>>24969186
the mossad types have to control ALL the communications venues.
If they can't control it they flood it with nonsense.
that's what you see, they don't have full control so they make this place, pardon the word, look degenerate and retarded
>>24969213
OSS and that group of degenerates showed up the first week of July 2020 and basically stated out loud that all the anon should know that they weren't welcome anymore and would be best to just leave the place to them.
at some point they even banned anon for a year.
you sound like an ai conflict shill who just posts disparaging nonsense.
why don't you insult Tucker Carlson and say that he's washed up.
how dare anyone have a narrative that explains what Mossad does!
thank you!
they wish that none of us were left.
we have the screen caps that reveal some of what was happening. I remember before the Ukraine war if you mentioned Ukraine and their undue influence there were be teams of shills who would attack, like the day that the Ukrainian drug slave guy murdered all those motorcyclists in New Hampshire by slamming his truck into them. The Ukrainiakes have so much power and influence that they guy had the charges greatly reduced as if he wasn't at fault.
Mossad and Ukraine seem somehow . . . connected. Why would that be?
anon/shill, what is obvious is obvious. I wouldn't have made the connection if they weren't so hot on trying to suppress all discussion about Ukraine.
no, it means that they are foreign owned, foreign CEO company.
well, scripted nonsense conflict usually IS that so it's likely.
It could be that real unhinged person is actually posting one or two people posting.
the purpose of the ones who post that, from what it seems, but who really knows, to find those who applaud it and laud it and echo it.
if Jews post 'jewhate' they do it to out real people who are anti semetic. If someone posts muslim hate, probably the same thing.
the anti-catholic spam is so that it seems ok to delete whatever they want to delete.
they might be hateful and combative, but generally they aren't really out to hurt anyone.
they do what to find those who DO want to do that, however.
as I said it should be obvious.
I think to make it less offensive to our friends I'd say 'Ukrainigarchs'.
Is that kind enough?
there aren't just two thing and I'm not one of them.
I am me. I'm on the side of those who want less killing and more well fed children
if he were anon and he needed to message the BO he'd wait till BO posted and then just message him!
>>24969446
no, that's not right. It's not that but the subset of them that term, deprecated, which we MUST NOT USE begins with a K. the Y are just anyone. That is an offensive word but it's incorrect. you should understand this by now.
>>24969455
all K are Y but not all Y are K.
Most J are good and awesome, kind, and loving. there is a personality type that are bullies and mean and cut throat. they are the K. not all J are K (very few, in fact.).
the equivalent of the K exist in most societies. It's not just J that have bad people. Most J don't like all the killing and descrimination. but the psyop of them being 'always victims' sets them into a highly defensive mode. Once they realize that they have nothing to be afraid of they back off. the K maybe wouldn't.
it's bait. Ya, that's a word that enlightened and loving people don't use unless their a shock-standup comic and only in a very specific context.
>>24969471
is my concept that the 'bad person could be a Jew' too egalitarian for your supremacist ideology?
>>24969477
>>24969475
sounds like you say this because you know it's true and you are talking about yourself.
oh, good, his crap has been dust-binned.
anyone who wants to talk about censorship and ask 'why is stuff deleted' you can review that person's posts and get an inkling of what the BO are gunning after.
is that hard to comprehend that it's offensive and hurtful to some people to hear themselves called that?
I don't say that no one should ever use it but it shows an unkind nature OR, as I said, it might just be a bit for an insult comic who is in a proper venue. OR it might be bait within a text or speach that someone uses to see who lauds the comment to determine the sentiments of the people within the audience.
offensive words, said in the wrong venue, can get you killed. you trigger some very dark emotions.
but you go ahead and think that my honest discussion is 'fag speak'. you do you. no one else would.
wouldn't that be something if people didn't get triggered into emotions by words.
but we must understand that people are if we are to be effective communicators.
so if you know someone isn't, you probably can be much freer in what you say.
but if you understand that you use certain words in certain crowds and that will result in heated and defensive emotional reactions, a wise person will avoid using those words.
'sticks and stones' is a cute nursery rhyme but in the real world we all know that people who 'should not be offended' often are, and to very violent consequence to those who blat out fight words and ethnic slurs.
so if you're in the enlightened emporium say what you do. but if you're out side the negro strip club don't use certain language or you might get clobbered or even murdered for doing it.
I am not.
and you don't read it because you want conflict and I'm not playing along with your script.
proper context. trying to be funny. no one within distance to clonk you on the head because your in your office or your spy-hub.
but points off for being an SP rip off
the conflict shill can't give up.
probably just a script.
no real person would care so much and show themselves to be so craven.
all your curses go back to you.