Page 2 of 5
Re: Legal quandry, or maybe not
Posted: Wed Jun 03, 2015 8:28 pm
by Shlomart Ben Yisrael
You know what? Just forget it.
Screwey PM'ed me and he's hooking me up with
NO DONK (Home and Student Version 1.0.9)
Thanks Screw...you rock, bro!
Re: Legal quandry, or maybe not
Posted: Wed Jun 03, 2015 8:36 pm
by Shlomart Ben Yisrael
OH, WHAT KIND OF BULLSHIT IS THIS!?!?
I can't even ALT-TAB out of the installer...this is bullshit!
Screwey...WTF!?!? I thought you said this was good for an unlimited amount of installs? Not cool, bro...
:x
Re: Legal quandry, or maybe not
Posted: Wed Jun 03, 2015 9:00 pm
by LTS TRN 2
Give a man a donkey porn site and he'll fuck his hand for a day. Give me and my dual citizen homies power in the White house and we'll fuck America forever... :wink:
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/7c035/7c03516fb1459d14fda2e832ca60b6c712befa18" alt="Image"
Re: Legal quandry, or maybe not
Posted: Wed Jun 03, 2015 10:17 pm
by MgoBlue-LightSpecial
Shlomo, dude, don't be a "jackass." When it comes to donk protection, you can't afford to mess around with bootlegged software. I always go straight to the fine folks at Donk Pro Professionals, a subsidiary of Bestial Browser Busters Inc.
Re: Legal quandry, or maybe not
Posted: Wed Jun 03, 2015 10:29 pm
by Shlomart Ben Yisrael
~sigh~
You know what? You're right.
Oh well, better put on a fresh pot of coffee...It'll take me all night to re-install Windows... :(
Re: Legal quandry, or maybe not
Posted: Wed Jun 03, 2015 10:52 pm
by LTS TRN 2
C'mere, little bushka, and let me tell you--I've fucked lots of donkeys, as well as sheep, chickens, and a pig. But trust me, nothing compares to fucking America
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/d003c/d003c7d2da4fbb509bfca3be906e50e35bb81398" alt="Image"
Re: Legal quandry, or maybe not
Posted: Thu Jun 04, 2015 12:09 am
by MgoBlue-LightSpecial
LTS TRN 2 wrote:Absolute bullshit. There's nothing whatever like malware on any of the sites.
Sounds like you're current on all your firewalls and anti-virus protection. Good for you.
But not everybody is...and it's my duty to look out for folks here.
Re: Legal quandry, or maybe not
Posted: Thu Jun 04, 2015 12:28 am
by Shlomart Ben Yisrael
Nick, it's obvious your rape fantasy is being overpowered by an aggressive Jewish male.
Sorry dude...I ain't into that. Your PM's are going straight to the trash. Try Craigslist.
Re: Legal quandry, or maybe not
Posted: Thu Jun 04, 2015 1:10 am
by LTS TRN 2
um..b-juice, I believe you introduced the charming imagery of donkey porn into this thread. Own it. As for PNAC and AIPAC fucking over Amwerica, it's a perfectly apt metaphor. Or what?
As for malware on the Architects and Engineers For Truth, it's a clean site. I do in fact have a site checker and of course it comes up clean. Why wouldn't it? What's your idiotic fake (diversion) apprehension? Oh, you can't begin to refute it, so you'll try and smear it? Typical cowardly behavior on your part, mgo.
Re: Legal quandry, or maybe not
Posted: Thu Jun 04, 2015 1:16 am
by Shlomart Ben Yisrael
NOBODY VISIT NICK'S LINK.
IT'S RIDDLED WITH SPYWARE!
Re: Legal quandry, or maybe not
Posted: Thu Jun 04, 2015 1:20 am
by Shlomart Ben Yisrael
I punched Nick's URL link into Mal-Watch.com
...it said "unsafe" and "security threat".
Re: Legal quandry, or maybe not
Posted: Thu Jun 04, 2015 1:25 am
by MgoBlue-LightSpecial
Guys, BACK UP ALL YOUR FILES AND DO A TOTAL SYSTEM CLEAN! This is way worse than originally thought...
Re: Legal quandry, or maybe not
Posted: Thu Jun 04, 2015 1:30 am
by Shlomart Ben Yisrael
MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:Guys, BACK UP ALL YOUR FILES AND DO A TOTAL SYSTEM CLEAN! This is way worse than originally thought...
Huh? Has your browser's homepage been changed to "FleshDonk - The Artificial Donkey Phallus Manufacturer"
Re: Legal quandry, or maybe not
Posted: Thu Jun 04, 2015 1:34 am
by Shlomart Ben Yisrael
I got this email:
Want to meet hot, horny honeys who also think that no plane flew into the Pentagon? They're WET! CLICK HERE AND WIN A FREE iPOD!
That stuff goes straight to my Junk (Tee-hee-hee! Get it? "My Junk"?) Folder.
Re: Legal quandry, or maybe not
Posted: Thu Jun 04, 2015 1:52 am
by MgoBlue-LightSpecial
SHIT
SHIT
SHIT
SHIT
Re: Legal quandry, or maybe not
Posted: Thu Jun 04, 2015 2:24 am
by LTS TRN 2
Shlomart Ben Yisrael wrote:I punched Nick's URL link into Mal-Watch.com
...it said "unsafe" and "security threat".
That's odd, because I punched "Shlomart" into Ped-Watch.co, and it says you're the founder. And that you should be treated with the same precautions as with handling toxic waste.
Re: Legal quandry, or maybe not
Posted: Thu Jun 04, 2015 4:46 am
by LTS TRN 2
ALERT ALERT ALERT
This just in, listen up. An APB is in effect for a known baby blowing pedophile.
Appearance: spindly, red-haired, glasses.
Demeanor: whiny, kvetching, repetitive.
Known Associates: drunk hillbillies and tedious hacks.
Aliases: "Canadian," "Screaming Whistler" deadhead.
If you see or meet this ped, proceed with impunity and "smack" him roundly and with extreme prejudice. That is all..
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/0c0fd/0c0fda30f132c22315a3090573e9ac860c97952d" alt="Image"
Re: Legal quandry, or maybe not
Posted: Thu Jun 04, 2015 1:43 pm
by Goober McTuber
LTS TRN 2 wrote:Shlomart Ben Yisrael wrote:I punched Nick's URL link into Mal-Watch.com
...it said "unsafe" and "security threat".
That's odd, because I punched "Shlomart" into Ped-Watch.co, and it says you're the founder.
Rack Marty for founding an organization that watches for and identifies pedos. A great humanitarian.
Re: Legal quandry, or maybe not
Posted: Thu Jun 04, 2015 7:21 pm
by LTS TRN 2
Uh, no, goobs, Ped-watch is a site dedicated to finding vulnerable youth and steering the clients of the site to the sordid encounters. But, nice thought on your part. Stay moral!
Re: Legal quandry, or maybe not
Posted: Thu Jun 04, 2015 7:28 pm
by Goober McTuber
LTS TRN 2 wrote:Uh, no, goobs, Ped-watch is a site dedicated to finding vulnerable youth and steering the clients of the site to the sordid encounters. But, nice thought on your part. Stay moral!
Figures that you would know all the ins and outs about such a vile enterprise.
Re: Legal quandry, or maybe not
Posted: Thu Jun 04, 2015 9:14 pm
by LTS TRN 2
Oh touche! Wow, you are really cookin' with the zingers. But let's put the side-splitting comedy aside for moment and check your basic sanity. Here's a little test.
Look at this picture. Tell us in all honesty if you actually believe a 757 just disappeared through the hole in the wall..
okay, first, here's what a 757 would look like on that day actually hitting the building in question as claimed--
And here's what actually happened to the building which was allegedly struck as depicted above--
So, do you believe a 757 just passed through that small within the small rectangular opening? (notice the unbroken windows surrounding it) Because if you do, this means you're in some certifiable state of delusion. Think carefully before answering. :wink:
Re: Legal quandry, or maybe not
Posted: Thu Jun 04, 2015 10:23 pm
by MgoBlue-LightSpecial
So Nick, what are you doing besides bickering with all 9 people on this message board, to bring awareness of these unspeakable crimes committed by our government? Surely anyone with this much fervor over a singular issue has brought their fight out into the "real world"...no?
Please give specifics.
Re: Legal quandry, or maybe not
Posted: Thu Jun 04, 2015 10:38 pm
by Jay in Phoenix
Good points Mgo. So Nickole, what exactly are you doing in the "real world" to bring enlightenment to the masses away from this board. Surely, with all this vital info you should be building your case against the Government to the Supreme Court any day now.
So what are you doing Nick? Why stay focused on the nine of us here who don't give a flying fuck about you or any of the nonsense you spew? Please, tell us about the big picture you surely are striving to achieve.
Or is it the simplicity of you alone in the basement, lotion in one hand, mouse clicking furiously away with the other in an internet masturbatory orgy of insanity.
Re: Legal quandry, or maybe not
Posted: Thu Jun 04, 2015 10:41 pm
by MgoBlue-LightSpecial
I might be interested in joining Nick's cause. I'd like to see some brochures.
Is there an official club? I can meet most nights...except Tuesdays and Fridays.
Re: Legal quandry, or maybe not
Posted: Thu Jun 04, 2015 10:46 pm
by Moving Sale
MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:I might be interested in joining Nick's cause. I'd like to see some brochures.
Is there an official club? I can meet most nights...except Tuesdays and Fridays.
Too busy at your Retards Anonymous meetings?
Re: Legal quandry, or maybe not
Posted: Thu Jun 04, 2015 10:51 pm
by R-Jack
So lemme get this straight....
The evil government, somehow organized and concealed enough explosives to take down three major buildings in New York City without not only one of the literally millions of people noticing a thing, no one working on this massive undertaking leaking a thing. Easily the most detailed and intricate shadow mission known to man. Masterful in cover up and precision.
When it came time to explain the gaping hole at the Pentagon, the same entity responsible for that intricate and detailed covert act in NYC said "just say it was a plane or something......fuck it"
That the narrative your keeping alive, right Nick?
Re: Legal quandry, or maybe not
Posted: Thu Jun 04, 2015 10:55 pm
by Moving Sale
Go ahead RJack, you tell us how WTC7 came down.
Re: Legal quandry, or maybe not
Posted: Thu Jun 04, 2015 10:58 pm
by MgoBlue-LightSpecial
Moving Sale wrote:MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:I might be interested in joining Nick's cause. I'd like to see some brochures.
Is there an official club? I can meet most nights...except Tuesdays and Fridays.
Too busy at your Retards Anonymous meetings?
No. Retards Anonymous meets Sunday afternoon right after church.
Re: Legal quandry, or maybe not
Posted: Thu Jun 04, 2015 11:45 pm
by Screw_Michigan
MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:
No. Retards Anonymous meets Sunday afternoon right after church.
For convenience.
Re: Legal quandry, or maybe not
Posted: Thu Jun 04, 2015 11:50 pm
by MgoBlue-LightSpecial
Screw_Michigan wrote:For convenience.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/e2d3b/e2d3b6387f4e8ae7e1b81a0fe247d3831a5c4399" alt="Image"
Re: Legal quandry, or maybe not
Posted: Thu Jun 04, 2015 11:52 pm
by Shlomart Ben Yisrael
MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:
No. Retards Anonymous meets Sunday afternoon right after church.
There's room for all.
Just be careful for any bits of jagged metal.
Re: Legal quandry, or maybe not
Posted: Thu Jun 04, 2015 11:52 pm
by Jay in Phoenix
MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:I might be interested in joining Nick's cause. I'd like to see some brochures.
Is there an official club? I can meet most nights...except Tuesdays and Fridays.
That sounds like a great idea! Maybe we can stand about on street corners, passing out flyers for Pro Cuba and Communist manifestos. We could be the Grassy Knolls and we can wear black clothing and Nike sneakers and wait for the comet after drinking the purple Kool-Aid.
Will Big Foot and E.T. be invited?
This has potential!
Re: Legal quandry, or maybe not
Posted: Thu Jun 04, 2015 11:59 pm
by MgoBlue-LightSpecial
Shlomart Ben Yisrael wrote:Just be careful for any bits of jagged metal.
Glad to see you got your machine back up and running, homey. Just whatever you do, STAY AWAY FROM NICK'S LINKS.
Re: Legal quandry, or maybe not
Posted: Fri Jun 05, 2015 12:23 am
by Shlomart Ben Yisrael
MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:Just whatever you do, STAY AWAY FROM NICK'S LINKS.
Yep! I changed all my passwords as well.
P.S. ~ Just PM me and I'll send you the new password for the toddowen nic
Re: Legal quandry, or maybe not
Posted: Fri Jun 05, 2015 1:12 am
by LTS TRN 2
Actually it's not such an effort to dash off a few posts. It's hardly the bulk of my efforts. As to why waste basic concern on tedious and bitter fools like you, well, perhaps you should consider yourselves as representative of America's muzzled intellect, its stunted curiosity, and its callow abdication of this nation's basic civic duties. Perhaps you should believe that you matter. Not that you're interesting or versed or possessed of such qualities that would ennoble a community, a nation, or a planet.
As for how they rigged the controlled demolitions of the WTC towers, what makes you think "millions" of people would have noticed crews at night pretending to inspect and maintain the buildings? However, millions did see the three towers drop in obvious controlled fashion, and the subsequent assertions of this were systematically buried or dismissed. Shameless spin efforts like the PM piece were part of the cover-up. Remember, this ghastly plan was years in the making.
Go Warriors!
Re: Legal quandry, or maybe not
Posted: Fri Jun 05, 2015 2:07 am
by MgoBlue-LightSpecial
LTS TRN 2 wrote:Actually it's not such an effort to dash off a few posts. It's hardly the bulk of my efforts.
What comprises the bulk of your efforts?
You don't need to get defensive; I'm just asking a question.
Re: Legal quandry, or maybe not
Posted: Fri Jun 05, 2015 4:55 am
by Roger_the_Shrubber
I have to tell ya.................
This thread is freaking GREAT! Keep it up. We gotta talk about something.
Re: Legal quandry, or maybe not
Posted: Fri Jun 05, 2015 5:14 am
by Atomic Punk
Roger_the_Shrubber wrote:I have to tell ya.................
This thread is freaking GREAT! Keep it up. We gotta talk about something.
I was surprised this thread didn't catch immediate attention with a misspelling in it's title. It took awhile for it to be mentioned. However, for all it's worth, I skimmed through your initial post and didn't bother to really read it as it seemed uninteresting. I'm guessing if I went back to actually read it... you might make a certain sig list.
Re: Legal quandry, or maybe not
Posted: Fri Jun 05, 2015 6:42 am
by LTS TRN 2
Papa Willie wrote:Who's to say that the Muzzies didn't blow up WTC 7?
PS: Nickie - I'm honestly kind of feeling sorry for you in this one. Damn, man. You're taking "getting punted in the fuck" to a whole new level. Just relax, and things might get a little better for you...
Who's to say? Well, for starters the fact that there's no evidence whatsoever that they did. Second, the fact that every part of the official story falls apart upon basic scrutiny. That is, there's nothing whatever which could be introduced as evidence to obtain any sort of indictment or charges against anyone alleged in the "official" story to have committed the crime. Can you wrap your dented dull mind around that?
And really, willers, don't presume to feel sorry for anyone, as you're the one needing the sort of sympathy we bestow upon homeless vegetative sorts sprawled on the curb.
Re: Legal quandry, or maybe not
Posted: Fri Jun 05, 2015 8:30 am
by LTS TRN 2
No, and again you're backwards. You're the one living a dead hell--a closed falsity.
What have you got?
......