>>21735868 (pb)
>not your place to call him 'dangerous'
Kek. That's exactly what free speech is, Moran. He wants to censor based on opinions he feels are wrong think™, which is the anti-thesis of free speech. Anyone that wants to censor the voice of another, simply 'cos they do not like what the other person has to say,isdangerous.
>you're a maniplator and a slanderer.
And that'slibel, Fren.
>He can say what he wants, and call it as he sees it.
As can I, but (you) seem to have a problem when I do it. Hypocrite much?
>you're as bad as what you say you condemn.
Wrong. That's projection. I haven't call for the censorship of anyone, nor do Icondoneit. There is a big difference between myself and the two of you. A very big difference.
>and then saying he's 'dangerous' is the iceing on the cake-of-cray-cray that you lay out and expect everyone else to eat.
Oooh. I touched a nerve on this one. Almost like it affected you,directly. That's your opinion and I'll defend your right to that opinion, but don't think for one second I will allow you to censor mine.
>you have the signature of a well known type here who say that anyone who disagrees with them is the worst of the worst.
That's actually projection of what you're doing. You're the one calling for censorship of something you do not like. I, however, am not.
>seriously your as obvious as it gets.
*you're, Anon. Take a breath. You're getting flustered that you're losing this debate and taking it personally.
>and so you ignore me becuase you are not even a genuine person, just a shill with a script and I throw eggs into your fan.
Kek. I was calling your faggot ass out left and right. As a matter of fact, when I gave you a rebuttal, I believe your response was, verbatim in toto, "useless noise maker." >>21735879 (pb) Kek. You sure showed me there, didn't you, Anon. /s