IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New True re many--but he's assurely the gigundo-Example of 'Why-we-Fight', (some: for decades).
New No, really not
There are lots of old white men who are more vociferous in their beliefs. The problem is that the more carefully-spoken ones who wield the institutional power decided to put one of the raving loons in front of their party.
--

Drew
New ~Concur, nice catch: it's the deception-planners who deserve the most obloquy, of whatever age
These KNOW they are lying /spinning but constantly buffer the fact: I Am ..a Rat in Rat's clothing..
and no-mistake.

Could this be ingrained as a toddler? He hit me First, Mom!
We are so fucking malleable ..on the broad Way --> towards adult insouciance-for-life :-/
     not posturing or gotchas, embedded reporting inside portland cthouse and embedded outside as well - (boxley) - (21)
         They don't want a solution, they want an excuse -NT - (drook) - (20)
             which side? or both? -NT - (boxley) - (19)
                 Trying not to knee jerk and assume - (drook) - (18)
                     you have folks inside the courthouse whose "mission" such as it is - (boxley) - (17)
                         This wasn't about the feds until they started playing Gestapo - (drook) - (16)
                             from the article I posted it did not seem like they were playing gestapo -NT - (boxley) - (15)
                                 Did the AP embed a reporter with the teams cruising in unmarked vans and disappearing people? -NT - (drook) - (14)
                                     nope, there is a missing persons list in portland? -NT - (boxley) - (13)
                                         The first round was catch-and-release. That makes it ok? -NT - (drook) - (12)
                                             so where did they "disappear" to? if it was to a jail then in front of a judge that not ok? -NT - (boxley) - (11)
                                                 No judge. - (Andrew Grygus) - (4)
                                                     so we are going to be like canada then - (boxley) - (3)
                                                         Are you implying that makes it OK? -NT - (drook) - (2)
                                                             nope -NT - (boxley) - (1)
                                                                 Then WTF *I*S* your argument? If you have one, make it -- otherwise, STFU. - (CRConrad)
                                                 precedent - (lincoln) - (5)
                                                     From August 2004 to June 2015 trump wasnt president then, thats why not much concern until now -NT - (boxley) - (4)
                                                         The protests aren't about Trump -NT - (drook) - (3)
                                                             True re many--but he's assurely the gigundo-Example of 'Why-we-Fight', (some: for decades). -NT - (Ashton) - (2)
                                                                 No, really not - (drook) - (1)
                                                                     ~Concur, nice catch: it's the deception-planners who deserve the most obloquy, of whatever age - (Ashton)

And then they ran out of time.
44 ms