Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #468142 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Jeff-Relf.Me @. |
|---|---|
| First post | 2018-09-21 06:51 -0700 |
| Last post | 2018-09-22 09:36 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 907 — 42 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-09-21 06:51 -0700
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-09-21 07:12 -0700
somebody running Snit over in a rental pickup truck from Lowes would be viewed as solid community service Simon bar Sinister <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2018-09-21 08:01 -0700
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-09-21 15:53 +0000
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-09-21 12:00 -0400
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2018-09-21 10:49 -0600
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-09-21 10:06 -0700
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-09-21 13:15 -0500
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-09-21 17:27 -0400
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-09-21 15:06 -0700
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-09-21 16:20 -0700
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-09-22 14:27 +0000
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-09-22 07:47 -0700
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Libtard <libtard@sandernistas.edu> - 2018-09-22 16:53 +0000
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-09-22 19:06 -0500
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-09-22 17:24 -0700
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-09-22 15:07 -0700
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-09-22 15:11 -0700
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-09-24 07:18 -0500
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-09-24 12:35 +0000
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 05:55 -0700
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-09-24 09:09 -0500
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-09-24 09:46 -0500
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-09-24 07:59 -0700
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-09-24 20:58 +0000
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 14:00 -0700
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 14:01 -0700
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-09-24 14:30 -0700
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2018-09-24 23:21 +0100
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2018-09-25 06:58 -0400
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-09-25 06:58 -0500
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-09-25 05:19 -0700
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-09-25 16:27 +0000
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-09-26 07:28 -0500
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-09-26 13:00 +0000
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-09-26 08:28 -0500
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-09-26 09:06 -0500
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-09-26 18:00 +0000
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-09-26 11:31 -0400
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-09-26 11:28 -0400
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-09-25 07:19 -0700
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-09-25 16:22 +0000
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-09-25 13:13 -0700
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-09-25 17:19 -0500
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-09-25 15:33 -0700
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-09-25 15:40 -0700
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-09-25 19:33 -0400
All educated people agree that Snit is the very definition of insanity Simon bar Sinister <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2018-09-26 05:34 -0700
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-09-25 23:46 -0700
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-09-26 07:00 -0500
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-09-26 12:53 +0000
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-09-26 08:35 -0500
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-09-26 18:02 +0000
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-09-26 10:12 -0400
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-09-26 18:17 +0000
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2018-09-27 05:14 +0000
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-09-26 16:28 -0700
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2018-09-26 09:20 -0400
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-09-26 17:55 +0000
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Your Friendly Neighbourhood Puppy Whistle Holder Emeritus ðķįŽ <root@127.0.0.1> - 2018-09-26 13:52 -0500
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2018-09-27 05:17 +0000
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Your Friendly Neighbourhood Puppy Whistle Holder Emeritus ðķįŽ <root@127.0.0.1> - 2018-09-27 00:23 -0500
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2018-09-27 06:17 +0000
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-09-26 22:06 -0700
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-09-27 10:08 -0400
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-09-27 10:31 -0500
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-09-27 15:46 +0000
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Your Friendly Neighbourhood Puppy Whistle Holder Emeritus ðķįŽ <root@127.0.0.1> - 2018-09-27 10:48 -0500
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-09-27 12:37 -0500
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-09-25 07:52 -0500
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-09-25 11:21 -0400
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Your Friendly Neighbourhood Puppy Whistle Holder Emeritus ðķįŽ <root@127.0.0.1> - 2018-09-25 10:32 -0500
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-09-26 14:24 -0500
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Your Friendly Neighbourhood Puppy Whistle Holder Emeritus ðķįŽ <root@127.0.0.1> - 2018-09-26 15:19 -0500
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-09-26 13:20 -0700
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-09-27 04:39 -0400
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-09-27 07:50 -0500
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-09-27 15:56 +0000
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-09-27 12:55 -0500
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-09-27 13:14 -0500
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-09-28 12:31 -0400
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-09-27 19:39 -0400
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-09-27 19:52 -0500
Inflation is immoral. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-09-28 02:52 -0700
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-09-25 16:33 +0000
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-09-25 13:12 -0700
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-09-25 13:37 -0700
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-09-26 08:17 -0500
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-09-26 17:49 +0000
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Your Friendly Neighbourhood Puppy Whistle Holder Emeritus ðķįŽ <root@127.0.0.1> - 2018-09-26 13:44 -0500
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-09-26 13:51 -0500
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Your Friendly Neighbourhood Puppy Whistle Holder Emeritus ðķįŽ <root@127.0.0.1> - 2018-09-26 13:59 -0500
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-09-26 22:36 +0000
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-09-26 16:23 -0700
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-09-26 22:15 -0700
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-09-27 07:38 -0500
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-10-01 20:22 -0500
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-10-02 07:15 -0500
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-10-02 15:10 -0500
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2018-10-02 23:00 +0100
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-10-03 07:10 -0500
Re: Today, the Democrats believe that people can commit crimes as long as they vote for them SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-10-03 13:21 +0000
Re: Today, the Democrats believe that people can commit crimes as long as they vote for them Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 06:42 -0700
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Lunar Opticfibre <jfwaldby@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 10:05 -0600
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-10-03 15:23 -0500
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 15:00 -0700
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-10-04 08:14 -0500
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-10-04 12:57 -0500
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-09-26 22:04 -0700
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-09-24 07:57 -0700
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 08:17 -0700
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-09-24 10:52 -0500
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-09-24 09:43 -0700
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-09-24 13:37 -0500
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 12:10 -0700
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-09-24 12:26 -0700
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 12:34 -0700
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 12:57 -0700
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-09-24 17:05 -0500
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-09-24 17:03 -0700
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-09-24 20:10 +0000
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 13:19 -0700
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Your Friendly Neighbourhood Puppy Whistle Holder Emeritus ðķįŽ <root@127.0.0.1> - 2018-09-24 10:43 -0500
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 08:48 -0700
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 05:39 -0700
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-09-21 14:50 -0700
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-09-22 02:22 +0000
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-09-26 21:54 -0700
I avoid women, children, and thieving junkies; not men per se. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-09-27 03:56 -0700
Re: I avoid women, children, and thieving junkies; not men per se. Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2018-09-27 15:34 +0000
Re: I avoid women, children, and thieving junkies; not men per se. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-09-27 15:58 +0000
Re: I avoid women, children, and thieving junkies; not men per se. Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2018-09-27 17:00 +0000
Re: I avoid women, children, and thieving junkies; not men per se. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-09-27 21:47 +0000
Re: I avoid women, children, and thieving junkies; not men per se. Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-09-27 18:05 -0700
Re: â Snowflake ââ Snowflake ââ Snowflake ââ Snowflake ââ Snowflake ââ Snowflake ââ Snowflake ââ Snowflake ââ Snowflake ââ Snowflake ââ Snowflake ââ Snowflake ââ Snowflake ââ Snowflake ââ Snowflake ââ Snowflake ââ Snowflake ââ Snowflake ââ Snowflake ââ Snowflake ââ Snowflake ââ Snowflake ââ Snowflake ââ Snowflake â I avoid women, children, and thieving junkies; not men per se. â Snowflake ââ Snowflake ââ Snowflake ââ Snowflake ââ Snowflake ââ Snowflake ââ Snowflake ââ Snowflake ââ Snowflake ââ Snowflake ââ Snowflake ââ Snowflake ââ Snowflake ââ Snowflake ââ Snowflake ââ Snowflake ââ Snowflake ââ Snowflake ââ Snowflake ââ Snowflake ââ Snowflake ââ Snowflake ââ Snowflake ââ Snowflake â Your Friendly Neighbourhood Puppy Whistle Holder Emeritus ðķįŽ <root@127.0.0.1> - 2018-09-27 20:31 -0500
Re: I avoid women, children, and thieving junkies; not men per se. "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-09-28 08:52 -0400
Re: I avoid women, children, and thieving junkies; not men per se. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-09-28 07:59 -0500
Re: I avoid women, children, and thieving junkies; not men per se. benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-09-28 12:04 -0400
Re: I avoid women, children, and thieving junkies; not men per se. "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-09-28 12:12 -0400
Re: I avoid women, children, and thieving junkies; not men per se. kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-09-28 12:45 -0400
Re: I avoid women, children, and thieving junkies; not men per se. "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-09-28 12:55 -0400
Re: I avoid women, children, and thieving junkies; not men per se. kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-09-28 13:27 -0400
Re: I avoid women, children, and thieving junkies; not men per se. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-09-28 16:27 +0000
Re: I avoid women, children, and thieving junkies; not men per se. kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-09-28 12:43 -0400
Re: I avoid women, children, and thieving junkies; not men per se. snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2018-09-28 18:39 +0100
Re: I avoid women, children, and thieving junkies; not men per se. benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-09-28 16:10 -0400
Re: I avoid women, children, and thieving junkies; not men per se. Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-09-28 23:29 -0500
Re: I avoid women, children, and thieving junkies; not men per se. "Catalina" <Catalina@beach.sun> - 2018-09-30 02:39 -0400
Re: I avoid women, children, and thieving junkies; not men per se. Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 01:25 -0700
Re: I avoid women, children, and thieving junkies; not men per se. Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2018-09-28 02:02 +0000
Re: I avoid women, children, and thieving junkies; not men per se. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-09-28 06:47 -0500
Re: I avoid women, children, and thieving junkies; not men per se. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-09-28 18:18 +0000
Re: I avoid women, children, and thieving junkies; not men per se. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-09-28 16:31 +0000
Re: I avoid women, children, and thieving junkies; not men per se. onion@anon.invalid (Mr On!on) - 2018-09-28 18:56 +0100
Re: I avoid women, children, and thieving junkies; not men per se. Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-09-28 18:57 +0000
Re: I avoid women, children, and thieving junkies; not men per se. onion@anon.invalid (Mr On!on) - 2018-09-28 20:30 +0100
Re: I avoid women, children, and thieving junkies; not men per se. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-09-28 12:37 -0700
Re: I avoid women, children, and thieving junkies; not men per se. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-09-28 21:51 +0000
Re: I avoid women, children, and thieving junkies; not men per se. kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-09-28 12:40 -0400
Re: I avoid women, children, and thieving junkies; not men per se. benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-09-28 16:08 -0400
Re: I avoid women, children, and thieving junkies; not men per se. "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> - 2018-09-28 22:34 -0700
Re: I avoid women, children, and thieving junkies; not men per se. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-09-29 14:23 +0000
Re: I avoid women, children, and thieving junkies; not men per se. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-09-29 10:52 -0700
Re: I avoid women, children, and thieving junkies; not men per se. Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-09-29 18:55 +0000
Re: I avoid women, children, and thieving junkies; not men per se. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-09-29 12:41 -0700
Being _ relatively poor isn't a real problem. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-09-29 15:25 -0700
Re: I avoid women, children, and thieving junkies; not men per se. Lunar Opticfibre <jfwaldby@gmail.com> - 2018-09-29 18:29 -0600
Re: I avoid women, children, and thieving junkies; not men per se. benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-09-29 21:48 -0400
Re: I avoid women, children, and thieving junkies; not men per se. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-09-29 20:18 -0700
Re: I avoid women, children, and thieving junkies; not men per se. Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-09-29 23:16 -0700
Re: I avoid women, children, and thieving junkies; not men per se. Lunar Opticfibre <jfwaldby@gmail.com> - 2018-09-29 18:27 -0600
Re: I avoid women, children, and thieving junkies; not men per se. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-09-29 20:18 -0700
Re: I avoid women, children, and thieving junkies; not men per se. kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-09-29 12:43 -0400
Re: I avoid women, children, and thieving junkies; not men per se. "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> - 2018-09-29 17:33 -0700
Re: I avoid women, children, and thieving junkies; not men per se. Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-09-30 01:17 +0000
Re: I avoid women, children, and thieving junkies; not men per se. "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> - 2018-09-29 20:08 -0700
Re: I avoid women, children, and thieving junkies; not men per se. Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-09-30 03:26 +0000
Re: I avoid women, children, and thieving junkies; not men per se. "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> - 2018-09-29 20:36 -0700
Re: I avoid women, children, and thieving junkies; not men per se. Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-09-30 03:42 +0000
Re: I avoid women, children, and thieving junkies; not men per se. "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> - 2018-09-29 22:13 -0700
Re: I avoid women, children, and thieving junkies; not men per se. Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-09-30 05:33 +0000
Re: I avoid women, children, and thieving junkies; not men per se. "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> - 2018-09-30 12:50 -0700
Re: I avoid women, children, and thieving junkies; not men per se. Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-09-30 20:18 +0000
Re: I avoid women, children, and thieving junkies; not men per se. Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 13:22 -0700
Re: I avoid women, children, and thieving junkies; not men per se. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 13:38 -0700
Re: I avoid women, children, and thieving junkies; not men per se. "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> - 2018-10-01 18:26 -0700
We need to eat more. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-09-27 09:38 -0700
Re: We need to eat more. Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2018-09-27 17:06 +0000
"Children" are everywhere, "adults" are hard to find. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-09-27 10:09 -0700
Re: "Children" are everywhere, "adults" are hard to find. Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2018-09-27 17:10 +0000
Re: "Children" are everywhere, "adults" are hard to find. "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-09-27 13:16 -0400
Re: "Children" are everywhere, "adults" are hard to find. Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2018-09-27 17:19 +0000
Re: "Children" are everywhere, "adults" are hard to find. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-09-27 12:58 -0500
Re: "Children" are everywhere, "adults" are hard to find. Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-09-27 13:16 -0500
Re: "Children" are everywhere, "adults" are hard to find. Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-09-27 17:04 -0700
Re: "Children" are everywhere, "adults" are hard to find. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-09-27 17:06 -0700
If you're fucking, you're stupid. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-09-27 17:14 -0700
Re: If you're fucking, you're stupid. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-09-27 17:39 -0700
Re: "Children" are everywhere, "adults" are hard to find. Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-09-27 18:01 -0700
Re: "Children" are everywhere, "adults" are hard to find. kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-09-28 12:47 -0400
Re: "Children" are everywhere, "adults" are hard to find. "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-09-28 12:59 -0400
Re: "Children" are everywhere, "adults" are hard to find. Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-09-28 11:37 -0700
Re: "Children" are everywhere, "adults" are hard to find. Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-09-28 19:00 +0000
Re: "Children" are everywhere, "adults" are hard to find. benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-09-28 16:12 -0400
Re: "Children" are everywhere, "adults" are hard to find. "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> - 2018-09-27 21:44 -0700
Re: "Children" are everywhere, "adults" are hard to find. Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-09-27 22:01 -0700
Artificial penises and testosterone implants. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-09-28 05:01 -0700
Re: Artificial penises and testosterone implants. "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> - 2018-09-28 15:17 -0700
Re: Artificial penises and testosterone implants. benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-09-28 23:42 -0400
Re: Artificial penises and testosterone implants. "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> - 2018-09-29 20:56 -0700
Re: "Children" are everywhere, "adults" are hard to find. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-09-28 16:26 +0000
Re: "Children" are everywhere, "adults" are hard to find. "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-09-28 12:30 -0400
I'm not half as retarded as you need me to be, Andrzej. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-09-28 09:38 -0700
Re: I'm not half as retarded as you need me to be, Andrzej. "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-09-28 12:41 -0400
Re: I'm not half as retarded as you need me to be, Andrzej. snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2018-09-28 19:09 +0100
Re: I'm not half as retarded as you need me to be, Andrzej. benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-09-28 16:04 -0400
Re: I'm not half as retarded as you need me to be, Andrzej. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-09-28 21:47 +0000
Re: I'm not half as retarded as you need me to be, Andrzej. Brick <brick@mortar.invalid> - 2018-09-28 21:52 +0000
If I were super attractive... Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-09-28 15:04 -0700
Re: If I were super attractive... "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-09-28 18:08 -0400
Re: If I were super attractive... SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-09-28 22:08 +0000
Re: If I were super attractive... Brick <brick@mortar.invalid> - 2018-09-28 22:10 +0000
Re: If I were super attractive... % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-09-28 15:52 -0700
Re: If I were super attractive... Brick <brick@mortar.invalid> - 2018-09-28 22:55 +0000
Re: If I were super attractive... % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-09-28 16:00 -0700
Re: If I were super attractive... Brick <brick@mortar.invalid> - 2018-09-28 23:05 +0000
Re: If I were super attractive... % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-09-28 16:15 -0700
Re: If I were super attractive... Brick <brick@mortar.invalid> - 2018-09-28 23:22 +0000
Re: If I were super attractive... % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-09-28 16:24 -0700
Re: If I were super attractive... Brick <brick@mortar.invalid> - 2018-09-28 23:28 +0000
Re: If I were super attractive... % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-09-28 16:31 -0700
Re: If I were super attractive... Brick <brick@mortar.invalid> - 2018-09-28 23:37 +0000
The list of ancestors 1, 2, 3, or 4. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-09-28 15:15 -0700
Re: The list of ancestors 1, 2, 3, or 4. Brick <brick@mortar.invalid> - 2018-09-28 22:18 +0000
Re: If I were super attractive... Brick <brick@mortar.invalid> - 2018-09-28 22:09 +0000
Re: I'm not half as retarded as you need me to be, Andrzej. Your Friendly Neighbourhood Puppy Whistle Holder Emeritus ðķįŽ <root@127.0.0.1> - 2018-09-28 17:29 -0500
Re: I'm not half as retarded as you need me to be, Andrzej. Brick <brick@mortar.invalid> - 2018-09-28 22:34 +0000
Re: I'm not half as retarded as you need me to be, Andrzej. Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-09-29 16:23 -0700
Re: I'm not half as retarded as you need me to be, Andrzej. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-09-29 16:28 -0700
Re: I'm not half as retarded as you need me to be, Andrzej. Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-09-29 18:49 -0700
Re: I'm not half as retarded as you need me to be, Andrzej. Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-09-30 01:55 +0000
Re: I'm not half as retarded as you need me to be, Andrzej. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-09-29 19:19 -0700
Re: I'm not half as retarded as you need me to be, Andrzej. Libtard <libtard@sandernistas.edu> - 2018-09-30 02:48 +0000
Re: I'm not half as retarded as you need me to be, Andrzej. Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-09-30 03:28 +0000
Re: I'm not half as retarded as you need me to be, Andrzej. "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> - 2018-09-29 20:45 -0700
Was she looking for love ? Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-09-29 20:55 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> - 2018-09-29 20:59 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 12:11 -0400
Re: Was she looking for love ? Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-09-30 05:35 +0000
Re: Was she looking for love ? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-09-29 22:42 -0700
Dr Ford was just stupid, not immoral ? Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-09-30 05:22 -0700
Dr Ford was just stupid, not immoral ? -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-09-30 07:13 -0700
I'd shut down the "party" so fast, your head would spin. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-09-30 07:34 -0700
Re: I'd shut down the "party" so fast, your head would spin. benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 12:18 -0400
I'd shut down the "party" so fast, your head would spin. -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-09-30 20:14 -0700
Were Dr. Ford the sweet, innocent, righteous woman you imagine... Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-09-30 20:37 -0700
Re: Were Dr. Ford the sweet, innocent, righteous woman you imagine... Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 20:58 -0700
Re: Were Dr. Ford the sweet, innocent, righteous woman you imagine... Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-10-01 04:21 +0000
Re: Were Dr. Ford the sweet, innocent, righteous woman you imagine... Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 22:25 -0700
Re: Were Dr. Ford the sweet, innocent, righteous woman you imagine... Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-10-01 06:40 +0000
Re: Were Dr. Ford the sweet, innocent, righteous woman you imagine... Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 00:15 -0700
Re: Were Dr. Ford the sweet, innocent, righteous woman you imagine... Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-10-02 02:08 +0000
Re: Were Dr. Ford the sweet, innocent, righteous woman you imagine... Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2018-10-01 20:19 -0600
Re: Were Dr. Ford the sweet, innocent, righteous woman you imagine... Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 20:54 -0700
Re: Were Dr. Ford the sweet, innocent, righteous woman you imagine... "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> - 2018-10-01 20:26 -0700
Did Diogenes ever find his honest man ? Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-10-01 20:34 -0700
Re: Were Dr. Ford the sweet, innocent, righteous woman you imagine... Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 21:09 -0700
Re: Were Dr. Ford the sweet, innocent, righteous woman you imagine... -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-10-01 04:14 -0700
Re: Were Dr. Ford the sweet, innocent, righteous woman you imagine... chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-10-01 07:28 -0500
Mr. ChrisV, my publicist. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-10-01 07:27 -0700
Re: Were Dr. Ford the sweet, innocent, righteous woman you imagine... RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 18:13 +0000
Re: Were Dr. Ford the sweet, innocent, righteous woman you imagine... owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-10-01 18:40 +0000
Re: Were Dr. Ford the sweet, innocent, righteous woman you imagine... Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 12:06 -0700
Re: Were Dr. Ford the sweet, innocent, righteous woman you imagine... chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-10-01 14:08 -0500
Re: Were Dr. Ford the sweet, innocent, righteous woman you imagine... RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 19:15 +0000
Re: Were Dr. Ford the sweet, innocent, righteous woman you imagine... chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-10-01 14:20 -0500
Re: Were Dr. Ford the sweet, innocent, righteous woman you imagine... RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 19:45 +0000
Re: Were Dr. Ford the sweet, innocent, righteous woman you imagine... chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-10-01 14:50 -0500
Re: Were Dr. Ford the sweet, innocent, righteous woman you imagine... RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 19:59 +0000
Re: Were Dr. Ford the sweet, innocent, righteous woman you imagine... Sam O'Nella <poison@donteatit.net> - 2018-10-01 16:10 -0400
Re: Were Dr. Ford the sweet, innocent, righteous woman you imagine... RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 19:22 +0000
Re: Were Dr. Ford the sweet, innocent, righteous woman you imagine... SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-10-01 23:05 +0000
Re: Were Dr. Ford the sweet, innocent, righteous woman you imagine... SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-10-01 22:58 +0000
Re: Were Dr. Ford the sweet, innocent, righteous woman you imagine... chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-10-02 07:34 -0500
Re: Were Dr. Ford the sweet, innocent, righteous woman you imagine... Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 06:02 -0700
Re: Were Dr. Ford the sweet, innocent, righteous woman you imagine... SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-10-02 14:42 +0000
Re: Were Dr. Ford the sweet, innocent, righteous woman you imagine... SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-10-01 23:02 +0000
Re: Were Dr. Ford the sweet, innocent, righteous woman you imagine... chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-10-01 14:00 -0500
Re: Were Dr. Ford the sweet, innocent, righteous woman you imagine... RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 19:17 +0000
Re: Were Dr. Ford the sweet, innocent, righteous woman you imagine... chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-10-01 14:23 -0500
Re: Were Dr. Ford the sweet, innocent, righteous woman you imagine... RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 19:52 +0000
Re: Were Dr. Ford the sweet, innocent, righteous woman you imagine... chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-10-01 15:04 -0500
Re: Were Dr. Ford the sweet, innocent, righteous woman you imagine... RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 20:28 +0000
Re: Were Dr. Ford the sweet, innocent, righteous woman you imagine... -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-10-01 13:54 -0700
Re: Were Dr. Ford the sweet, innocent, righteous woman you imagine... Sam O'Nella <poison@donteatit.net> - 2018-10-01 16:55 -0400
Re: Were Dr. Ford the sweet, innocent, righteous woman you imagine... SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-10-01 23:12 +0000
Re: Were Dr. Ford the sweet, innocent, righteous woman you imagine... RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 00:45 +0000
Re: Were Dr. Ford the sweet, innocent, righteous woman you imagine... -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-10-01 18:12 -0700
Re: Were Dr. Ford the sweet, innocent, righteous woman you imagine... chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-10-02 07:26 -0500
Re: Were Dr. Ford the sweet, innocent, righteous woman you imagine... Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 05:31 -0700
Re: Were Dr. Ford the sweet, innocent, righteous woman you imagine... SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-10-02 14:13 +0000
Re: Were Dr. Ford the sweet, innocent, righteous woman you imagine... chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-10-02 07:23 -0500
Dr. Ford has made 700,000$, so far, with her GoFundMe account. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-10-01 12:59 -0700
Re: Dr. Ford has made 700,000$, so far, with her GoFundMe account. "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> - 2018-10-01 14:13 -0700
Re: Dr. Ford has made 700,000$, so far, with her GoFundMe account. Sam O'Nella <poison@donteatit.net> - 2018-10-01 17:18 -0400
Re: Dr. Ford has made 700,000$, so far, with her GoFundMe account. Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-10-01 16:22 -0500
Re: Dr. Ford has made 700,000$, so far, with her GoFundMe account. "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> - 2018-10-01 14:37 -0700
Re: Dr. Ford has made 700,000$, so far, with her GoFundMe account. snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2018-10-01 22:30 +0100
Re: Dr. Ford has made 700,000$, so far, with her GoFundMe account. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 14:34 -0700
Re: Dr. Ford has made 700,000$, so far, with her GoFundMe account. "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> - 2018-10-01 14:40 -0700
Re: Dr. Ford has made 700,000$, so far, with her GoFundMe account. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 14:42 -0700
Re: Dr. Ford has made 700,000$, so far, with her GoFundMe account. "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> - 2018-10-01 14:49 -0700
Re: Dr. Ford has made 700,000$, so far, with her GoFundMe account. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 14:53 -0700
Re: Dr. Ford has made 700,000$, so far, with her GoFundMe account. "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> - 2018-10-01 14:54 -0700
Re: Dr. Ford has made 700,000$, so far, with her GoFundMe account. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 15:02 -0700
Re: Dr. Ford has made 700,000$, so far, with her GoFundMe account. "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> - 2018-10-01 15:06 -0700
Re: Dr. Ford has made 700,000$, so far, with her GoFundMe account. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 15:18 -0700
Re: Dr. Ford has made 700,000$, so far, with her GoFundMe account. "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> - 2018-10-01 15:21 -0700
Re: Dr. Ford has made 700,000$, so far, with her GoFundMe account. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 15:26 -0700
Re: Dr. Ford has made 700,000$, so far, with her GoFundMe account. "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> - 2018-10-01 15:29 -0700
Re: Dr. Ford has made 700,000$, so far, with her GoFundMe account. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 15:33 -0700
Re: Dr. Ford has made 700,000$, so far, with her GoFundMe account. "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> - 2018-10-01 15:36 -0700
Re: Dr. Ford has made 700,000$, so far, with her GoFundMe account. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 15:38 -0700
Re: Dr. Ford has made 700,000$, so far, with her GoFundMe account. "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> - 2018-10-01 15:41 -0700
Re: Dr. Ford has made 700,000$, so far, with her GoFundMe account. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 15:46 -0700
Re: Dr. Ford has made 700,000$, so far, with her GoFundMe account. "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> - 2018-10-01 15:57 -0700
Re: Dr. Ford has made 700,000$, so far, with her GoFundMe account. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 16:00 -0700
Re: Dr. Ford has made 700,000$, so far, with her GoFundMe account. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 16:29 -0700
Re: Dr. Ford has made 700,000$, so far, with her GoFundMe account. "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> - 2018-10-01 21:27 -0700
Re: Dr. Ford has made 700,000$, so far, with her GoFundMe account. John of Patmos <jpatmos1318@gmXil.com> - 2018-10-02 07:59 +0000
Re: Dr. Ford has made 700,000$, so far, with her GoFundMe account. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 01:19 -0700
Re: Dr. Ford has made 700,000$, so far, with her GoFundMe account. "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> - 2018-10-02 13:46 -0700
Re: Dr. Ford has made 700,000$, so far, with her GoFundMe account. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 13:49 -0700
Re: Dr. Ford has made 700,000$, so far, with her GoFundMe account. "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> - 2018-10-02 14:10 -0700
Re: Dr. Ford has made 700,000$, so far, with her GoFundMe account. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 14:36 -0700
Re: Dr. Ford has made 700,000$, so far, with her GoFundMe account. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 16:13 -0700
Re: Dr. Ford has made 700,000$, so far, with her GoFundMe account. "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> - 2018-10-01 15:28 -0700
Re: Dr. Ford has made 700,000$, so far, with her GoFundMe account. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 15:32 -0700
Re: Dr. Ford has made 700,000$, so far, with her GoFundMe account. "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> - 2018-10-01 15:40 -0700
Re: Dr. Ford has made 700,000$, so far, with her GoFundMe account. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 15:45 -0700
Re: Dr. Ford has made 700,000$, so far, with her GoFundMe account. "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> - 2018-10-01 15:54 -0700
Re: Dr. Ford has made 700,000$, so far, with her GoFundMe account. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 15:59 -0700
Re: Dr. Ford has made 700,000$, so far, with her GoFundMe account. Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 16:29 -0700
Re: Dr. Ford has made 700,000$, so far, with her GoFundMe account. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 16:33 -0700
Re: Dr. Ford has made 700,000$, so far, with her GoFundMe account. Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 16:46 -0700
Re: Dr. Ford has made 700,000$, so far, with her GoFundMe account. "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-10-01 21:35 -0400
Re: Dr. Ford has made 700,000$, so far, with her GoFundMe account. "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> - 2018-10-01 15:03 -0700
Re: Dr. Ford has made 700,000$, so far, with her GoFundMe account. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 14:55 -0700
Re: Were Dr. Ford the sweet, innocent, righteous woman you imagine... -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-10-01 12:07 -0700
Re: Were Dr. Ford the sweet, innocent, righteous woman you imagine... chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-10-01 14:13 -0500
Re: Were Dr. Ford the sweet, innocent, righteous woman you imagine... RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 19:35 +0000
Re: Were Dr. Ford the sweet, innocent, righteous woman you imagine... chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-10-01 14:38 -0500
Re: Were Dr. Ford the sweet, innocent, righteous woman you imagine... -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-10-01 12:55 -0700
Re: Were Dr. Ford the sweet, innocent, righteous woman you imagine... RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 19:58 +0000
Re: Were Dr. Ford the sweet, innocent, righteous woman you imagine... chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-10-01 15:07 -0500
Re: Were Dr. Ford the sweet, innocent, righteous woman you imagine... RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 20:15 +0000
Re: Were Dr. Ford the sweet, innocent, righteous woman you imagine... chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-10-02 07:44 -0500
Re: Were Dr. Ford the sweet, innocent, righteous woman you imagine... Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 07:20 -0700
Re: Were Dr. Ford the sweet, innocent, righteous woman you imagine... Sam O'Nella <poison@donteatit.net> - 2018-10-01 16:15 -0400
Re: Were Dr. Ford the sweet, innocent, righteous woman you imagine... Sam O'Nella <poison@donteatit.net> - 2018-10-01 15:51 -0400
Re: Were Dr. Ford the sweet, innocent, righteous woman you imagine... SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-10-01 22:57 +0000
Re: Were Dr. Ford the sweet, innocent, righteous woman you imagine... chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-10-02 07:28 -0500
Re: Were Dr. Ford the sweet, innocent, righteous woman you imagine... SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-10-02 14:41 +0000
Everyone on the left is jealous, seething with intent. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-10-01 06:57 -0700
Re: Everyone on the left is jealous, seething with intent. -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-10-01 07:42 -0700
Re: Everyone on the left is jealous, seething with intent. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 07:52 -0700
Dr. Ford will leave the country ? Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-10-01 10:01 -0700
Re: Dr. Ford will leave the country ? Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-10-01 13:56 -0500
Re: Dr. Ford will leave the country ? "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-10-01 15:00 -0400
Re: Dr. Ford will leave the country ? % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 12:02 -0700
Re: Dr. Ford will leave the country ? Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 12:57 -0700
Re: Dr. Ford will leave the country ? Sam O'Nella <poison@donteatit.net> - 2018-10-01 16:01 -0400
Re: Dr. Ford will leave the country ? SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-10-01 23:09 +0000
Re: Dr. Ford will leave the country ? benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 19:30 -0400
Re: Dr. Ford will leave the country ? Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-10-01 21:15 -0500
Re: Dr. Ford will leave the country ? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 19:36 -0700
I'm too Ugly to fuck (U), so it's LGBTQAXYZRNEHPU. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-10-01 20:43 -0700
Re: I'm too Ugly to fuck (U), so it's LGBTQAXYZRNEHPU. Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-10-02 15:34 -0500
Re: I'm too Ugly to fuck (U), so it's LGBTQAXYZRNEHPU. snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2018-10-03 09:02 +0100
Re: I'm too Ugly to fuck (U), so it's LGBTQAXYZRNEHPU. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 01:30 -0700
Re: I'm too Ugly to fuck (U), so it's LGBTQAXYZRNEHPU. Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2018-10-03 06:45 -0700
Re: I'm too Ugly to fuck (U), so it's LGBTQAXYZRNEHPU. Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-10-03 08:50 -0500
Re: I'm too Ugly to fuck (U), so it's LGBTQAXYZRNEHPU. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-10-03 14:15 +0000
Re: I'm too Ugly to fuck (U), so it's LGBTQAXYZRNEHPU. Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2018-10-03 08:23 -0700
Re: I'm too Ugly to fuck (U), so it's LGBTQAXYZRNEHPU. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-10-03 10:22 -0700
Re: I'm too Ugly to fuck (U), so it's LGBTQAXYZRNEHPU. snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2018-10-03 16:28 +0100
Re: I'm too Ugly to fuck (U), so it's LGBTQAXYZRNEHPU. Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2018-10-03 09:30 -0700
Re: I'm too Ugly to fuck (U), so it's LGBTQAXYZRNEHPU. snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2018-10-03 19:18 +0100
Re: I'm too Ugly to fuck (U), so it's LGBTQAXYZRNEHPU. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 12:08 -0700
Re: I'm too Ugly to fuck (U), so it's LGBTQAXYZRNEHPU. Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2018-10-03 13:40 -0700
Re: I'm too Ugly to fuck (U), so it's LGBTQAXYZRNEHPU. Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-10-03 14:22 -0500
Re: I'm too Ugly to fuck (U), so it's LGBTQAXYZRNEHPU. Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2018-10-03 13:39 -0700
Re: I'm too Ugly to fuck (U), so it's LGBTQAXYZRNEHPU. snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2018-10-03 21:58 +0100
Re: I'm too Ugly to fuck (U), so it's LGBTQAXYZRNEHPU. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 14:05 -0700
Re: I'm too Ugly to fuck (U), so it's LGBTQAXYZRNEHPU. snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2018-10-03 22:31 +0100
Re: I'm too Ugly to fuck (U), so it's LGBTQAXYZRNEHPU. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 14:37 -0700
Re: I'm too Ugly to fuck (U), so it's LGBTQAXYZRNEHPU. Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-10-04 20:55 -0500
Re: I'm too Ugly to fuck (U), so it's LGBTQAXYZRNEHPU. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 14:44 -0700
Re: Dr. Ford will leave the country ? % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 12:00 -0700
Re: Dr. Ford will leave the country ? Sam O'Nella <poison@donteatit.net> - 2018-10-01 15:52 -0400
Re: Dr. Ford will leave the country ? -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-10-01 13:28 -0700
Re: Dr. Ford will leave the country ? Sam O'Nella <poison@donteatit.net> - 2018-10-01 16:39 -0400
Re: Dr. Ford will leave the country ? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 14:23 -0700
Re: Dr. Ford will leave the country ? Sam O'Nella <poison@donteatit.net> - 2018-10-01 16:47 -0400
Re: Dr. Ford will leave the country ? -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-10-01 14:37 -0700
Re: Dr. Ford will leave the country ? Sam O'Nella <poison@donteatit.net> - 2018-10-01 17:46 -0400
Re: Dr. Ford will leave the country ? -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-10-01 16:05 -0700
Re: Dr. Ford will leave the country ? Sam O'Nella <poison@donteatit.net> - 2018-10-01 21:41 -0400
Re: Dr. Ford will leave the country ? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 21:56 -0700
Re: Dr. Ford will leave the country ? -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-10-02 06:30 -0700
Re: Dr. Ford will leave the country ? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 06:48 -0700
Depending on how you define the word "is"... Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-10-02 06:58 -0700
Re: Dr. Ford will leave the country ? chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-10-02 08:49 -0500
Re: Dr. Ford will leave the country ? chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-10-02 09:54 -0500
Re: Dr. Ford will leave the country ? Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 13:47 -0700
Re: Dr. Ford will leave the country ? Sam O'Nella <poison@donteatit.net> - 2018-10-01 16:53 -0400
Re: Dr. Ford will leave the country ? Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 14:10 -0700
Re: Dr. Ford will leave the country ? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 14:07 -0700
Re: Dr. Ford will leave the country ? SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-10-01 23:10 +0000
Re: Dr. Ford will leave the country ? RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 00:29 +0000
Re: Dr. Ford will leave the country ? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 18:33 -0700
Re: Dr. Ford will leave the country ? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 22:12 -0700
Re: Dr. Ford will leave the country ? Sam O'Nella <poison@donteatit.net> - 2018-10-01 21:43 -0400
Re: Dr. Ford will leave the country ? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 19:04 -0700
Re: Dr. Ford will leave the country ? SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-10-02 13:40 +0000
Re: Dr. Ford will leave the country ? -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-10-01 17:41 -0700
Re: Dr. Ford will leave the country ? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 18:02 -0700
Re: Dr. Ford will leave the country ? Sam O'Nella <poison@donteatit.net> - 2018-10-01 21:43 -0400
Re: Dr. Ford will leave the country ? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 21:40 -0700
Re: Dr. Ford will leave the country ? Your Friendly Neighbourhood Puppy Whistle Holder Emeritus ðķįŽ <root@127.0.0.1> - 2018-10-01 16:02 -0500
Re: Dr. Ford will leave the country ? Sam O'Nella <poison@donteatit.net> - 2018-10-01 17:04 -0400
Re: Dr. Ford will leave the country ? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 15:26 -0700
Re: Dr. Ford will leave the country ? SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-10-01 23:08 +0000
Re: Dr. Ford will leave the country ? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-10-01 21:15 -0700
Re: Were Dr. Ford the sweet, innocent, righteous woman you imagine... chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-10-01 10:03 -0500
Re: Dr Ford was just stupid, not immoral ? benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 12:13 -0400
Re: Dr Ford was just stupid, not immoral ? chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-10-01 07:33 -0500
Re: Was she looking for love ? "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-09-30 11:29 -0400
Re: Was she looking for love ? benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 12:19 -0400
Re: Was she looking for love ? "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-09-30 12:26 -0400
Re: Was she looking for love ? Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-09-30 19:59 +0000
Re: Was she looking for love ? Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 13:40 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Bricked <bricked@barkingspiders.com> - 2018-09-30 17:52 -0500
Re: Was she looking for love ? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-09-30 13:11 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-09-30 16:22 -0400
Re: Was she looking for love ? Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-09-30 20:25 +0000
Re: Was she looking for love ? Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 13:38 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-10-01 02:01 +0000
Re: Was she looking for love ? Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 00:04 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-09-30 16:39 -0400
Re: Was she looking for love ? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-09-30 17:08 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-10-01 02:03 +0000
Re: Was she looking for love ? pandora <pandora@peak.org> - 2018-10-01 23:22 -0500
Re: Was she looking for love ? "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-10-02 10:09 -0400
Re: Was she looking for love ? Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 11:02 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-10-02 14:16 -0400
Re: Was she looking for love ? Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 11:25 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-10-02 14:35 -0400
Re: Was she looking for love ? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 12:02 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 13:18 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 13:22 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 20:04 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 20:18 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 20:34 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-10-03 13:09 +0000
Re: Was she looking for love ? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 06:26 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-10-03 11:34 -0400
Re: Was she looking for love ? SWD <swd@whitehouse.gov> - 2018-10-03 18:15 +0000
Re: Was she looking for love ? Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 13:19 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-10-03 16:38 -0400
Re: Was she looking for love ? % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 13:50 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 13:59 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-10-03 17:17 -0400
Re: Was she looking for love ? % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 14:27 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 14:47 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 14:58 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 20:12 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-10-04 06:51 +0000
Re: Was she looking for love ? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 00:21 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 11:46 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2018-10-03 09:07 +0100
Re: Was she looking for love ? Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2018-10-03 06:47 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 07:13 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-10-03 11:37 -0400
Re: Was she looking for love ? snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2018-10-03 16:52 +0100
Re: Was she looking for love ? "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-10-03 12:08 -0400
Re: Was she looking for love ? Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2018-10-03 09:38 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2018-10-03 19:26 +0100
Re: Was she looking for love ? "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-10-03 14:32 -0400
Re: Was she looking for love ? Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2018-10-03 13:42 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-10-03 16:47 -0400
Re: Was she looking for love ? snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2018-10-03 22:05 +0100
Re: Was she looking for love ? % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 14:08 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2018-10-03 22:42 +0100
Re: Was she looking for love ? Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2018-10-03 15:33 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2018-10-04 13:53 +0100
Re: Was she looking for love ? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 06:04 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2018-10-04 06:18 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2018-10-03 13:41 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2018-10-03 22:10 +0100
Re: Was she looking for love ? Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2018-10-03 15:32 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2018-10-04 13:53 +0100
Re: Was she looking for love ? Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2018-10-04 06:17 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2018-10-04 17:36 +0100
Re: Was she looking for love ? Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2018-10-04 10:53 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2018-10-04 19:10 +0100
Re: Was she looking for love ? Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2018-10-04 12:41 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2018-10-04 20:51 +0100
Re: Was she looking for love ? "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-10-04 15:56 -0400
Re: Was she looking for love ? onion@anon.invalid (Mr On!on) - 2018-10-04 22:13 +0100
Re: Was she looking for love ? % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 15:41 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 15:57 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-10-05 03:55 +0000
Re: Was she looking for love ? snipeco.2@gmail.com (Wader of Doom) - 2018-10-05 10:08 +0100
Re: Was she looking for love ? Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2018-10-05 02:24 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-05 02:55 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-10-05 06:57 -0400
Re: Was she looking for love ? snipeco.2@gmail.com (Wader of Doom) - 2018-10-05 12:48 +0100
Re: Was she looking for love ? kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-10-05 09:04 -0400
Re: Was she looking for love ? snipeco.2@gmail.com (Wader of Doom) - 2018-10-05 14:19 +0100
Re: Was she looking for love ? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-05 06:31 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2018-10-05 07:01 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-05 07:19 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Sam O'Nella <poison@donteatit.net> - 2018-10-05 10:36 -0400
Re: Was she looking for love ? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-05 08:05 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? snipeco.2@gmail.com (Wader of Doom) - 2018-10-05 17:45 +0100
Re: Was she looking for love ? kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-10-05 10:43 -0400
Re: Was she looking for love ? snipeco.2@gmail.com (Wader of Doom) - 2018-10-05 17:49 +0100
Re: Was she looking for love ? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 13:06 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 14:28 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? pandora <pandora@peak.org> - 2018-10-03 16:42 -0500
Re: Was she looking for love ? snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2018-10-03 22:49 +0100
Re: Was she looking for love ? pandora <pandora@peak.org> - 2018-10-03 17:16 -0500
Re: Was she looking for love ? % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 15:30 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 16:02 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? pandora <pandora@peak.org> - 2018-10-03 19:21 -0500
Re: Was she looking for love ? % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 17:24 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 20:21 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 13:05 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 14:15 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 15:41 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 17:58 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 18:01 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Lunar Opticfibre <jfwaldby@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 19:27 -0600
Re: Was she looking for love ? % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-10-05 12:24 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-10-05 14:04 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-10-05 14:14 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-10-04 21:04 -0400
Re: Was she looking for love ? Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 18:17 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-10-04 21:27 -0400
Re: Was she looking for love ? Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 18:34 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-10-04 21:45 -0400
Re: Was she looking for love ? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 19:19 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 22:21 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 18:33 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-10-03 17:49 -0400
Re: Was she looking for love ? Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-10-04 06:58 +0000
Re: Was she looking for love ? snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2018-10-04 08:45 +0100
Re: Was she looking for love ? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 01:07 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 13:05 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2018-10-04 02:12 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 04:15 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2018-10-04 13:53 +0100
Re: Was she looking for love ? kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-10-04 05:15 -0400
Re: Was she looking for love ? snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2018-10-04 13:41 +0100
Re: Was she looking for love ? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 06:19 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2018-10-04 07:56 -0600
Re: Was she looking for love ? Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-10-05 03:58 +0000
Re: Was she looking for love ? pandora <pandora@peak.org> - 2018-10-05 03:24 -0500
Re: Was she looking for love ? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-05 01:51 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-10-05 06:58 -0400
Re: Was she looking for love ? pandora <pandora@peak.org> - 2018-10-03 16:24 -0500
Re: Was she looking for love ? "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-10-03 17:32 -0400
Re: Was she looking for love ? % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 14:47 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? pandora <pandora@peak.org> - 2018-10-03 17:14 -0500
Re: Was she looking for love ? "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-10-03 18:32 -0400
Re: Was she looking for love ? % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 15:35 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? "Checkmate" <ricksabian1@qmail.com> - 2018-10-03 18:39 -0400
Re: Was she looking for love ? Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 14:42 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? pandora <pandora@peak.org> - 2018-10-03 17:12 -0500
Re: Was she looking for love ? "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-10-03 18:17 -0400
Re: Was she looking for love ? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-09-30 17:07 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 17:51 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> - 2018-09-30 13:49 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-09-30 16:53 -0400
Re: Was she looking for love ? "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> - 2018-09-30 14:12 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 14:21 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> - 2018-09-30 14:31 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 13:55 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> - 2018-09-30 14:21 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-09-30 11:26 -0400
Re: Was she looking for love ? SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-09-30 16:05 +0000
Re: Was she looking for love ? benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 12:18 -0400
Re: Was she looking for love ? "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-09-30 12:23 -0400
Re: Was she looking for love ? SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-09-30 23:07 +0000
Re: Was she looking for love ? "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-09-30 19:11 -0400
Re: Was she looking for love ? % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 16:15 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Bob Robertson <bobrobertsontsy66@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 18:19 -0500
Re: Was she looking for love ? "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-09-30 19:22 -0400
Re: Was she looking for love ? Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 16:40 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Bob Robertson <bobrobertsontsy66@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 20:43 -0500
Re: Was she looking for love ? Bob Robertson <bobrobertsontsy66@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 20:42 -0500
Re: Was she looking for love ? Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 10:32 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-09-30 13:44 -0400
Re: Was she looking for love ? mixed nuts <melopsitticus@undulatus.budgie> - 2018-09-30 13:57 -0400
Re: Was she looking for love ? "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-09-30 14:05 -0400
Re: Was she looking for love ? mixed nuts <melopsitticus@undulatus.budgie> - 2018-09-30 14:20 -0400
Re: Was she looking for love ? Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 11:51 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? mixed nuts <melopsitticus@undulatus.budgie> - 2018-09-30 15:13 -0400
Re: Was she looking for love ? Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-09-30 20:06 +0000
Re: Was she looking for love ? "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-09-30 16:15 -0400
Re: Was she looking for love ? Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-09-30 20:20 +0000
Re: Was she looking for love ? "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-09-30 16:34 -0400
Re: Was she looking for love ? snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2018-09-30 21:49 +0100
Re: Was she looking for love ? Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-30 14:00 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2018-09-30 22:13 +0100
Re: Was she looking for love ? % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 14:22 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2018-09-30 22:27 +0100
Re: Was she looking for love ? % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 14:38 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2018-09-30 22:44 +0100
Re: Was she looking for love ? % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 14:52 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2018-09-30 23:00 +0100
Re: Was she looking for love ? % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 15:06 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2018-10-01 07:57 +0100
Re: Was she looking for love ? Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2018-10-01 01:54 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2018-10-01 10:14 +0100
Re: Was she looking for love ? Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2018-10-01 02:52 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 02:55 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 04:13 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 03:10 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2018-10-01 12:56 +0100
Re: Was she looking for love ? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 05:31 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 06:18 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2018-10-01 05:46 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2018-10-01 13:58 +0100
Re: Was she looking for love ? Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2018-10-01 06:42 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2018-10-01 17:11 +0100
Re: Was she looking for love ? Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2018-10-01 10:35 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2018-10-01 18:42 +0100
Re: Was she looking for love ? "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-10-01 13:44 -0400
Re: Was she looking for love ? snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2018-10-01 19:03 +0100
Re: Was she looking for love ? "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-10-01 14:09 -0400
Re: Was she looking for love ? Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2018-10-01 11:07 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-10-01 14:12 -0400
Re: Was she looking for love ? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 12:34 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? mixed nuts <melopsitticus@undulatus.budgie> - 2018-10-01 13:56 -0400
Re: Was she looking for love ? snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2018-10-01 19:07 +0100
Re: Was she looking for love ? mixed nuts <melopsitticus@undulatus.budgie> - 2018-10-02 00:47 -0400
Re: Was she looking for love ? Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-10-02 02:49 +0000
Re: Was she looking for love ? "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-10-01 22:59 -0400
Re: Was she looking for love ? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 20:23 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> - 2018-10-01 20:35 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> - 2018-10-01 20:33 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 20:38 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? mixed nuts <melopsitticus@undulatus.budgie> - 2018-10-02 00:28 -0400
Re: Was she looking for love ? snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2018-10-02 07:42 +0100
Re: Was she looking for love ? % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 12:31 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> - 2018-10-01 16:40 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 16:52 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 17:47 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> - 2018-10-01 20:32 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2018-10-02 09:59 +0100
Re: Was she looking for love ? "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> - 2018-10-02 14:15 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-10-01 02:10 +0000
Re: Was she looking for love ? snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2018-10-01 07:57 +0100
Re: Was she looking for love ? Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 23:57 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-10-01 02:09 +0000
Re: Was she looking for love ? snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2018-10-01 07:57 +0100
Re: Was she looking for love ? Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2018-10-01 01:54 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2018-10-01 10:14 +0100
Re: Was she looking for love ? Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 00:01 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-10-02 02:50 +0000
Re: Was she looking for love ? Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 13:35 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-10-01 02:12 +0000
Were Kavanaugh such an incel, he would've have been locked away, long ago. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-09-30 19:48 -0700
Re: Were Kavanaugh such an incel, he would've have been locked away, long ago. Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-10-01 04:22 +0000
Re: Were Kavanaugh such an incel, he would've have been locked away, long ago. Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 23:31 -0700
Re: Were Kavanaugh such an incel, he would've have been locked away, long ago. Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-10-01 06:43 +0000
Re: Were Kavanaugh such an incel, he would've have been locked away, long ago. Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 00:12 -0700
Re: Were Kavanaugh such an incel, he would've have been locked away, long ago. Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2018-10-01 05:27 -0600
Re: Were Kavanaugh such an incel, he would've have been locked away, long ago. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 04:45 -0700
Re: Were Kavanaugh such an incel, he would've have been locked away, long ago. Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-10-01 11:11 -0500
Re: Were Kavanaugh such an incel, he would've have been locked away, long ago. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 09:27 -0700
Re: Were Kavanaugh such an incel, he would've have been locked away, long ago. "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-10-01 13:09 -0400
The Sex, Drugs, and Alcohol Party ? Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-10-01 06:06 -0700
Re: The Sex, Drugs, and Alcohol Party ? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 06:34 -0700
Re: Were Kavanaugh such an incel, he would've have been locked away, long ago. Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2018-10-01 05:25 -0600
Nadegda is the only one who knows the true story, not the FBI. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-10-01 05:14 -0700
Re: Nadegda is the only one who knows the true story, not the FBI. Your Friendly Neighbourhood Puppy Whistle Holder Emeritus ðķįŽ <root@127.0.0.1> - 2018-10-01 08:50 -0500
Re: Nadegda is the only one who knows the true story, not the FBI. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 07:21 -0700
Re: Nadegda is the only one who knows the true story, not the FBI. "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> - 2018-10-01 14:09 -0700
Re: Nadegda is the only one who knows the true story, not the FBI. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 15:10 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 23:56 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2018-10-01 05:37 -0600
Re: Was she looking for love ? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 05:00 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-10-01 13:44 +0000
Re: Was she looking for love ? "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> - 2018-10-01 13:57 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 19:27 -0400
Re: Was she looking for love ? "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> - 2018-10-01 16:37 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> - 2018-10-01 16:38 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 17:00 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 18:48 -0700
Were you ever kidnapped anonymously ? Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-09-30 14:02 -0700
Re: Were you ever kidnapped anonymously ? % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 14:06 -0700
Re: Were you ever kidnapped anonymously ? Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-10-01 02:14 +0000
Why did this "incel bullshit" happen to Dr Ford, and not Nadegda ?! Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-09-30 19:31 -0700
Why did this "incel bullshit" happen to Dr. Ford, and not Nadegda ?! Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-09-30 19:32 -0700
Re: Why did this "incel bullshit" happen to Dr. Ford, and not Nadegda ?! Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-10-01 04:24 +0000
Re: Why did this "incel bullshit" happen to Dr. Ford, and not Nadegda ?! Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 21:44 -0700
Nadegda got kidnapped, pushed into a room, at a high class party ? Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-10-01 05:37 -0700
Re: Nadegda got kidnapped, pushed into a room, at a high class party ? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 06:03 -0700
Re: Nadegda got kidnapped, pushed into a room, at a high class party ? benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 11:47 -0400
Re: Nadegda got kidnapped, pushed into a room, at a high class party ? Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-10-01 11:15 -0500
Re: Nadegda got kidnapped, pushed into a room, at a high class party ? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 09:42 -0700
Re: Nadegda got kidnapped, pushed into a room, at a high class party ? Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-10-02 03:00 +0000
Re: Nadegda got kidnapped, pushed into a room, at a high class party ? benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 15:26 -0400
Re: Nadegda got kidnapped, pushed into a room, at a high class party ? Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-10-02 21:51 +0000
Re: Nadegda got kidnapped, pushed into a room, at a high class party ? % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 14:53 -0700
Re: Nadegda got kidnapped, pushed into a room, at a high class party ? benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 18:15 -0400
Re: Nadegda got kidnapped, pushed into a room, at a high class party ? % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 15:16 -0700
Re: Why did this "incel bullshit" happen to Dr. Ford, and not Nadegda ?! SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-10-01 13:31 +0000
Re: Were you ever kidnapped anonymously ? Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 23:42 -0700
Re: Were you ever kidnapped anonymously ? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 23:49 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2018-09-30 19:48 -0600
Re: Was she looking for love ? Janithor <Janithor@comcast.net> - 2018-09-30 11:15 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-09-30 14:19 -0400
Re: Was she looking for love ? mixed nuts <melopsitticus@undulatus.budgie> - 2018-09-30 14:23 -0400
Re: Was she looking for love ? Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 23:44 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-10-01 06:46 +0000
Re: Was she looking for love ? Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 00:06 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Bob Robertson <bobrobertsontsy66@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 05:55 -0500
Re: Was she looking for love ? Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 10:40 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-10-02 03:02 +0000
Re: Was she looking for love ? "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-10-01 10:49 -0400
Re: Was she looking for love ? Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-10-02 03:04 +0000
Re: Was she looking for love ? "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> - 2018-10-01 16:31 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 17:02 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 17:32 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-10-02 03:06 +0000
Re: Was she looking for love ? Lunar Opticfibre <jfwaldby@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 21:09 -0600
Re: Was she looking for love ? Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-09-30 20:03 +0000
Re: Was she looking for love ? Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 13:34 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-09-30 16:42 -0400
Re: Was she looking for love ? % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 13:54 -0700
Greg, the incel. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-09-30 14:23 -0700
Re: Greg, the incel. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 14:27 -0700
Re: Greg, the incel. pandora <pandora@peak.org> - 2018-10-01 20:27 -0500
Re: Greg, the incel. "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-10-01 21:49 -0400
Re: Greg, the incel. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 21:25 -0700
Re: Greg, the incel. Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-10-02 04:10 +0000
Re: Greg, the incel. "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-10-02 10:14 -0400
Re: Greg, the incel. Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 11:07 -0700
Re: Greg, the incel. Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-10-02 21:53 +0000
Re: Greg, the incel. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 14:57 -0700
Re: Greg, the incel. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 15:22 -0700
Re: Greg, the incel. pandora <pandora@peak.org> - 2018-10-02 15:36 -0500
Re: Greg, the incel. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 13:39 -0700
Re: Greg, the incel. Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 17:19 -0700
Re: Greg, the incel. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 17:30 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-10-01 02:16 +0000
If a woman doesn't have a high net worth, you shouldn't touch her. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-09-30 13:49 -0700
Re: If a woman doesn't have a high net worth, you shouldn't touch her. Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-10-01 02:17 +0000
If a woman doesn't have a high net worth, you shouldn't touch her. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-09-30 19:41 -0700
Re: If a woman doesn't have a high net worth, you shouldn't touch her. Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-10-01 04:26 +0000
Everything Stacy wants costs Chad money, and lots of it. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-10-01 05:54 -0700
Re: Everything Stacy wants costs Chad money, and lots of it. benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 11:49 -0400
Re: Everything Stacy wants costs Chad money, and lots of it. Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-10-02 03:09 +0000
Re: If a woman doesn't have a high net worth, you shouldn't touch her. snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2018-10-01 08:05 +0100
Re: Was she looking for love ? Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-10-01 02:15 +0000
Re: Was she looking for love ? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 19:57 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 23:54 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 00:05 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-10-01 13:36 +0000
Re: Was she looking for love ? Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 10:42 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 12:18 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> - 2018-10-01 16:29 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-10-02 03:17 +0000
Re: Was she looking for love ? Lunar Opticfibre <jfwaldby@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 21:21 -0600
Re: Was she looking for love ? "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> - 2018-10-01 20:57 -0700
Trump is a salesman. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-10-01 21:37 -0700
Re: Trump is a salesman. "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> - 2018-10-01 22:06 -0700
Re: Trump is a salesman. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 22:27 -0700
Re: Trump is a salesman. Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-10-02 06:44 +0000
Re: Trump is a salesman. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 00:01 -0700
Re: Trump is a salesman. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 01:49 -0700
Re: Trump is a salesman. benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 15:29 -0400
Trump could sell accusations to a Dr. Ford. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-10-02 12:53 -0700
Re: Trump is a salesman. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-10-02 15:08 -0500
Re: Was she looking for love ? "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-10-02 10:17 -0400
Re: Was she looking for love ? Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-10-02 21:56 +0000
Take your kids and friends with you, please. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-10-01 21:45 -0700
Re: Take your kids and friends with you, please. benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 15:30 -0400
Re: Take your kids and friends with you, please. "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-10-02 15:35 -0400
Re: Take your kids and friends with you, please. Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 13:16 -0700
China's Slave Trade. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-10-02 13:01 -0700
Re: China's Slave Trade. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 13:10 -0700
Re: Take your kids and friends with you, please. Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 13:15 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-10-02 10:16 -0400
Re: Was she looking for love ? SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-10-02 14:44 +0000
Re: Was she looking for love ? mixed nuts <melopsitticus@undulatus.budgie> - 2018-10-02 11:11 -0400
Re: Was she looking for love ? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 08:22 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 08:38 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 11:14 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Ser Gregor Clegane <sergregor@lannistermail.raven> - 2018-10-02 14:23 -0400
Re: Was she looking for love ? Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 13:31 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-10-02 16:46 -0400
Re: Was she looking for love ? Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 14:54 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-10-02 22:22 +0000
Re: Was she looking for love ? % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 15:24 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-10-02 18:28 -0400
Re: Was she looking for love ? benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 20:18 -0400
Re: Was she looking for love ? Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-10-03 00:53 +0000
Re: Was she looking for love ? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 18:14 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> - 2018-10-02 20:06 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-10-03 04:11 +0000
Re: Was she looking for love ? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 21:37 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-10-03 07:04 -0500
Re: Was she looking for love ? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 05:23 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-10-02 21:58 +0000
Re: Was she looking for love ? % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 15:10 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 20:45 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 21:05 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Janithor <Janithor@comcast.net> - 2018-10-02 12:35 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-10-02 15:45 -0400
Re: Was she looking for love ? Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 13:22 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 13:33 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-10-02 16:48 -0400
Re: Was she looking for love ? % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 13:58 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 14:49 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 12:48 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2018-10-03 16:54 +0100
Re: Was she looking for love ? Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-09-30 20:01 +0000
Re: Was she looking for love ? "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-09-30 16:10 -0400
Re: Was she looking for love ? Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-09-30 20:22 +0000
Re: Was she looking for love ? Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 13:39 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 10:17 -0700
Re: Was she looking for love ? Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-10-02 03:22 +0000
Re: Was she looking for love ? "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-10-02 10:23 -0400
Re: Was she looking for love ? Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-10-02 22:01 +0000
Re: Was she looking for love ? benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 12:09 -0400
Re: I'm not half as retarded as you need me to be, Andrzej. Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-09-30 05:34 +0000
Dr Ford was equally "guilty" for going into a drunkard's bedroom. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-09-30 06:25 -0700
Re: Dr Ford was equally "guilty" for going into a drunkard's bedroom. Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-09-30 20:07 +0000
Re: I'm not half as retarded as you need me to be, Andrzej. "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> - 2018-09-30 14:37 -0700
Re: I'm not half as retarded as you need me to be, Andrzej. "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> - 2018-09-29 20:47 -0700
Re: I'm not half as retarded as you need me to be, Andrzej. "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-09-30 09:26 -0400
Re: I'm not half as retarded as you need me to be, Andrzej. benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 12:21 -0400
Re: I'm not half as retarded as you need me to be, Andrzej. "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-09-30 12:27 -0400
Re: I'm not half as retarded as you need me to be, Andrzej. Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 10:19 -0700
Re: I'm not half as retarded as you need me to be, Andrzej. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-10-01 08:08 -0500
Re: I'm not half as retarded as you need me to be, Andrzej. onion@anon.invalid (Mr On!on) - 2018-10-01 17:19 +0100
Re: I'm not half as retarded as you need me to be, Andrzej. Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 10:43 -0700
Re: I'm not half as retarded as you need me to be, Andrzej. "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-10-01 13:48 -0400
Re: I'm not half as retarded as you need me to be, Andrzej. Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 15:38 -0700
Re: I'm not half as retarded as you need me to be, Andrzej. Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-10-02 03:24 +0000
Re: I'm not half as retarded as you need me to be, Andrzej. "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> - 2018-10-01 20:48 -0700
Re: I'm not half as retarded as you need me to be, Andrzej. "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> - 2018-10-02 13:42 -0700
Re: I'm not half as retarded as you need me to be, Andrzej. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 14:21 -0700
Re: I'm not half as retarded as you need me to be, Andrzej. "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> - 2018-10-01 14:02 -0700
Re: I'm not half as retarded as you need me to be, Andrzej. Lunar Opticfibre <jfwaldby@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 15:18 -0600
Re: I'm not half as retarded as you need me to be, Andrzej. "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> - 2018-10-01 16:29 -0700
Re: I'm not half as retarded as you need me to be, Andrzej. Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 22:36 -0700
Re: I'm not half as retarded as you need me to be, Andrzej. Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-10-02 06:46 +0000
Re: I'm not half as retarded as you need me to be, Andrzej. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 00:17 -0700
Re: I'm not half as retarded as you need me to be, Andrzej. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-09-29 19:18 -0700
Re: I'm not half as retarded as you need me to be, Andrzej. "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-09-29 19:41 -0400
Re: I'm not half as retarded as you need me to be, Andrzej. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-09-29 16:44 -0700
Re: I'm not half as retarded as you need me to be, Andrzej. Ser Gregor Clegane <sergregor@lannistermail.raven> - 2018-09-29 19:55 -0400
Re: I'm not half as retarded as you need me to be, Andrzej. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-09-29 16:58 -0700
Re: I'm not half as retarded as you need me to be, Andrzej. Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-09-30 01:21 +0000
Re: I'm not half as retarded as you need me to be, Andrzej. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-09-29 18:27 -0700
Re: I'm not half as retarded as you need me to be, Andrzej. Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> - 2018-09-29 18:48 -0700
More children is always better ? Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-09-27 10:23 -0700
Re: We need to eat more. Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-27 11:12 -0700
Re: We need to eat more. "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-09-27 14:27 -0400
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-09-21 17:14 -0400
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-09-21 21:18 +0000
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-09-21 14:34 -0700
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-09-21 14:45 -0700
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-09-21 16:18 -0700
The victims bear the cost, instead of the city. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-09-21 20:57 -0700
Re: The victims bear the cost, instead of the city. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-09-21 21:22 -0700
Re: The victims bear the cost, instead of the city. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-09-21 21:46 -0700
"IllGotten" gains. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-09-22 01:46 -0700
Re: "IllGotten" gains. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-09-22 02:19 -0700
Re: "IllGotten" gains. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-09-22 03:38 -0700
Re: "IllGotten" gains. benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-09-22 13:36 -0400
Re: "IllGotten" gains. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-09-22 10:54 -0700
Re: "IllGotten" gains. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-09-22 13:36 -0700
Re: "IllGotten" gains. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-09-22 13:41 -0700
Re: "IllGotten" gains. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-09-22 16:37 -0700
Re: "IllGotten" gains. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-09-22 17:55 -0700
Re: "IllGotten" gains. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-09-22 17:02 -0700
Re: "IllGotten" gains. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-09-22 17:11 -0700
Cigarettes kill old people, heroin kills the young. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-09-22 02:06 -0700
Re: Cigarettes kill old people, heroin kills the young. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-09-22 02:51 -0700
Re: Cigarettes kill old people, heroin kills the young. benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-09-22 13:37 -0400
Re: Today, the conservative stance is to let criminals run free. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-09-21 16:14 -0700
The victims bear the cost, instead of the city. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-09-21 20:40 -0700
Democratic Socialists are Tards ... Just thought that the COLA Fruits might want to know Simon bar Sinister <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2018-09-22 00:59 -0700
Re: Democratic Socialists are Tards ... Just thought that the COLA Fruits might want to know Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-09-22 01:17 -0700
Second verse, same as the first ... Simon bar Sinister <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2018-09-22 02:26 -0700
Re: Second verse, same as the first ... DFS <nospam@nospam.com> - 2018-09-22 09:50 -0400
Re: Second verse, same as the first ... SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-09-22 14:38 +0000
Re: Second verse, same as the first ... Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-09-22 08:02 -0700
Second verse, same as the first ... Simon bar Sinister <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2018-09-22 09:20 -0700
Re: Second verse, same as the first ... Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-09-22 09:36 -0700
Page 39 of 46 — ← Prev page 1 … 37 38 [39] 40 41 … 46 Next page →
| From | Jeff-Relf.Me @. |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-09-30 13:49 -0700 |
| Subject | If a woman doesn't have a high net worth, you shouldn't touch her. |
| Message-ID | <Jeff-Relf.Me@Sep.30--1.49pm.Seattle.2018> |
| In reply to | #469565 |
> we were just about to do The Deed, when she said she would, but > only if I told her I loved her first. > I told her I wouldn't say that because I didn't. If a woman doesn't have a high net worth, you shouldn't touch her; otherwise, she'll suck you dry ( not in a fun way ), and move on to the next.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-01 02:17 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: If a woman doesn't have a high net worth, you shouldn't touch her. |
| Message-ID | <pos041$mhp$124@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #469578 |
Time to trigger the right-wing snowflakes again. Melt, snowflakes, melt! On Sun, 30 Sep 2018 13:49:33 -0700, Jeff-Relf.Me wrote: >> we were just about to do The Deed, when she said she would, but only if >> I told her I loved her first. >> I told her I wouldn't say that because I didn't. > > If a woman doesn't have a high net worth, you shouldn't touch her; > otherwise, she'll suck you dry ( not in a fun way ), > and move on to the next. Proof, misogynist kook? -- FNVWe Nadegda "By all means, compare these shitheads to Nazis. Again and again. I'm with you." -- Mike Godwin, Aug 13, 2017, 8:03 PM
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jeff-Relf.Me @. |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-09-30 19:41 -0700 |
| Subject | If a woman doesn't have a high net worth, you shouldn't touch her. |
| Message-ID | <Jeff-Relf.Me@Sep.30--7.41pm.Seattle.2018> |
| In reply to | #469636 |
> > If a woman doesn't have a high net worth, you shouldn't touch her; > > otherwise, she'll suck you dry ( not in a fun way ), > > and move on to the next. > > Proof, misogynist kook? High Net Worth Women are a safer bet, that's all. P.S. your autism is showing, badly.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-01 04:26 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: If a woman doesn't have a high net worth, you shouldn't touch her. |
| Message-ID | <pos7ko$mhp$130@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #469640 |
Time to trigger the right-wing snowflakes again. Melt, snowflakes, melt! On Sun, 30 Sep 2018 19:41:30 -0700, Jeff-Relf.Me wrote: >> > If a woman doesn't have a high net worth, you shouldn't touch her; >> > otherwise, she'll suck you dry ( not in a fun way ), >> > and move on to the next. >> >> Proof, misogynist kook? > > High Net Worth Women are a safer bet, that's all. > > P.S. your autism is showing, badly. ... says the kook whose model of human social behavior is so simplistic it assumes 100% of all women are golddiggers. -- FNVWe Nadegda "By all means, compare these shitheads to Nazis. Again and again. I'm with you." -- Mike Godwin, Aug 13, 2017, 8:03 PM
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jeff-Relf.Me @. |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-01 05:54 -0700 |
| Subject | Everything Stacy wants costs Chad money, and lots of it. |
| Message-ID | <Jeff-Relf.Me@Oct.1--5.54am.Seattle.2018> |
| In reply to | #469655 |
Nadegda replied: > > > > If a woman doesn't have a high net worth, you shouldn't touch her. > > > > > > misogynist kook > > > > Your autism is showing. > > ... says the kook whose model of human social behavior > is so simplistic it assumes 100% of all women are golddiggers. Let's consider "Chad" and "Stacy", the proverbial hot "couple". All day long, everyday, Stacy tells Chad: "No, you can't fuck me, you idiot". All day long, everyday, Chad tells Stacy: "No, I don't love you, you idiot". Chad loves his dog, takes care of it; Stacy sees that, and wants it. Everything Stacy wants costs Chad money, and lots of it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-01 11:49 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: Everything Stacy wants costs Chad money, and lots of it. |
| Message-ID | <potfm0$lts$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #469734 |
On 10/1/2018 8:54 AM, Jeff-Relf.Me@. wrote: > Nadegda replied: >>>>> If a woman doesn't have a high net worth, you shouldn't touch her. >>>> >>>> misogynist kook >>> >>> Your autism is showing. >> >> ... says the kook whose model of human social behavior >> is so simplistic it assumes 100% of all women are golddiggers. > > Let's consider "Chad" and "Stacy", the proverbial hot "couple". > > All day long, everyday, Stacy tells Chad: "No, you can't fuck me, you idiot". > > All day long, everyday, Chad tells Stacy: "No, I don't love you, you idiot". > > Chad loves his dog, takes care of it; Stacy sees that, and wants it. > Everything Stacy wants costs Chad money, and lots of it. > Face the Truth, Rolf. All men are pigs and all women are whores!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-02 03:09 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Everything Stacy wants costs Chad money, and lots of it. |
| Message-ID | <pounhe$at2$15@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #469734 |
Time to trigger the right-wing snowflakes again. Melt, snowflakes, melt! On Mon, 01 Oct 2018 05:54:28 -0700, Jeff-Relf.Me wrote: > Nadegda replied: >> > > > If a woman doesn't have a high net worth, you shouldn't touch >> > > > her. >> > > >> > > misogynist kook >> > >> > Your autism is showing. >> >> ... says the kook whose model of human social behavior is so simplistic >> it assumes 100% of all women are golddiggers. > > Let's consider "Chad" and "Stacy", [more incel bullshit deleted] [nothing left] -- FNVWe Nadegda "By all means, compare these shitheads to Nazis. Again and again. I'm with you." -- Mike Godwin, Aug 13, 2017, 8:03 PM
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-01 08:05 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: If a woman doesn't have a high net worth, you shouldn't touch her. |
| Message-ID | <1nvzfrf.18hhvy51n77opaN%snipeco.2@gmail.com> |
| In reply to | #469640 |
<Jeff-Relf.Me> wrote: [of Nerdegda] > P.S. your autism is showing, badly. True, that. -- ^Ã^ My pet rock Gordon just is.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-01 02:15 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Was she looking for love ? |
| Message-ID | <pos00i$mhp$122@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #469565 |
Time to trigger the right-wing snowflakes again. Melt, snowflakes, melt! On Sun, 30 Sep 2018 13:34:08 -0700, Checkmate wrote: > Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading posts by > Checkmate! In article <pora76$mhp$108@dont-email.me>, nad318b404 > @gmail.invalid says... > > > >> Time to trigger the right-wing snowflakes again. Melt, snowflakes, >> melt! On Sun, 30 Sep 2018 10:32:34 -0700, Checkmate wrote: >> >> > Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading posts >> > by Checkmate! In article >> > <djq1rdt4na60fld5d79059fe0evo3n256v@4ax.com>, >> > greghall@yacht_maester.fake says... >> > >> > >> > >> >> On Sun, 30 Sep 2018 05:35:12, Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> >> >> wrote: >> >> >On Sat, 29 Sep 2018 20:55:02, Jeff-Relf.Me wrote: >> >> >> Why did Dr Ford go into a private bedroom with a drunk man ? >> >> >> Was she looking for love ? >> >> > >> >> >Irrelevant. Going into someone's bedroom with someone does not >> >> >amount to giving consent. >> >> >> >> Wrong! It amounts to a willingness to be petted up to including >> >> sexual intercourse just like going into a shower amounts to a >> >> willingness to get wet. >> >> >> >> You liberal feminists seem to think NONE of your actions have >> >> consequences. You would be wrong about that... >> > >> > Little girl thought it was okay to attend and participate in a >> > drinking party at age 15, and spends the next 36 years of her life >> > trying to get over the trauma of another drunken boy attempting to >> > make sexual advances towards her... which, by her own account, >> > amounted to some inappropriate roughhousing. The second guy jumps on >> > the bed, they all fall onto the floor, and she runs out of the room. >> > The two boys laugh, and don't even pursue her like one might expect. >> > Instead, they laugh and "ping-pong" down the stairs. That sounds >> > like a bunch of teens behaving badly, but it doesn't sound like they >> > intended to forcibly rape her, or they wouldn't have wandered off to >> > find some other mischief to get into. IOW, >> > she didn't get raped, she got scared... and this is enough to consume >> > the next 36 years of her life? She's not even willing to accept ANY >> > responsibility for her own lack of good judgment. >> >> What a load of victim-blaming bullshit. >> >> Tell me, kooky, are you saying that just out of partisan support for >> Trump and Kavanofuckingway? Or are you saying that because you have >> been pushy with reluctant women in the past yourself, and are quite >> averse to the thought that maybe you came close to, or actually did, >> commit rape. > > I've never forced myself on anyone, you paranoid Ko0k. In fact, in my > much younger years I was fooling around in bed with a girl, and we were > just about to do The Deed, when she said she would, but only if I told > her I loved her first. I told her I wouldn't say that because I didn't. > She still slept with me that night, but I honored her wishes and didn't > try to pork her. A friend of mine ran into her years later, and tried > to hit on her. He told me all she could do was keep asking about me. > If I had lied to her just to get sex, I doubt that she would have even > remembered me. You seem to be under the assumption that anyone with a > dick is a rapist. If it isn't given freely and willingly, I don't want > it. So it's just partisan bullshit then. Gotcha. You won't do anything even remotely rapey yourself, but you will wholeheartedly support the rapepublican party and rapey assholes within it like Kavanaugh, Roy Moore, and of course the Tangerine Tyrant itself. :P -- FNVWe Nadegda "By all means, compare these shitheads to Nazis. Again and again. I'm with you." -- Mike Godwin, Aug 13, 2017, 8:03 PM
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-09-30 19:57 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Was she looking for love ? |
| Message-ID | <7e409cb1-4766-40a8-be15-57747bc639fa@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #469634 |
On Sunday, September 30, 2018 at 7:15:48 PM UTC-7, Nadegda wrote: > Time to trigger the right-wing snowflakes again. Melt, snowflakes, melt! > On Sun, 30 Sep 2018 13:34:08 -0700, Checkmate wrote: > > > Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading posts by > > Checkmate! In article <pora76$mhp$108@dont-email.me>, nad318b404 > > @gmail.invalid says... > > > > > > > >> Time to trigger the right-wing snowflakes again. Melt, snowflakes, > >> melt! On Sun, 30 Sep 2018 10:32:34 -0700, Checkmate wrote: > >> > >> > Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading posts > >> > by Checkmate! In article > >> > <djq1rdt4na60fld5d79059fe0evo3n256v@4ax.com>, > >> > greghall@yacht_maester.fake says... > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> >> On Sun, 30 Sep 2018 05:35:12, Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> > >> >> wrote: > >> >> >On Sat, 29 Sep 2018 20:55:02, Jeff-Relf.Me wrote: > >> >> >> Why did Dr Ford go into a private bedroom with a drunk man ? > >> >> >> Was she looking for love ? > >> >> > > >> >> >Irrelevant. Going into someone's bedroom with someone does not > >> >> >amount to giving consent. > >> >> > >> >> Wrong! It amounts to a willingness to be petted up to including > >> >> sexual intercourse just like going into a shower amounts to a > >> >> willingness to get wet. > >> >> > >> >> You liberal feminists seem to think NONE of your actions have > >> >> consequences. You would be wrong about that... > >> > > >> > Little girl thought it was okay to attend and participate in a > >> > drinking party at age 15, and spends the next 36 years of her life > >> > trying to get over the trauma of another drunken boy attempting to > >> > make sexual advances towards her... which, by her own account, > >> > amounted to some inappropriate roughhousing. The second guy jumps on > >> > the bed, they all fall onto the floor, and she runs out of the room. > >> > The two boys laugh, and don't even pursue her like one might expect. > >> > Instead, they laugh and "ping-pong" down the stairs. That sounds > >> > like a bunch of teens behaving badly, but it doesn't sound like they > >> > intended to forcibly rape her, or they wouldn't have wandered off to > >> > find some other mischief to get into. IOW, > >> > she didn't get raped, she got scared... and this is enough to consume > >> > the next 36 years of her life? She's not even willing to accept ANY > >> > responsibility for her own lack of good judgment. > >> > >> What a load of victim-blaming bullshit. > >> > >> Tell me, kooky, are you saying that just out of partisan support for > >> Trump and Kavanofuckingway? Or are you saying that because you have > >> been pushy with reluctant women in the past yourself, and are quite > >> averse to the thought that maybe you came close to, or actually did, > >> commit rape. > > > > I've never forced myself on anyone, you paranoid Ko0k. In fact, in my > > much younger years I was fooling around in bed with a girl, and we were > > just about to do The Deed, when she said she would, but only if I told > > her I loved her first. I told her I wouldn't say that because I didn't. > > She still slept with me that night, but I honored her wishes and didn't > > try to pork her. A friend of mine ran into her years later, and tried > > to hit on her. He told me all she could do was keep asking about me. > > If I had lied to her just to get sex, I doubt that she would have even > > remembered me. You seem to be under the assumption that anyone with a > > dick is a rapist. If it isn't given freely and willingly, I don't want > > it. > > So it's just partisan bullshit then. Gotcha. You won't do anything even > remotely rapey yourself, but you will wholeheartedly support the > rapepublican party and rapey assholes within it like Kavanaugh, Roy Moore, > and of course the Tangerine Tyrant itself. :P > > -- > FNVWe Nadegda > > "By all means, compare these shitheads to Nazis. Again and again. I'm with > you." -- Mike Godwin, Aug 13, 2017, 8:03 PM For most I would think it is worth looking into. Given that it's Snit I would forget that step and go straight to 'lie' because that's most of what Snit does. IOW, he's earned it. Klaus Schadenfreude's earliest statement stands true and correct. I know we have different views completely. From what I've seen it looks like the trolling nonsense got more sophisticated. You are quick as a tuna on ice. With all the bragging Snit's done on this topic, the 'Top Programmer' doesn't get how to do this. It seriously takes a couple seconds to highlight a paragraph and 'print' it. -- Top 15 Ways Snit Trolls! https://youtu.be/lF8yk7ul4Mw https://youtu.be/u4xD43Khhkw Jonas Eklundh
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-09-30 23:54 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Was she looking for love ? |
| Message-ID | <MPG.361b6494c1c26e88994cfd@news.altopia.com> |
| In reply to | #469634 |
Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading posts by Checkmate! In article <pos00i$mhp$122@dont-email.me>, nad318b404 @gmail.invalid says... > > Time to trigger the right-wing snowflakes again. Melt, snowflakes, melt! > On Sun, 30 Sep 2018 13:34:08 -0700, Checkmate wrote: > > > Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading posts by > > Checkmate! In article <pora76$mhp$108@dont-email.me>, nad318b404 > > @gmail.invalid says... > > > > > > > >> Time to trigger the right-wing snowflakes again. Melt, snowflakes, > >> melt! On Sun, 30 Sep 2018 10:32:34 -0700, Checkmate wrote: > >> > >> > Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading posts > >> > by Checkmate! In article > >> > <djq1rdt4na60fld5d79059fe0evo3n256v@4ax.com>, > >> > greghall@yacht_maester.fake says... > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> >> On Sun, 30 Sep 2018 05:35:12, Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> > >> >> wrote: > >> >> >On Sat, 29 Sep 2018 20:55:02, Jeff-Relf.Me wrote: > >> >> >> Why did Dr Ford go into a private bedroom with a drunk man ? > >> >> >> Was she looking for love ? > >> >> > > >> >> >Irrelevant. Going into someone's bedroom with someone does not > >> >> >amount to giving consent. > >> >> > >> >> Wrong! It amounts to a willingness to be petted up to including > >> >> sexual intercourse just like going into a shower amounts to a > >> >> willingness to get wet. > >> >> > >> >> You liberal feminists seem to think NONE of your actions have > >> >> consequences. You would be wrong about that... > >> > > >> > Little girl thought it was okay to attend and participate in a > >> > drinking party at age 15, and spends the next 36 years of her life > >> > trying to get over the trauma of another drunken boy attempting to > >> > make sexual advances towards her... which, by her own account, > >> > amounted to some inappropriate roughhousing. The second guy jumps on > >> > the bed, they all fall onto the floor, and she runs out of the room. > >> > The two boys laugh, and don't even pursue her like one might expect. > >> > Instead, they laugh and "ping-pong" down the stairs. That sounds > >> > like a bunch of teens behaving badly, but it doesn't sound like they > >> > intended to forcibly rape her, or they wouldn't have wandered off to > >> > find some other mischief to get into. IOW, > >> > she didn't get raped, she got scared... and this is enough to consume > >> > the next 36 years of her life? She's not even willing to accept ANY > >> > responsibility for her own lack of good judgment. > >> > >> What a load of victim-blaming bullshit. > >> > >> Tell me, kooky, are you saying that just out of partisan support for > >> Trump and Kavanofuckingway? Or are you saying that because you have > >> been pushy with reluctant women in the past yourself, and are quite > >> averse to the thought that maybe you came close to, or actually did, > >> commit rape. > > > > I've never forced myself on anyone, you paranoid Ko0k. In fact, in my > > much younger years I was fooling around in bed with a girl, and we were > > just about to do The Deed, when she said she would, but only if I told > > her I loved her first. I told her I wouldn't say that because I didn't. > > She still slept with me that night, but I honored her wishes and didn't > > try to pork her. A friend of mine ran into her years later, and tried > > to hit on her. He told me all she could do was keep asking about me. > > If I had lied to her just to get sex, I doubt that she would have even > > remembered me. You seem to be under the assumption that anyone with a > > dick is a rapist. If it isn't given freely and willingly, I don't want > > it. > > So it's just partisan bullshit then. Gotcha. You won't do anything even > remotely rapey yourself, but you will wholeheartedly support the > rapepublican party and rapey assholes within it like Kavanaugh, Roy Moore, > and of course the Tangerine Tyrant itself. :P "Partisan bullshit"? What about at least half a dozen Democrats who have done far worse, much more recently (than what's ALLEGED with Kavanaugh), and with much more proof? What is it about Kavanaugh that trips your trigger? It certainly isn't any evidence that's even remotely provable. Is it the fact that he's not a Democrat, like out former Commander-In- Briefs, William Jefferson Clinton... or is it the possibility that Kavanaugh might potentially overturn Roe V Wade and take control of whatever might be baking in your oven some day? -- Checkmate ÂŪ Author, Humorist, Cynic Philosopher, Humanitarian Poet, Elektrishun to the Stars Usenet Shot-Caller Copyright ÂĐ 2018 all rights reserved In loving memory of The Battle Kitten May 2010-February 12, 2017 "There are many here among us, who feel that life is but a joke." "I am the author of nearly as much kook butthurt as kensi." -Nadegda Message-ID: <pbg8ne$p9k$21@dont-email.me>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-01 00:05 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Was she looking for love ? |
| Message-ID | <aea5f394-c5e4-4771-905b-9e93f7ff2dec@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #469676 |
On Sunday, September 30, 2018 at 11:54:52 PM UTC-7, Checkmate wrote: > Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading posts by > Checkmate! In article <pos00i$mhp$122@dont-email.me>, nad318b404 > @gmail.invalid says... > > > > > > Time to trigger the right-wing snowflakes again. Melt, snowflakes, melt! > > On Sun, 30 Sep 2018 13:34:08 -0700, Checkmate wrote: > > > > > Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading posts by > > > Checkmate! In article <pora76$mhp$108@dont-email.me>, nad318b404 > > > @gmail.invalid says... > > > > > > > > > > > >> Time to trigger the right-wing snowflakes again. Melt, snowflakes, > > >> melt! On Sun, 30 Sep 2018 10:32:34 -0700, Checkmate wrote: > > >> > > >> > Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading posts > > >> > by Checkmate! In article > > >> > <djq1rdt4na60fld5d79059fe0evo3n256v@4ax.com>, > > >> > greghall@yacht_maester.fake says... > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> >> On Sun, 30 Sep 2018 05:35:12, Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> > > >> >> wrote: > > >> >> >On Sat, 29 Sep 2018 20:55:02, Jeff-Relf.Me wrote: > > >> >> >> Why did Dr Ford go into a private bedroom with a drunk man ? > > >> >> >> Was she looking for love ? > > >> >> > > > >> >> >Irrelevant. Going into someone's bedroom with someone does not > > >> >> >amount to giving consent. > > >> >> > > >> >> Wrong! It amounts to a willingness to be petted up to including > > >> >> sexual intercourse just like going into a shower amounts to a > > >> >> willingness to get wet. > > >> >> > > >> >> You liberal feminists seem to think NONE of your actions have > > >> >> consequences. You would be wrong about that... > > >> > > > >> > Little girl thought it was okay to attend and participate in a > > >> > drinking party at age 15, and spends the next 36 years of her life > > >> > trying to get over the trauma of another drunken boy attempting to > > >> > make sexual advances towards her... which, by her own account, > > >> > amounted to some inappropriate roughhousing. The second guy jumps on > > >> > the bed, they all fall onto the floor, and she runs out of the room. > > >> > The two boys laugh, and don't even pursue her like one might expect. > > >> > Instead, they laugh and "ping-pong" down the stairs. That sounds > > >> > like a bunch of teens behaving badly, but it doesn't sound like they > > >> > intended to forcibly rape her, or they wouldn't have wandered off to > > >> > find some other mischief to get into. IOW, > > >> > she didn't get raped, she got scared... and this is enough to consume > > >> > the next 36 years of her life? She's not even willing to accept ANY > > >> > responsibility for her own lack of good judgment. > > >> > > >> What a load of victim-blaming bullshit. > > >> > > >> Tell me, kooky, are you saying that just out of partisan support for > > >> Trump and Kavanofuckingway? Or are you saying that because you have > > >> been pushy with reluctant women in the past yourself, and are quite > > >> averse to the thought that maybe you came close to, or actually did, > > >> commit rape. > > > > > > I've never forced myself on anyone, you paranoid Ko0k. In fact, in my > > > much younger years I was fooling around in bed with a girl, and we were > > > just about to do The Deed, when she said she would, but only if I told > > > her I loved her first. I told her I wouldn't say that because I didn't. > > > She still slept with me that night, but I honored her wishes and didn't > > > try to pork her. A friend of mine ran into her years later, and tried > > > to hit on her. He told me all she could do was keep asking about me. > > > If I had lied to her just to get sex, I doubt that she would have even > > > remembered me. You seem to be under the assumption that anyone with a > > > dick is a rapist. If it isn't given freely and willingly, I don't want > > > it. > > > > So it's just partisan bullshit then. Gotcha. You won't do anything even > > remotely rapey yourself, but you will wholeheartedly support the > > rapepublican party and rapey assholes within it like Kavanaugh, Roy Moore, > > and of course the Tangerine Tyrant itself. :P > > "Partisan bullshit"? What about at least half a dozen Democrats who have > done far worse, much more recently (than what's ALLEGED with Kavanaugh), > and with much more proof? What is it about Kavanaugh that trips your > trigger? It certainly isn't any evidence that's even remotely provable. > Is it the fact that he's not a Democrat, like out former Commander-In- > Briefs, William Jefferson Clinton... or is it the possibility that > Kavanaugh might potentially overturn Roe V Wade and take control of > whatever might be baking in your oven some day? > > -- > Checkmate ÂŪ > Author, Humorist, Cynic > Philosopher, Humanitarian > Poet, Elektrishun to the Stars > Usenet Shot-Caller > Copyright ÂĐ 2018 > all rights reserved > > In loving memory of The Battle Kitten > May 2010-February 12, 2017 > > "There are many here among us, > who feel that life is but a joke." > > "I am the author of nearly as much kook butthurt as > kensi." -Nadegda > Message-ID: <pbg8ne$p9k$21@dont-email.me> What did you assume from the lying imbecile? That Steve 'The Moron' Petruzzellis crackhead has nothing to lose but time. He has nothing else. Especially not confidence. What it looks like can be skinned and easily remedied, especially if it's better than what Steve 'The Moron' Petruzzellis uses. Steve 'The Moron' Petruzzellis's posts are nothing but a senseless rambling. Lines of text containing numbers and symbols. Too many people persist in replying to Steve 'The Moron' Petruzzellis. Frankly I can't blame Klaus Schadenfreude for being pissed but, really, I don't understand why he posts here after all this nonsense. Klaus Schadenfreude is far more interested in conversations as experienced in a non-trolling group and unmoderated groups make him want to puke. So many jerks are now talking about the GNU/Linux "UI" as if they think it actually exists. -- Best CMS Solution of 2017! http://www.5z8.info/peepshow_z9s9ht_dogporn http://www.5z8.info/creditscore_g7f8du_launchexe Jonas Eklundh Communication AB
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-01 13:36 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Was she looking for love ? |
| Message-ID | <yppsD.31103$X82.27503@fx22.iad> |
| In reply to | #469676 |
On Sun, 30 Sep 2018 23:54:50 -0700, Checkmate wrote: > Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading posts by > Checkmate! In article <pos00i$mhp$122@dont-email.me>, nad318b404 > @gmail.invalid says... > > > >> Time to trigger the right-wing snowflakes again. Melt, snowflakes, >> melt! On Sun, 30 Sep 2018 13:34:08 -0700, Checkmate wrote: >> >> > Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading posts >> > by Checkmate! In article <pora76$mhp$108@dont-email.me>, nad318b404 >> > @gmail.invalid says... >> > >> > >> > >> >> Time to trigger the right-wing snowflakes again. Melt, snowflakes, >> >> melt! On Sun, 30 Sep 2018 10:32:34 -0700, Checkmate wrote: >> >> >> >> > Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading >> >> > posts by Checkmate! In article >> >> > <djq1rdt4na60fld5d79059fe0evo3n256v@4ax.com>, >> >> > greghall@yacht_maester.fake says... >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> >> On Sun, 30 Sep 2018 05:35:12, Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> >> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >On Sat, 29 Sep 2018 20:55:02, Jeff-Relf.Me wrote: >> >> >> >> Why did Dr Ford go into a private bedroom with a drunk man ? >> >> >> >> Was she looking for love ? >> >> >> > >> >> >> >Irrelevant. Going into someone's bedroom with someone does not >> >> >> >amount to giving consent. >> >> >> >> >> >> Wrong! It amounts to a willingness to be petted up to including >> >> >> sexual intercourse just like going into a shower amounts to a >> >> >> willingness to get wet. >> >> >> >> >> >> You liberal feminists seem to think NONE of your actions have >> >> >> consequences. You would be wrong about that... >> >> > >> >> > Little girl thought it was okay to attend and participate in a >> >> > drinking party at age 15, and spends the next 36 years of her life >> >> > trying to get over the trauma of another drunken boy attempting to >> >> > make sexual advances towards her... which, by her own account, >> >> > amounted to some inappropriate roughhousing. The second guy jumps >> >> > on the bed, they all fall onto the floor, and she runs out of the >> >> > room. The two boys laugh, and don't even pursue her like one might >> >> > expect. Instead, they laugh and "ping-pong" down the stairs. That >> >> > sounds like a bunch of teens behaving badly, but it doesn't sound >> >> > like they intended to forcibly rape her, or they wouldn't have >> >> > wandered off to find some other mischief to get into. IOW, >> >> > she didn't get raped, she got scared... and this is enough to >> >> > consume the next 36 years of her life? She's not even willing to >> >> > accept ANY responsibility for her own lack of good judgment. >> >> >> >> What a load of victim-blaming bullshit. >> >> >> >> Tell me, kooky, are you saying that just out of partisan support for >> >> Trump and Kavanofuckingway? Or are you saying that because you have >> >> been pushy with reluctant women in the past yourself, and are quite >> >> averse to the thought that maybe you came close to, or actually did, >> >> commit rape. >> > >> > I've never forced myself on anyone, you paranoid Ko0k. In fact, in >> > my much younger years I was fooling around in bed with a girl, and we >> > were just about to do The Deed, when she said she would, but only if >> > I told her I loved her first. I told her I wouldn't say that because >> > I didn't. >> > She still slept with me that night, but I honored her wishes and >> > didn't try to pork her. A friend of mine ran into her years later, >> > and tried to hit on her. He told me all she could do was keep asking >> > about me. If I had lied to her just to get sex, I doubt that she >> > would have even remembered me. You seem to be under the assumption >> > that anyone with a dick is a rapist. If it isn't given freely and >> > willingly, I don't want it. >> >> So it's just partisan bullshit then. Gotcha. You won't do anything even >> remotely rapey yourself, but you will wholeheartedly support the >> rapepublican party and rapey assholes within it like Kavanaugh, Roy >> Moore, >> and of course the Tangerine Tyrant itself. :P > > "Partisan bullshit"? What about at least half a dozen Democrats who > have done far worse, much more recently (than what's ALLEGED with > Kavanaugh), and with much more proof? What is it about Kavanaugh that > trips your trigger? It certainly isn't any evidence that's even > remotely provable. Is it the fact that he's not a Democrat, like out > former Commander-In- Briefs, William Jefferson Clinton... or is it the > possibility that Kavanaugh might potentially overturn Roe V Wade and > take control of whatever might be baking in your oven some day? Bill Clinton flat out raped women and the Democrats refused to hear it and Keith Allison beat the crap out of his wife and they once again don't care. Anyone who believes that Democrats actually care about female victims is a fool. They only care about gaining as much power as possible and they will gladly throw innocent people under the bus with rape, sexism or racism allegations to do it. Bill Clinton should be in jail, as should his wife and Keith Ellison. However, they're left-wing so they're going to be protected at all costs by their fellow leftist politicians, the media, the music industry, the movie industry and so on. To Hell with all of them. -- SilverSlimer FSF Contributor / EFF Member / Free speech advocate Absolute centrist, proud Christian
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Checkmate <ricksabian1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-01 10:42 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Was she looking for love ? |
| Message-ID | <MPG.361bfc4b99f77475994d0a@news.altopia.com> |
| In reply to | #469744 |
Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading posts by Checkmate! In article <yppsD.31103$X82.27503@fx22.iad>, silver@slim.er says... > > On Sun, 30 Sep 2018 23:54:50 -0700, Checkmate wrote: > > > Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading posts by > > Checkmate! In article <pos00i$mhp$122@dont-email.me>, nad318b404 > > @gmail.invalid says... > > > > > > > >> Time to trigger the right-wing snowflakes again. Melt, snowflakes, > >> melt! On Sun, 30 Sep 2018 13:34:08 -0700, Checkmate wrote: > >> > >> > Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading posts > >> > by Checkmate! In article <pora76$mhp$108@dont-email.me>, nad318b404 > >> > @gmail.invalid says... > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> >> Time to trigger the right-wing snowflakes again. Melt, snowflakes, > >> >> melt! On Sun, 30 Sep 2018 10:32:34 -0700, Checkmate wrote: > >> >> > >> >> > Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading > >> >> > posts by Checkmate! In article > >> >> > <djq1rdt4na60fld5d79059fe0evo3n256v@4ax.com>, > >> >> > greghall@yacht_maester.fake says... > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> >> On Sun, 30 Sep 2018 05:35:12, Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> > >> >> >> wrote: > >> >> >> >On Sat, 29 Sep 2018 20:55:02, Jeff-Relf.Me wrote: > >> >> >> >> Why did Dr Ford go into a private bedroom with a drunk man ? > >> >> >> >> Was she looking for love ? > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> >Irrelevant. Going into someone's bedroom with someone does not > >> >> >> >amount to giving consent. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Wrong! It amounts to a willingness to be petted up to including > >> >> >> sexual intercourse just like going into a shower amounts to a > >> >> >> willingness to get wet. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> You liberal feminists seem to think NONE of your actions have > >> >> >> consequences. You would be wrong about that... > >> >> > > >> >> > Little girl thought it was okay to attend and participate in a > >> >> > drinking party at age 15, and spends the next 36 years of her life > >> >> > trying to get over the trauma of another drunken boy attempting to > >> >> > make sexual advances towards her... which, by her own account, > >> >> > amounted to some inappropriate roughhousing. The second guy jumps > >> >> > on the bed, they all fall onto the floor, and she runs out of the > >> >> > room. The two boys laugh, and don't even pursue her like one might > >> >> > expect. Instead, they laugh and "ping-pong" down the stairs. That > >> >> > sounds like a bunch of teens behaving badly, but it doesn't sound > >> >> > like they intended to forcibly rape her, or they wouldn't have > >> >> > wandered off to find some other mischief to get into. IOW, > >> >> > she didn't get raped, she got scared... and this is enough to > >> >> > consume the next 36 years of her life? She's not even willing to > >> >> > accept ANY responsibility for her own lack of good judgment. > >> >> > >> >> What a load of victim-blaming bullshit. > >> >> > >> >> Tell me, kooky, are you saying that just out of partisan support for > >> >> Trump and Kavanofuckingway? Or are you saying that because you have > >> >> been pushy with reluctant women in the past yourself, and are quite > >> >> averse to the thought that maybe you came close to, or actually did, > >> >> commit rape. > >> > > >> > I've never forced myself on anyone, you paranoid Ko0k. In fact, in > >> > my much younger years I was fooling around in bed with a girl, and we > >> > were just about to do The Deed, when she said she would, but only if > >> > I told her I loved her first. I told her I wouldn't say that because > >> > I didn't. > >> > She still slept with me that night, but I honored her wishes and > >> > didn't try to pork her. A friend of mine ran into her years later, > >> > and tried to hit on her. He told me all she could do was keep asking > >> > about me. If I had lied to her just to get sex, I doubt that she > >> > would have even remembered me. You seem to be under the assumption > >> > that anyone with a dick is a rapist. If it isn't given freely and > >> > willingly, I don't want it. > >> > >> So it's just partisan bullshit then. Gotcha. You won't do anything even > >> remotely rapey yourself, but you will wholeheartedly support the > >> rapepublican party and rapey assholes within it like Kavanaugh, Roy > >> Moore, > >> and of course the Tangerine Tyrant itself. :P > > > > "Partisan bullshit"? What about at least half a dozen Democrats who > > have done far worse, much more recently (than what's ALLEGED with > > Kavanaugh), and with much more proof? What is it about Kavanaugh that > > trips your trigger? It certainly isn't any evidence that's even > > remotely provable. Is it the fact that he's not a Democrat, like out > > former Commander-In- Briefs, William Jefferson Clinton... or is it the > > possibility that Kavanaugh might potentially overturn Roe V Wade and > > take control of whatever might be baking in your oven some day? > > Bill Clinton flat out raped women and the Democrats refused to hear it > and Keith Allison beat the crap out of his wife and they once again don't > care. Anyone who believes that Democrats actually care about female > victims is a fool. They only care about gaining as much power as possible > and they will gladly throw innocent people under the bus with rape, > sexism or racism allegations to do it. > > Bill Clinton should be in jail, as should his wife and Keith Ellison. > However, they're left-wing so they're going to be protected at all costs > by their fellow leftist politicians, the media, the music industry, the > movie industry and so on. To Hell with all of them. Precisely! Hypocrites, every one of 'em! -- Checkmate ÂŪ Author, Humorist, Cynic Philosopher, Humanitarian Poet, Elektrishun to the Stars Usenet Shot-Caller Copyright ÂĐ 2018 all rights reserved In loving memory of The Battle Kitten May 2010-February 12, 2017 "There are many here among us, who feel that life is but a joke." "I am the author of nearly as much kook butthurt as kensi." -Nadegda Message-ID: <pbg8ne$p9k$21@dont-email.me>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-01 12:18 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Was she looking for love ? |
| Message-ID | <629f7893-f071-4c26-ab0b-8783cd2ec7a3@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #469800 |
On Monday, October 1, 2018 at 10:42:08 AM UTC-7, Checkmate wrote: > Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading posts by > Checkmate! In article <yppsD.31103$X82.27503@fx22.iad>, silver@slim.er > says... > > > > > > On Sun, 30 Sep 2018 23:54:50 -0700, Checkmate wrote: > > > > > Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading posts by > > > Checkmate! In article <pos00i$mhp$122@dont-email.me>, nad318b404 > > > @gmail.invalid says... > > > > > > > > > > > >> Time to trigger the right-wing snowflakes again. Melt, snowflakes, > > >> melt! On Sun, 30 Sep 2018 13:34:08 -0700, Checkmate wrote: > > >> > > >> > Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading posts > > >> > by Checkmate! In article <pora76$mhp$108@dont-email.me>, nad318b404 > > >> > @gmail.invalid says... > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> >> Time to trigger the right-wing snowflakes again. Melt, snowflakes, > > >> >> melt! On Sun, 30 Sep 2018 10:32:34 -0700, Checkmate wrote: > > >> >> > > >> >> > Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading > > >> >> > posts by Checkmate! In article > > >> >> > <djq1rdt4na60fld5d79059fe0evo3n256v@4ax.com>, > > >> >> > greghall@yacht_maester.fake says... > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> >> On Sun, 30 Sep 2018 05:35:12, Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> > > >> >> >> wrote: > > >> >> >> >On Sat, 29 Sep 2018 20:55:02, Jeff-Relf.Me wrote: > > >> >> >> >> Why did Dr Ford go into a private bedroom with a drunk man ? > > >> >> >> >> Was she looking for love ? > > >> >> >> > > > >> >> >> >Irrelevant. Going into someone's bedroom with someone does not > > >> >> >> >amount to giving consent. > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> Wrong! It amounts to a willingness to be petted up to including > > >> >> >> sexual intercourse just like going into a shower amounts to a > > >> >> >> willingness to get wet. > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> You liberal feminists seem to think NONE of your actions have > > >> >> >> consequences. You would be wrong about that... > > >> >> > > > >> >> > Little girl thought it was okay to attend and participate in a > > >> >> > drinking party at age 15, and spends the next 36 years of her life > > >> >> > trying to get over the trauma of another drunken boy attempting to > > >> >> > make sexual advances towards her... which, by her own account, > > >> >> > amounted to some inappropriate roughhousing. The second guy jumps > > >> >> > on the bed, they all fall onto the floor, and she runs out of the > > >> >> > room. The two boys laugh, and don't even pursue her like one might > > >> >> > expect. Instead, they laugh and "ping-pong" down the stairs. That > > >> >> > sounds like a bunch of teens behaving badly, but it doesn't sound > > >> >> > like they intended to forcibly rape her, or they wouldn't have > > >> >> > wandered off to find some other mischief to get into. IOW, > > >> >> > she didn't get raped, she got scared... and this is enough to > > >> >> > consume the next 36 years of her life? She's not even willing to > > >> >> > accept ANY responsibility for her own lack of good judgment. > > >> >> > > >> >> What a load of victim-blaming bullshit. > > >> >> > > >> >> Tell me, kooky, are you saying that just out of partisan support for > > >> >> Trump and Kavanofuckingway? Or are you saying that because you have > > >> >> been pushy with reluctant women in the past yourself, and are quite > > >> >> averse to the thought that maybe you came close to, or actually did, > > >> >> commit rape. > > >> > > > >> > I've never forced myself on anyone, you paranoid Ko0k. In fact, in > > >> > my much younger years I was fooling around in bed with a girl, and we > > >> > were just about to do The Deed, when she said she would, but only if > > >> > I told her I loved her first. I told her I wouldn't say that because > > >> > I didn't. > > >> > She still slept with me that night, but I honored her wishes and > > >> > didn't try to pork her. A friend of mine ran into her years later, > > >> > and tried to hit on her. He told me all she could do was keep asking > > >> > about me. If I had lied to her just to get sex, I doubt that she > > >> > would have even remembered me. You seem to be under the assumption > > >> > that anyone with a dick is a rapist. If it isn't given freely and > > >> > willingly, I don't want it. > > >> > > >> So it's just partisan bullshit then. Gotcha. You won't do anything even > > >> remotely rapey yourself, but you will wholeheartedly support the > > >> rapepublican party and rapey assholes within it like Kavanaugh, Roy > > >> Moore, > > >> and of course the Tangerine Tyrant itself. :P > > > > > > "Partisan bullshit"? What about at least half a dozen Democrats who > > > have done far worse, much more recently (than what's ALLEGED with > > > Kavanaugh), and with much more proof? What is it about Kavanaugh that > > > trips your trigger? It certainly isn't any evidence that's even > > > remotely provable. Is it the fact that he's not a Democrat, like out > > > former Commander-In- Briefs, William Jefferson Clinton... or is it the > > > possibility that Kavanaugh might potentially overturn Roe V Wade and > > > take control of whatever might be baking in your oven some day? > > > > Bill Clinton flat out raped women and the Democrats refused to hear it > > and Keith Allison beat the crap out of his wife and they once again don't > > care. Anyone who believes that Democrats actually care about female > > victims is a fool. They only care about gaining as much power as possible > > and they will gladly throw innocent people under the bus with rape, > > sexism or racism allegations to do it. > > > > Bill Clinton should be in jail, as should his wife and Keith Ellison. > > However, they're left-wing so they're going to be protected at all costs > > by their fellow leftist politicians, the media, the music industry, the > > movie industry and so on. To Hell with all of them. > > Precisely! Hypocrites, every one of 'em! > > -- > Checkmate ÂŪ > Author, Humorist, Cynic > Philosopher, Humanitarian > Poet, Elektrishun to the Stars > Usenet Shot-Caller > Copyright ÂĐ 2018 > all rights reserved > > In loving memory of The Battle Kitten > May 2010-February 12, 2017 > > "There are many here among us, > who feel that life is but a joke." > > "I am the author of nearly as much kook butthurt as > kensi." -Nadegda > Message-ID: <pbg8ne$p9k$21@dont-email.me> Now that nobody is talking to Sigmond, he's making it sound like he's figured out the right timing -- when in fact, people are just beating him at his own game. That is the problem 'today' and younger instructors don't know what they are doing, people from older generations (~60 yo) *should* know better than to fall for socialism. Sigmond's actions are thoroughly duplicitous. There's no question that as soon as any forgiven 'blocked person' does one thing to annoy the little pansy's feelings that they'll be ignored again. I shan't ask Sigmond how any part of Steve Petruzzellis's body tastes no matter how frequently Sigmond kisses it. Who knows JavaScript, is an IT "master", has hacked Steve Petruzzellis's ID, has passion for this shit and is a huge immature mama's boy who posts lie after lie after lie even when he's _not_ flooding... AND... who struggles to pin everything he is doing on "advocates" and has for over a decade? -- I Left My Husband & Daughter At Home And THIS happened http://www.5z8.info/open.exe_f2s2ea_nazi Jonas Eklundh
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-01 16:29 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Was she looking for love ? |
| Message-ID | <pouakc$v7j$4@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #469800 |
On 10/1/2018 10:42 AM, Checkmate wrote: > Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading posts by > Checkmate! In article <yppsD.31103$X82.27503@fx22.iad>, silver@slim.er > says... > > >> >> On Sun, 30 Sep 2018 23:54:50 -0700, Checkmate wrote: >> >>> Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading posts by >>> Checkmate! In article <pos00i$mhp$122@dont-email.me>, nad318b404 >>> @gmail.invalid says... >>> >>> >>> >>>> Time to trigger the right-wing snowflakes again. Melt, snowflakes, >>>> melt! On Sun, 30 Sep 2018 13:34:08 -0700, Checkmate wrote: >>>> >>>>> Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading posts >>>>> by Checkmate! In article <pora76$mhp$108@dont-email.me>, nad318b404 >>>>> @gmail.invalid says... >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Time to trigger the right-wing snowflakes again. Melt, snowflakes, >>>>>> melt! On Sun, 30 Sep 2018 10:32:34 -0700, Checkmate wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading >>>>>>> posts by Checkmate! In article >>>>>>> <djq1rdt4na60fld5d79059fe0evo3n256v@4ax.com>, >>>>>>> greghall@yacht_maester.fake says... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Sun, 30 Sep 2018 05:35:12, Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Sat, 29 Sep 2018 20:55:02, Jeff-Relf.Me wrote: >>>>>>>>>> Why did Dr Ford go into a private bedroom with a drunk man ? >>>>>>>>>> Was she looking for love ? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Irrelevant. Going into someone's bedroom with someone does not >>>>>>>>> amount to giving consent. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Wrong! It amounts to a willingness to be petted up to including >>>>>>>> sexual intercourse just like going into a shower amounts to a >>>>>>>> willingness to get wet. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> You liberal feminists seem to think NONE of your actions have >>>>>>>> consequences. You would be wrong about that... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Little girl thought it was okay to attend and participate in a >>>>>>> drinking party at age 15, and spends the next 36 years of her life >>>>>>> trying to get over the trauma of another drunken boy attempting to >>>>>>> make sexual advances towards her... which, by her own account, >>>>>>> amounted to some inappropriate roughhousing. The second guy jumps >>>>>>> on the bed, they all fall onto the floor, and she runs out of the >>>>>>> room. The two boys laugh, and don't even pursue her like one might >>>>>>> expect. Instead, they laugh and "ping-pong" down the stairs. That >>>>>>> sounds like a bunch of teens behaving badly, but it doesn't sound >>>>>>> like they intended to forcibly rape her, or they wouldn't have >>>>>>> wandered off to find some other mischief to get into. IOW, >>>>>>> she didn't get raped, she got scared... and this is enough to >>>>>>> consume the next 36 years of her life? She's not even willing to >>>>>>> accept ANY responsibility for her own lack of good judgment. >>>>>> >>>>>> What a load of victim-blaming bullshit. >>>>>> >>>>>> Tell me, kooky, are you saying that just out of partisan support for >>>>>> Trump and Kavanofuckingway? Or are you saying that because you have >>>>>> been pushy with reluctant women in the past yourself, and are quite >>>>>> averse to the thought that maybe you came close to, or actually did, >>>>>> commit rape. >>>>> >>>>> I've never forced myself on anyone, you paranoid Ko0k. In fact, in >>>>> my much younger years I was fooling around in bed with a girl, and we >>>>> were just about to do The Deed, when she said she would, but only if >>>>> I told her I loved her first. I told her I wouldn't say that because >>>>> I didn't. >>>>> She still slept with me that night, but I honored her wishes and >>>>> didn't try to pork her. A friend of mine ran into her years later, >>>>> and tried to hit on her. He told me all she could do was keep asking >>>>> about me. If I had lied to her just to get sex, I doubt that she >>>>> would have even remembered me. You seem to be under the assumption >>>>> that anyone with a dick is a rapist. If it isn't given freely and >>>>> willingly, I don't want it. >>>> >>>> So it's just partisan bullshit then. Gotcha. You won't do anything even >>>> remotely rapey yourself, but you will wholeheartedly support the >>>> rapepublican party and rapey assholes within it like Kavanaugh, Roy >>>> Moore, >>>> and of course the Tangerine Tyrant itself. :P >>> >>> "Partisan bullshit"? What about at least half a dozen Democrats who >>> have done far worse, much more recently (than what's ALLEGED with >>> Kavanaugh), and with much more proof? What is it about Kavanaugh that >>> trips your trigger? It certainly isn't any evidence that's even >>> remotely provable. Is it the fact that he's not a Democrat, like out >>> former Commander-In- Briefs, William Jefferson Clinton... or is it the >>> possibility that Kavanaugh might potentially overturn Roe V Wade and >>> take control of whatever might be baking in your oven some day? >> >> Bill Clinton flat out raped women and the Democrats refused to hear it >> and Keith Allison beat the crap out of his wife and they once again don't >> care. Anyone who believes that Democrats actually care about female >> victims is a fool. They only care about gaining as much power as possible >> and they will gladly throw innocent people under the bus with rape, >> sexism or racism allegations to do it. >> >> Bill Clinton should be in jail, as should his wife and Keith Ellison. >> However, they're left-wing so they're going to be protected at all costs >> by their fellow leftist politicians, the media, the music industry, the >> movie industry and so on. To Hell with all of them. > > Precisely! Hypocrites, every one of 'em! > Still looking forward into fantasy land where there is an actual serious investigation into Juanita and William...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-02 03:17 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Was she looking for love ? |
| Message-ID | <pouo0j$at2$16@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #469676 |
Time to trigger the right-wing snowflakes again. Melt, snowflakes, melt! On Sun, 30 Sep 2018 23:54:50 -0700, Checkmate wrote: > Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading posts by > Checkmate! In article <pos00i$mhp$122@dont-email.me>, nad318b404 > @gmail.invalid says... > > > >> Time to trigger the right-wing snowflakes again. Melt, snowflakes, >> melt! On Sun, 30 Sep 2018 13:34:08 -0700, Checkmate wrote: >> >> > Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading posts >> > by Checkmate! In article <pora76$mhp$108@dont-email.me>, nad318b404 >> > @gmail.invalid says... >> > >> > >> > >> >> Time to trigger the right-wing snowflakes again. Melt, snowflakes, >> >> melt! On Sun, 30 Sep 2018 10:32:34 -0700, Checkmate wrote: >> >> >> >> > Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading >> >> > posts by Checkmate! In article >> >> > <djq1rdt4na60fld5d79059fe0evo3n256v@4ax.com>, >> >> > greghall@yacht_maester.fake says... >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> >> On Sun, 30 Sep 2018 05:35:12, Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> >> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >On Sat, 29 Sep 2018 20:55:02, Jeff-Relf.Me wrote: >> >> >> >> Why did Dr Ford go into a private bedroom with a drunk man ? >> >> >> >> Was she looking for love ? >> >> >> > >> >> >> >Irrelevant. Going into someone's bedroom with someone does not >> >> >> >amount to giving consent. >> >> >> >> >> >> Wrong! It amounts to a willingness to be petted up to including >> >> >> sexual intercourse just like going into a shower amounts to a >> >> >> willingness to get wet. >> >> >> >> >> >> You liberal feminists seem to think NONE of your actions have >> >> >> consequences. You would be wrong about that... >> >> > >> >> > Little girl thought it was okay to attend and participate in a >> >> > drinking party at age 15, and spends the next 36 years of her life >> >> > trying to get over the trauma of another drunken boy attempting to >> >> > make sexual advances towards her... which, by her own account, >> >> > amounted to some inappropriate roughhousing. The second guy jumps >> >> > on the bed, they all fall onto the floor, and she runs out of the >> >> > room. The two boys laugh, and don't even pursue her like one might >> >> > expect. Instead, they laugh and "ping-pong" down the stairs. That >> >> > sounds like a bunch of teens behaving badly, but it doesn't sound >> >> > like they intended to forcibly rape her, or they wouldn't have >> >> > wandered off to find some other mischief to get into. IOW, >> >> > she didn't get raped, she got scared... and this is enough to >> >> > consume the next 36 years of her life? She's not even willing to >> >> > accept ANY responsibility for her own lack of good judgment. >> >> >> >> What a load of victim-blaming bullshit. >> >> >> >> Tell me, kooky, are you saying that just out of partisan support for >> >> Trump and Kavanofuckingway? Or are you saying that because you have >> >> been pushy with reluctant women in the past yourself, and are quite >> >> averse to the thought that maybe you came close to, or actually did, >> >> commit rape. >> > >> > I've never forced myself on anyone, you paranoid Ko0k. In fact, in >> > my much younger years I was fooling around in bed with a girl, and we >> > were just about to do The Deed, when she said she would, but only if >> > I told her I loved her first. I told her I wouldn't say that because >> > I didn't. >> > She still slept with me that night, but I honored her wishes and >> > didn't try to pork her. A friend of mine ran into her years later, >> > and tried to hit on her. He told me all she could do was keep asking >> > about me. If I had lied to her just to get sex, I doubt that she >> > would have even remembered me. You seem to be under the assumption >> > that anyone with a dick is a rapist. If it isn't given freely and >> > willingly, I don't want it. >> >> So it's just partisan bullshit then. Gotcha. You won't do anything even >> remotely rapey yourself, but you will wholeheartedly support the >> rapepublican party and rapey assholes within it like Kavanaugh, Roy >> Moore, >> and of course the Tangerine Tyrant itself. :P > > "Partisan bullshit"? What about at least half a dozen Democrats who > have done far worse, much more recently (than what's ALLEGED with > Kavanaugh), and with much more proof? Which doesn't quite add up to the quarter-dozen Rapepublicans named Trump, Moore, and Kavanaugh, of whom the first two ogled underage girls (Trump ogled *naked* underage girls) and the third is implicated in two gang rapes and one attempted gang rape. Funny how pedophilia particularly seems to be a Rapepublican specialty, eh? The worst you can pin on the entirety of the Dem politician population is a couple of probable rapes and a bunch of groping, harassment, and other comparatively small-potatoes stuff. Which is all beside the point. The Democratic party is *bad*. The Rapepublican party is *much, much worse*. We really need either a massive reform of the Democratic party or a viable third party to arise. > What is it about Kavanaugh that trips your trigger? I could ask you, and all the other rightards in the world, the same question. Why are the lot of you so willing to go to the wall to defend that privileged little git? Assholes like him are a dime a dozen, especially in the GOP upper echelons. There are other candidates Trump could nominate most of whom would be as bad or worse without being (as easily proved to be) rapists...but it's Kavanaugh or bust. Why pick that particular hill to die on? I can only imagine that a lot of right wingers see more than a bit of themselves in Kavanaugh; either in their own past peccadilloes, or else in their self image of who they *want* to be. > It certainly isn't any evidence that's even remotely provable. Is it the > fact that he's not a Democrat, like out former Commander-In- Briefs, > William Jefferson Clinton... or is it the possibility that Kavanaugh > might potentially overturn Roe V Wade and take control of whatever might > be baking in your oven some day? Kavanaugh will never have that control. If he ascends to the Supreme Court, that's it, I'm gone. The United States of America will be a lost cause, at least for the next 20 years and possibly forever. Reactionaries locked into positions of authority and power-diving the country right into bedrock. -- FNVWe Nadegda "By all means, compare these shitheads to Nazis. Again and again. I'm with you." -- Mike Godwin, Aug 13, 2017, 8:03 PM
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lunar Opticfibre <jfwaldby@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-01 21:21 -0600 |
| Subject | Re: Was she looking for love ? |
| Message-ID | <YuBsD.165250$cL2.51990@fx43.iad> |
| In reply to | #470007 |
On 10/1/2018 9:17 PM, Nadegda wrote: > Time to trigger the right-wing snowflakes again. Melt, snowflakes, melt! > On Sun, 30 Sep 2018 23:54:50 -0700, Checkmate wrote: > >> Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading posts by >> Checkmate! In article <pos00i$mhp$122@dont-email.me>, nad318b404 >> @gmail.invalid says... >> >> >> >>> Time to trigger the right-wing snowflakes again. Melt, snowflakes, >>> melt! On Sun, 30 Sep 2018 13:34:08 -0700, Checkmate wrote: >>> >>>> Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading posts >>>> by Checkmate! In article <pora76$mhp$108@dont-email.me>, nad318b404 >>>> @gmail.invalid says... >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> Time to trigger the right-wing snowflakes again. Melt, snowflakes, >>>>> melt! On Sun, 30 Sep 2018 10:32:34 -0700, Checkmate wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading >>>>>> posts by Checkmate! In article >>>>>> <djq1rdt4na60fld5d79059fe0evo3n256v@4ax.com>, >>>>>> greghall@yacht_maester.fake says... >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Sun, 30 Sep 2018 05:35:12, Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> On Sat, 29 Sep 2018 20:55:02, Jeff-Relf.Me wrote: >>>>>>>>> Why did Dr Ford go into a private bedroom with a drunk man ? >>>>>>>>> Was she looking for love ? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Irrelevant. Going into someone's bedroom with someone does not >>>>>>>> amount to giving consent. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Wrong! It amounts to a willingness to be petted up to including >>>>>>> sexual intercourse just like going into a shower amounts to a >>>>>>> willingness to get wet. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> You liberal feminists seem to think NONE of your actions have >>>>>>> consequences. You would be wrong about that... >>>>>> >>>>>> Little girl thought it was okay to attend and participate in a >>>>>> drinking party at age 15, and spends the next 36 years of her life >>>>>> trying to get over the trauma of another drunken boy attempting to >>>>>> make sexual advances towards her... which, by her own account, >>>>>> amounted to some inappropriate roughhousing. The second guy jumps >>>>>> on the bed, they all fall onto the floor, and she runs out of the >>>>>> room. The two boys laugh, and don't even pursue her like one might >>>>>> expect. Instead, they laugh and "ping-pong" down the stairs. That >>>>>> sounds like a bunch of teens behaving badly, but it doesn't sound >>>>>> like they intended to forcibly rape her, or they wouldn't have >>>>>> wandered off to find some other mischief to get into. IOW, >>>>>> she didn't get raped, she got scared... and this is enough to >>>>>> consume the next 36 years of her life? She's not even willing to >>>>>> accept ANY responsibility for her own lack of good judgment. >>>>> >>>>> What a load of victim-blaming bullshit. >>>>> >>>>> Tell me, kooky, are you saying that just out of partisan support for >>>>> Trump and Kavanofuckingway? Or are you saying that because you have >>>>> been pushy with reluctant women in the past yourself, and are quite >>>>> averse to the thought that maybe you came close to, or actually did, >>>>> commit rape. >>>> >>>> I've never forced myself on anyone, you paranoid Ko0k. In fact, in >>>> my much younger years I was fooling around in bed with a girl, and we >>>> were just about to do The Deed, when she said she would, but only if >>>> I told her I loved her first. I told her I wouldn't say that because >>>> I didn't. >>>> She still slept with me that night, but I honored her wishes and >>>> didn't try to pork her. A friend of mine ran into her years later, >>>> and tried to hit on her. He told me all she could do was keep asking >>>> about me. If I had lied to her just to get sex, I doubt that she >>>> would have even remembered me. You seem to be under the assumption >>>> that anyone with a dick is a rapist. If it isn't given freely and >>>> willingly, I don't want it. >>> >>> So it's just partisan bullshit then. Gotcha. You won't do anything even >>> remotely rapey yourself, but you will wholeheartedly support the >>> rapepublican party and rapey assholes within it like Kavanaugh, Roy >>> Moore, >>> and of course the Tangerine Tyrant itself. :P >> >> "Partisan bullshit"? What about at least half a dozen Democrats who >> have done far worse, much more recently (than what's ALLEGED with >> Kavanaugh), and with much more proof? > > Which doesn't quite add up to the quarter-dozen Rapepublicans named Trump, > Moore, and Kavanaugh, of whom the first two ogled underage girls (Trump > ogled *naked* underage girls) and the third is implicated in two gang > rapes and one attempted gang rape. > > Funny how pedophilia particularly seems to be a Rapepublican specialty, > eh? The worst you can pin on the entirety of the Dem politician population > is a couple of probable rapes and a bunch of groping, harassment, and > other comparatively small-potatoes stuff. > > Which is all beside the point. The Democratic party is *bad*. The > Rapepublican party is *much, much worse*. We really need either a massive > reform of the Democratic party or a viable third party to arise. > >> What is it about Kavanaugh that trips your trigger? > > I could ask you, and all the other rightards in the world, the same > question. Why are the lot of you so willing to go to the wall to defend > that privileged little git? Assholes like him are a dime a dozen, > especially in the GOP upper echelons. There are other candidates Trump > could nominate most of whom would be as bad or worse without being (as > easily proved to be) rapists...but it's Kavanaugh or bust. Why pick that > particular hill to die on? I can only imagine that a lot of right wingers > see more than a bit of themselves in Kavanaugh; either in their own past > peccadilloes, or else in their self image of who they *want* to be. > >> It certainly isn't any evidence that's even remotely provable. Is it the >> fact that he's not a Democrat, like out former Commander-In- Briefs, >> William Jefferson Clinton... or is it the possibility that Kavanaugh >> might potentially overturn Roe V Wade and take control of whatever might >> be baking in your oven some day? > > Kavanaugh will never have that control. If he ascends to the Supreme > Court, that's it, I'm gone. The United States of America will be a lost > cause, at least for the next 20 years and possibly forever. Reactionaries > locked into positions of authority and power-diving the country right into > bedrock. > Typical contard drinking the Fox koolaid. You just keep on worshipping Trump all of you.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-01 20:57 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Was she looking for love ? |
| Message-ID | <pouqbi$5t1$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #470008 |
On 10/1/2018 8:21 PM, Lunar Opticfibre wrote: > On 10/1/2018 9:17 PM, Nadegda wrote: >> Time to trigger the right-wing snowflakes again. Melt, snowflakes, melt! >> On Sun, 30 Sep 2018 23:54:50 -0700, Checkmate wrote: >> >>> Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading posts by >>> Checkmate! In article <pos00i$mhp$122@dont-email.me>, nad318b404 >>> @gmail.invalid says... >>> >>> >>> >>>> Time to trigger the right-wing snowflakes again. Melt, snowflakes, >>>> melt! On Sun, 30 Sep 2018 13:34:08 -0700, Checkmate wrote: >>>> >>>>> Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading posts >>>>> by Checkmate! In article <pora76$mhp$108@dont-email.me>, nad318b404 >>>>> @gmail.invalid says... >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Time to trigger the right-wing snowflakes again. Melt, snowflakes, >>>>>> melt! On Sun, 30 Sep 2018 10:32:34 -0700, Checkmate wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Warning! Always wear ANSI approved safety goggles when reading >>>>>>> posts by Checkmate! In article >>>>>>> <djq1rdt4na60fld5d79059fe0evo3n256v@4ax.com>, >>>>>>> greghall@yacht_maester.fake says... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Sun, 30 Sep 2018 05:35:12, Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Sat, 29 Sep 2018 20:55:02, Jeff-Relf.Me wrote: >>>>>>>>>> Why did Dr Ford go into a private bedroom with a drunk man ? >>>>>>>>>> Was she looking for love ? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Irrelevant. Going into someone's bedroom with someone does not >>>>>>>>> amount to giving consent. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Wrong! It amounts to a willingness to be petted up to including >>>>>>>> sexual intercourse just like going into a shower amounts to a >>>>>>>> willingness to get wet. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> You liberal feminists seem to think NONE of your actions have >>>>>>>> consequences. You would be wrong about that... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Little girl thought it was okay to attend and participate in a >>>>>>> drinking party at age 15, and spends the next 36 years of her life >>>>>>> trying to get over the trauma of another drunken boy attempting to >>>>>>> make sexual advances towards her... which, by her own account, >>>>>>> amounted to some inappropriate roughhousing. The second guy jumps >>>>>>> on the bed, they all fall onto the floor, and she runs out of the >>>>>>> room. The two boys laugh, and don't even pursue her like one might >>>>>>> expect. Instead, they laugh and "ping-pong" down the stairs. That >>>>>>> sounds like a bunch of teens behaving badly, but it doesn't sound >>>>>>> like they intended to forcibly rape her, or they wouldn't have >>>>>>> wandered off to find some other mischief to get into. IOW, >>>>>>> she didn't get raped, she got scared... and this is enough to >>>>>>> consume the next 36 years of her life? She's not even willing to >>>>>>> accept ANY responsibility for her own lack of good judgment. >>>>>> >>>>>> What a load of victim-blaming bullshit. >>>>>> >>>>>> Tell me, kooky, are you saying that just out of partisan support for >>>>>> Trump and Kavanofuckingway? Or are you saying that because you have >>>>>> been pushy with reluctant women in the past yourself, and are quite >>>>>> averse to the thought that maybe you came close to, or actually did, >>>>>> commit rape. >>>>> >>>>> I've never forced myself on anyone, you paranoid Ko0k. In fact, in >>>>> my much younger years I was fooling around in bed with a girl, and we >>>>> were just about to do The Deed, when she said she would, but only if >>>>> I told her I loved her first. I told her I wouldn't say that because >>>>> I didn't. >>>>> She still slept with me that night, but I honored her wishes and >>>>> didn't try to pork her. A friend of mine ran into her years later, >>>>> and tried to hit on her. He told me all she could do was keep asking >>>>> about me. If I had lied to her just to get sex, I doubt that she >>>>> would have even remembered me. You seem to be under the assumption >>>>> that anyone with a dick is a rapist. If it isn't given freely and >>>>> willingly, I don't want it. >>>> >>>> So it's just partisan bullshit then. Gotcha. You won't do anything even >>>> remotely rapey yourself, but you will wholeheartedly support the >>>> rapepublican party and rapey assholes within it like Kavanaugh, Roy >>>> Moore, >>>> and of course the Tangerine Tyrant itself. :P >>> >>> "Partisan bullshit"? What about at least half a dozen Democrats who >>> have done far worse, much more recently (than what's ALLEGED with >>> Kavanaugh), and with much more proof? >> >> Which doesn't quite add up to the quarter-dozen Rapepublicans named >> Trump, >> Moore, and Kavanaugh, of whom the first two ogled underage girls (Trump >> ogled *naked* underage girls) and the third is implicated in two gang >> rapes and one attempted gang rape. >> >> Funny how pedophilia particularly seems to be a Rapepublican specialty, >> eh? The worst you can pin on the entirety of the Dem politician >> population >> is a couple of probable rapes and a bunch of groping, harassment, and >> other comparatively small-potatoes stuff. >> >> Which is all beside the point. The Democratic party is *bad*. The >> Rapepublican party is *much, much worse*. We really need either a massive >> reform of the Democratic party or a viable third party to arise. >> >>> What is it about Kavanaugh that trips your trigger? >> >> I could ask you, and all the other rightards in the world, the same >> question. Why are the lot of you so willing to go to the wall to defend >> that privileged little git? Assholes like him are a dime a dozen, >> especially in the GOP upper echelons. There are other candidates Trump >> could nominate most of whom would be as bad or worse without being (as >> easily proved to be) rapists...but it's Kavanaugh or bust. Why pick that >> particular hill to die on? I can only imagine that a lot of right wingers >> see more than a bit of themselves in Kavanaugh; either in their own past >> peccadilloes, or else in their self image of who they *want* to be. >> >>> It certainly isn't any evidence that's even remotely provable. Is it the >>> fact that he's not a Democrat, like out former Commander-In- Briefs, >>> William Jefferson Clinton... or is it the possibility that Kavanaugh >>> might potentially overturn Roe V Wade and take control of whatever might >>> be baking in your oven some day? >> >> Kavanaugh will never have that control. If he ascends to the Supreme >> Court, that's it, I'm gone. The United States of America will be a lost >> cause, at least for the next 20 years and possibly forever. Reactionaries >> locked into positions of authority and power-diving the country right >> into >> bedrock. >> > > Typical contard drinking the Fox koolaid. You just keep on > worshipping Trump all of you. Is Trump a total moron, a genius, or some sort of strange "hybrid"?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jeff-Relf.Me @. |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-01 21:37 -0700 |
| Subject | Trump is a salesman. |
| Message-ID | <Jeff-Relf.Me@Oct.1--9.37pm.Seattle.2018> |
| In reply to | #470023 |
> Is Trump a total moron, a genius, or some sort of strange "hybrid"? Trump is a salesman.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 39 of 46 — ← Prev page 1 … 37 38 [39] 40 41 … 46 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.advocacy
csiph-web