bendeus
Bellend Tagline Generator
A guy who masturbates over prepubescent kids is a poster who "deserves better"? Twisted logic there our kid.
Brilliant.
A guy who masturbates over prepubescent kids is a poster who "deserves better"? Twisted logic there our kid.
I'm very comfortable with my position. You, in the cold light of morning, may be less so (unless you're Firky)I aim to please.
Though it seems you're lacking an argument.
I'm very comfortable with my position. You, in the cold light of morning, may be less so (unless you're Firky)
Nah, I'm not The Runt cheap shot that was though, he never even liked me anyway - Skinny cuntchya.
Why are you defending a guy who made a crack about wanking off over prepubescent girls though? You've never satisfactoraly answered that.
Last warning for the evening. Wind your neck in please.Piss off dick -I doubt anyone's arsed about your bullshit. You're the one sticking up for him. And you spew out bile, not shit it out. Do try to keep up. Worst cunt.
You're asking the wrong question about the wrong person. You've dragged your wormy dog arse along the carpet of this thread and in so doing have accused a bunch of people, without backup, of being apologists for paedophilia, or paedophiles in the flesh. A_chap has very little to do with this; the fact that you're a twat, everything.
Last warning for the evening. Wind your neck in please.
I'm not asking any questions of a worthless trumpet such as you - Anyone who's stuck up for a_chap is suspect in my book - Let him clear the air if he can. The backup is there in the form of a_chap's decidedly dubious comment - You're an apologist - Have you got a beard coz I dunno how you could look yourself in the eye in the shaving mirror?
Given the way in which those of us who have merely questioned the possibilities that this was an innocent comment have been spoken to, I wouldn't blame the poster for not wanting to put himself in harm's way.tbf, they have had chance to answer, as they were looking at this thread half an hour ago.
I have no idea if he's referring to me, but I certainly found it rather ironic to find myself being accused of being a apologist for noncery. And not, I have to say, particularly pleasant - that's the point at which I reported a post.I'm not having that - Elaborate or retract.
I should have thought that you were starting to sail extremely close to the wind, defamation-wise, by now.A guy who masturbates over prepubescent kids is a poster who "deserves better"? Twisted logic there our kid.
I think he has form for this, and I think that, IIRC, in the past he has come back and retracted extreme comments he's made.Oh dear, Frances Lengel, you really have come across as an incoherent, self-righteous idiot.
I can only hope that you now get back and make some pretty grovelling apologies to the many and various people you've accused of shit here, TOTALLY unjustifiably, as far as I can see
How do you actually know what "Is there an innapropriate wank button too?" means?
It could mean 'I don't like this creepy photograph'
To be scrupulously fair to Frances, given JC3's usual bent for humour, those familiar with his posting style would most likely take it as him in effect saying "I've just had a wank over this photo, and I know it's inappropriate".
If that was the intention, then why mention wanking or inappropriateness?
Ockham's razor.
JC didn't make the comment though, this is nothing to do with him.
Not everyone who mentions the word "wank" is referring to an actual incident of masturbation.
Even if that were the case, a line got crossed when he started to cast aspersions against people for not joining in with his histrionics...If that was the intention, then why mention wanking or inappropriateness?
Ockham's razor.
Even if that were the case, a line got crossed when he started to cast aspersions against people for not joining in with his histrionics...