It's a report from the fucking JUSTICE DEPARTMENT!! It could be posted on Justin Biebers website, doesn't change the fact that it's a JUSTICE DEPARTMENT REPORT.unnamednewbie13 wrote:
No.Extra Medium wrote:
Are you and Uzique best friends IRL or something? Just because the report has a bunch of idiots in the comments does not mean the report has somehow lost credibility.unnamednewbie13 wrote:
idiotic nonsense about comments
You people are fools.
I iooked at your Breitbart link, and was curious about what kind of people read it. So I scrolled down and looked at the first three comments shown. Real great first fucking impression of the readership we've got there.
Are you best friends with factory farms or something? Because it looked like you just bent over and took one in the ass for them in the animal rights thread.Fixed for Breitbart consumption.Extra Medium wrote:
Suck it you liberal gang of faggots. sUk it u libertard gang of fagz
You linked to Breitbart before you even linked to the PDF, and then are acting all hurt when people responded negatively to your snotty comment. I clicked the Breitbart again and there was an ad whinging about Christians not getting special treatment in the military or something.
But I must just not get it or something.
But I must just not get it or something.
I saw that article through one of the lovely people I have the wonderful pleasure to know on facebook. It's outrageous that Christians could be punished for proselytizing while in the military. I mean, it's the TRUE religion after all.
Well what is a reputable news source in your opinion, ohh mighty one?unnamednewbie13 wrote:
You linked to Breitbart before you even linked to the PDF, and then are acting all hurt when people responded negatively to your snotty comment. I clicked the Breitbart again and there was an ad whinging about Christians not getting special treatment in the military or something.
But I must just not get it or something.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/2 … s-plummet/
Is FORBES a legitimate enough website for you guys?
Is FORBES a legitimate enough website for you guys?
We've already done this, but as with everything else, you have selective reading comprehension. And arguing with you over text is an exercise in futility because of it.Extra Medium wrote:
Well what is a reputable news source in your opinion, ohh mighty one?
Once again, ignore what I write and instead attack my perceived character. It's the only argument you have any chance of hanging with.unnamednewbie13 wrote:
We've already done this, but as with everything else, you have selective reading comprehension. And arguing with you over text is an exercise in futility because of it.Extra Medium wrote:
Well what is a reputable news source in your opinion, ohh mighty one?
Except this aspect of your character has everything to do with whether or not we can have a reasonable discussion. There's also the issue of your hypocrisy:
If you have enough time. I know that you're planning to die in your 60's from a heart attack. Good luck with that.
Extra Medium wrote:
Once again, ignore what I write and instead attack my perceived character.
Extra Medium wrote:
Go away troll, grown ups are talking.
As soon as you come to the realization that the forum isn't trying to turn you into a vegetarian, smart car liberal when we say that excess consumption of meat is problematic in our society for a number of reasons, let me know and we can start over from scratch.Extra Medium wrote:
Your the worst moderator in the history of anything.
If you have enough time. I know that you're planning to die in your 60's from a heart attack. Good luck with that.
Thats pretty mean, you should apologize.
If the women don't find ya handsome. They should at least find ya handy.
UnkleRukus wrote:
Thats pretty mean, you should apologize.
em wrote:
I plan on dropping dead of a massive heart attack between the ages of 55-65 with all of my faculties intact.
I'm not saying anyone is trying to convert me. I'm saying those points of view are fucking stupid.unnamednewbie13 wrote:
As soon as you come to the realization that the forum isn't trying to turn you into a vegetarian, smart car liberal when we say that excess consumption of meat is problematic in our society for a number of reasons, let me know and we can start over from scratch.
If you have enough time. I know that you're planning to die in your 60's from a heart attack. Good luck with that.
Once again because apparently we are too fucking dense to absorb it.
1. Excess meat consumption is a problem. Excess ANYTHING is a problem. Attacking meat specifically is fucking stupid. You should be attacking PORTION SIZES of ALL food.
2. Smart cars are fucking stupid and accomplish nothing. They don't reduce pollution, they merely produce it in different less apparent areas. They are also ugly as fuck and for the most part inefficient as the technology is still in it's infancy.
3. And since were in a gun control thread why not, abolishing guns is stupid as well. Currently America has more firearms than previously due to the expiration of the AWB and gun related crimes are dropping. Also, if guns were banned people would just use something else to hurt someone or they would still use a FUCKING GUN because people who tend to hurt people don't tend to give a fuck about the law in the first place, otherwise they wouldn't be hurting anyone. All a gun ban accomplishes is taking guns away from people who abide by the law.
I look forward to hearing about the next great nunchaku massacre.
Not in America. Some asshole with a nunchaku would get shot fairly quickly.unnamednewbie13 wrote:
I look forward to hearing about the next great nunchaku massacre.
lol extra medium thinks the "moderators" on an online forum are supposed to be the same as the moderator of a TV presidential debate.
I can't remember the last nanchaku massacre. Must be all those guns across the world repressing them.
NO. Moderators on this website were historically the most leveled headed and fair users in the community who kept the kind of shit this moderator posts on a daily basis in check.Spearhead wrote:
lol extra medium thinks the "moderators" on an online forum are supposed to be the same as the moderator of a TV presidential debate.
The moderator status on this forum went to shit when they made Parker a mod. Since then moderators are just regular shit users with the ability to ban people with whom they disagree with.
If you think I'm crazy, look at the current audience. Site diversity was wiped out over a year ago.
Parker was such a cunt.
A thieving one too.
I stood in line for four hours. They better give me a Wal-Mart gift card, or something. - Rodney Booker, Job Fair attendee.
Weren't you just finished complaining about how I scrutinized the comments on breitbart when you threw the link into DST as some sort of self-satisfied "gotcha" trump card? Seems an awful time for you to start doing the same thing. I also think I'm a pretty ok mod as far as mods go, so you're probably wrong there, too.Extra Medium wrote:
NO. Moderators on this website were historically the most leveled headed and fair users in the community who kept the kind of shit this moderator posts on a daily basis in check.Spearhead wrote:
lol extra medium thinks the "moderators" on an online forum are supposed to be the same as the moderator of a TV presidential debate.
The moderator status on this forum went to shit when they made Parker a mod. Since then moderators are just regular shit users with the ability to ban people with whom they disagree with.
If you think I'm crazy, look at the current audience. Site diversity was wiped out over a year ago.
PM your reply and/or get back to me whenever I ban you for disagreeing with me.
Didn't one of the mods assault one of the members before all that... There has always been one or two out there mods.Extra Medium wrote:
NO. Moderators on this website were historically the most leveled headed and fair users in the community who kept the kind of shit this moderator posts on a daily basis in check.Spearhead wrote:
lol extra medium thinks the "moderators" on an online forum are supposed to be the same as the moderator of a TV presidential debate.
The moderator status on this forum went to shit when they made Parker a mod. Since then moderators are just regular shit users with the ability to ban people with whom they disagree with.
If you think I'm crazy, look at the current audience. Site diversity was wiped out over a year ago.
yeah triggerhappy bashed kimmie and then kimmie went on to date chuy for a while. it was one weird fuckfest lol.-Whiteroom- wrote:
Didn't one of the mods assault one of the members before all that... There has always been one or two out there mods.Extra Medium wrote:
NO. Moderators on this website were historically the most leveled headed and fair users in the community who kept the kind of shit this moderator posts on a daily basis in check.Spearhead wrote:
lol extra medium thinks the "moderators" on an online forum are supposed to be the same as the moderator of a TV presidential debate.
The moderator status on this forum went to shit when they made Parker a mod. Since then moderators are just regular shit users with the ability to ban people with whom they disagree with.
If you think I'm crazy, look at the current audience. Site diversity was wiped out over a year ago.
Last edited by Cybargs (2013-05-20 11:43:49)
She was too pretty for the both of them anyway
pics of kimmi or it didnt happen
you only say that coz shes filipinaMacbeth wrote:
She was too pretty for the both of them anyway