>Anyone questioning Jim's decisions about board matters is a shill trying to divide.
bullshit
fuckery is fuckery
>fuckery is fuckery
>>16488942 (PB)
>Yes anon, that's the picture I got banned for with the added scarf Hunte
>OSS turned on his own MNR or Midnight Riders
so the midnightriders
aka
/comms/ crew
supportedOSS, in your historical narrative?
interdasting
>Lets just say they were gullible huh?
the /midnightiders/ boar was created because OSS (and a band of anon) BTFO of the /comms/ crew so hard that they had to make a new board
thats how bad the /comms/ reputations had gotten
so no
I dont think the /midnightriders/ were OSS's minions
in any sense of the definition
gullible or otherwise
>could the addition have been interpreted as CP?
it was the anon that posted its opinion that NO, absolutely not
the ONLY thing that got added (according to anon who posted it) was hunter biden wearing the red scarf
>>16489177 (me)
>basic claim
>I dont think the /midnightriders/ were OSS's minions
>>16489197 (You)
>>16489219 (You)
>REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
>P=PENIS!
>Neon Revolt!
>InTheMatrixxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx!!!!
are you sure you are replying to the correct poster anon?
>Anon outted OSS and Comms at the same fucking time.
if you say you
you also said:
>OSS turned on his own MNR or Midnight Riders
OSS turn on 'HIS OWN' MNR or Midnight RIders
OSS
his own
midnight riders
you just claimed the midnight riders were OSS crew
the truth is LITERALLY the opposite of that
shadilay
>RE: DOST
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dost_test
>has been used for years here as alternative to "CP"
ty anon
>the photo was of one of those girls with a man in panties. Sexualized and that is illegal.
adding hunter biden in red scarf to joe biden on the beach with kids is illegal?
site the code, section and paragraph
>you were banned
wasnt me
I am just tracking the situation
>that is illegal
>site the code, section and paragraph
>Go to hell, don't pass go on the way.
got it
adding pic 2 to pic 1 somehow becomes CP through legal magic that you cant site or define
checks out
>https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2252A
yep
that is the code on CP
nothing saying a meme with a man in underwear (which could easily be a speedo/ swimwear that would be adequate for a beach setting) next to children is defined as CP
nothing at all
>Any sexualized visual representation of a real child or minor
this is sexual?
what is SEXual about it?
he is wearing underwear
that is technically no different thatn speedo's
which would be absolutely considered appropriate beachwear
>If that is the case, then then black and white pic of joe kneeling and ogling the little girl in the swimsuit would be considered cp, wouldn't it?
according to Jim I would assume yes
DOST report filed
barely trust myself most days
>don't need to overthink it. If it is illegal enough to go away if it is edgy or gray
its not even close to gray
its accurate
top kek