to defend Milo Yiannopoulos but knows it's too impolitic to do so, so he finds other targets to get around that Milo is pond scum and is rightfully disgraced? Remember he came pretty close to rape/pedophilia apologia here and "denounced" it only because a mod asked him. Pete has demonstrated anti-Muslim bigotry and his writings imply he's a virulent white nationalist who hates the current prevailing paradigm of welcoming diversity.  There's no point in engaging him because he believes his sources are impeccable and refuses to acknowledge your sources are anything but the fevered dreams of angry leftists. (All of this alt-right behavior, by the way, has a strong racial component and white nationalist basis. It's not found in other areas of the ideological spectrum).

Pete is pretty deplorable. We need to appellate the same thing we do for Krazen and say "Stop feeding the Stormfront troll" in the threads he starts or tries to bait other posters in. Mockery or reminding others that engaging him is a waste of time is the best way to handle him.

This is exactly why I don't even bother.
Logged
EnglishPete
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,605


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #246 on: February 23, 2017, 01:58:31 PM »


What can you expect from a bigot who wants to defend Milo Yiannopoulos but knows it's too impolitic to do so, so he finds other targets to get around that Milo is pond scum and is rightfully disgraced? Remember he came pretty close to rape/pedophilia apologia here and "denounced" it only because a mod asked him. Pete has demonstrated anti-Muslim bigotry and his writings imply he's a virulent white nationalist who hates the current prevailing paradigm of welcoming diversity.  There's no point in engaging him because he believes his sources are impeccable and refuses to acknowledge your sources are anything but the fevered dreams of angry leftists. (All of this alt-right behavior, by the way, has a strong racial component and white nationalist basis. It's not found in other areas of the ideological spectrum).

Pete is pretty deplorable. We need to appellate the same thing we do for Krazen and say "Stop feeding the Stormfront troll" in the threads he starts or tries to bait other posters in. Mockery or reminding others that engaging him is a waste of time is the best way to handle him.
Well you've given your views on Milo at length and just typed at a lengthy foaming at the mouth rant about me but you don't really want to give your views on the cases Milk or Maher and you recommend everyone else avoid the topic as well. I understand.
Logged
The_Doctor
SilentCal1924
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,271


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #247 on: February 23, 2017, 02:04:13 PM »
« Edited: February 23, 2017, 02:12:06 PM by TD »


What can you expect from a bigot who wants to defend Milo Yiannopoulos but knows it's too impolitic to do so, so he finds other targets to get around that Milo is pond scum and is rightfully disgraced? Remember he came pretty close to rape/pedophilia apologia here and "denounced" it only because a mod asked him. Pete has demonstrated anti-Muslim bigotry and his writings imply he's a virulent white nationalist who hates the current prevailing paradigm of welcoming diversity.  There's no point in engaging him because he believes his sources are impeccable and refuses to acknowledge your sources are anything but the fevered dreams of angry leftists. (All of this alt-right behavior, by the way, has a strong racial component and white nationalist basis. It's not found in other areas of the ideological spectrum).

Pete is pretty deplorable. We need to appellate the same thing we do for Krazen and say "Stop feeding the Stormfront troll" in the threads he starts or tries to bait other posters in. Mockery or reminding others that engaging him is a waste of time is the best way to handle him.
Well you've given your views on Milo at length and just typed at a lengthy foaming at the mouth rant about me but you don't really want to give your views on the cases Milk or Maher and you recommend everyone else avoid the topic as well. I understand.

Nope, I condemn both for their actions if they're actually guilty of what you say they are (I haven't researched it). I'm not ideologically wedded to them and remember, not a Lefty by any means. I'm actually from the Right and hold actual conservative views. I don't care what the Left says here so let's square this away since I have the capability to pull the Republican/conservative card; I'm actually a conservative who has consistently voted Republican. They may have defenses but I'm not going to focus on that to get to my point.

But let's be honest, they're not the focus on this discussion. You want to defend Milo so badly so you deflect and attack other people. You want to deflect, so now that I've done the requisite condemnation, I suggest you crawl back to whatever bigoted parts of the internet you came from.

I'll duly note that you don't condemn Milo and you are pretty much just mouthing that you are a rape/pedophilia denouncer while trying to detract from the fact Milo is pond scum that should be disgraced. Duly noted that he's your new hero though. Your quasi apologia for him is amusing.

Let's be honest though: you're baiting people on this forum as a form of trying to "get one" over the lefties. Face up to it, Petey, Milo is not worth defending and the more you defend him and deflect, the worse you look. And while you're at it, face up to the Stormfront ideology you hold too. That would be nice too.
Logged
EnglishPete
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,605


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #248 on: February 23, 2017, 02:26:34 PM »


What can you expect from a bigot who wants to defend Milo Yiannopoulos but knows it's too impolitic to do so, so he finds other targets to get around that Milo is pond scum and is rightfully disgraced? Remember he came pretty close to rape/pedophilia apologia here and "denounced" it only because a mod asked him. Pete has demonstrated anti-Muslim bigotry and his writings imply he's a virulent white nationalist who hates the current prevailing paradigm of welcoming diversity.  There's no point in engaging him because he believes his sources are impeccable and refuses to acknowledge your sources are anything but the fevered dreams of angry leftists. (All of this alt-right behavior, by the way, has a strong racial component and white nationalist basis. It's not found in other areas of the ideological spectrum).

Pete is pretty deplorable. We need to appellate the same thing we do for Krazen and say "Stop feeding the Stormfront troll" in the threads he starts or tries to bait other posters in. Mockery or reminding others that engaging him is a waste of time is the best way to handle him.
Well you've given your views on Milo at length and just typed at a lengthy foaming at the mouth rant about me but you don't really want to give your views on the cases Milk or Maher and you recommend everyone else avoid the topic as well. I understand.

Nope, I condemn both for their actions if they're actually guilty of what you say they are (I haven't researched it). I'm not ideologically wedded to them and remember, not a Lefty by any means. I'm actually from the Right and hold actual conservative views. I don't care what the Left says here so let's square this away since I have the capability to pull the Republican/conservative card; I'm actually a conservative who has consistently voted Republican. They may have defenses but I'm not going to focus on that to get to my point.

But let's be honest, they're not the focus on this discussion. You want to defend Milo so badly so you deflect and attack other people. You want to deflect, so now that I've done the requisite condemnation, I suggest you crawl back to whatever bigoted parts of the internet you came from.

I'll duly note that you don't condemn Milo and you are pretty much just mouthing that you are a rape/pedophilia denouncer while trying to detract from the fact Milo is pond scum that should be disgraced. Duly noted that he's your new hero though. Your quasi apologia for him is amusing.

Let's be honest though: you're baiting people on this forum as a form of trying to "get one" over the lefties. Face up to it, Petey, Milo is not worth defending and the more you defend him and deflect, the worse you look. And while you're at it, face up to the Stormfront ideology you hold too. That would be nice too.
Well at least you answered the question before embarking on your foaming at the mouth rant this time. LOL
Logged
The_Doctor
SilentCal1924
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,271


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #249 on: February 23, 2017, 02:30:20 PM »
« Edited: February 23, 2017, 02:32:11 PM by TD »

No foaming at the mouth; I'm just explaining to the forum your history.

Though, gonna denounce Milo now in no unconditional terms, Petey? You know, you said you weren't into rape/pedophilia apologism. If not, I totally understand.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.066 seconds with 12 queries.