Keeping track of zoophiles
Michael Hirtes
heartless pervert scumbags:
http://www.pet-abuse.com/database/search.php?country=&state=&type_id=10&m
onth=00&year=&gender=&status=&search=search
David Vasco da Gama Saunders
shall never vanquished be until great Birnam wood to high
alt.fan.furry. hill shall come against him.
I like it how they have people on there who have "allegedly" committed
these crimes on there or who were "Not Charged".
And therefore have not actually committed the crime until they are
proven guilty.
We need something like that for Fanboi's who don't wash.
-----------------------------------
|"Chirpy Yiffmonger" |
| |
| Status: Greasy & Unwashed |
|Case: Pending |
|Action: Drowning in a vat of wine.|
------------------------------------
---
Can we put a price on peace?
Yes, it is the opportunity cost of all those weapons you will not sell.
Farlo
> heartless pervert scumbags:
LOL. How ironic!
--
Farlo
Urban Fey Dragon
"Imperial" States of America
(The Land of Confusion)
Brian Henderson
Gama" Saunders) wrote:
>I like it how they have people on there who have "allegedly" committed
>these crimes on there or who were "Not Charged".
>And therefore have not actually committed the crime until they are
>proven guilty.
Um... whether or not you are actually convicted and serve time, you
can *STILL* do the crime you know.
iBuck
>Um... whether or not you are actually convicted and serve time, you
>can *STILL* do the crime you know.
the act yes, crime no...
this little thing about "innocent untill proven guilty"..
"You can have it Quickly,Correct, Complex - Pick 2"
Griffure
In France, someone who would build this kind of site would be regarded
as a criminal. The webmaster should give the photagraph and the IRL
adress of any abuser. That would be practical for those who would want
to burn them alive.
Good christians that do not believe nor in mercy, nor in redemtion.
Seems they all deserve some time in a mental asylum, however. I really
enjoyed the story of the guy who had fucked a goat. What was absolutely
unforgivable was that he was... seropositive. Poor goat, not even good
for the butcher, then. Had the goat be burned, being infected?
Griffure
Michael Hirtes
Farlo <hall...@att.net> wrote:
> Michael Hirtes <mhi...@KILL.ALL.THE.SPAMMERS.telemarketers.too.com> wrote:
> > heartless pervert scumbags:
>
> LOL. How ironic!
So, how come YOU'RE not on the list, Farlo? One step ahead of the cops
as always, I see.
no one in particular
"Michael Hirtes" <mhi...@KILL.ALL.THE.SPAMMERS.telemarketers.too.com> wrote in
message news:mhirtes-2982E4...@news.central.cox.net...
ABSOFUCKINGLUTELY, MIKE!!!
I cannot but agree 100% with MH on this. Anyone who abuses animals needs to
be dragged down a road at 50mph by their hair.
-Wayd Wolf
Farlo
> So, how come YOU'RE not on the list, Farlo? One step ahead of the cops
> as always, I see
*Grin*
--
Farlo "Capt'n Jack" Feydragon
Michael Hirtes
And not by the hair on their head (if you know what i mean).
Barry Gold
Those cases are disgusting. There is no excuse for those ******s.
--
I pledge allegiance to the Constitution of the United States of America, and
to the republic which it established, one nation from many peoples, promising
liberty and justice for all.
Chris
get sued for it, for lots, and lots of money.
======================
Bastard Boy
100% Bastard Inside
Baboo!
Why were you looking for beastiality in the first place.
Ah shit. I keep forgetting where I am.
D.S
Birnam wood to high alt.fan.furry. hill shall come against him.
>Michael Hirtes <mhi...@KILL.ALL.THE.SPAMMERS.telemarketers.too.com> wrote in message news:<mhirtes-2982E4...@news.central.cox.net>...
Ha! fine words from someone who uses google.
Paul Johnson
Hash: SHA1
The Wed, 16 Jul 2003 15:33:36 GMT, Farlo <hall...@att.net> wrote:
> Michael Hirtes <mhi...@KILL.ALL.THE.SPAMMERS.telemarketers.too.com> wrote:
>> heartless pervert scumbags:
>
> LOL. How ironic!
Yeah, the moment you quit publishing pornography to leach off society,
I really think you loose all grounds to making that claim for anybody
other than yourself. Everything else is just projection.
- --
.''`. Paul Johnson <ba...@ursine.ca>
: :' : proud Debian admin and user
`. `'`
`- Debian - when you have better things to do than fix a system
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQE/F9IPJ5vLSqVpK2kRAh6VAKDf5xNkla9rfo6ODhRhxr8AYlDOLwCg0p9u
OsvFm0fftNHiu8KCn985RyE=
=0ePo
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Paul Johnson
Hash: SHA1
The 17 Jul 2003 22:52:43 -0700, Baboo! <ba...@dotcult.com> wrote:
> Why were you looking for beastiality in the first place.
>
> Ah shit. I keep forgetting where I am.
Google for furplay and you'll realise it's not the newsgroup, it's him.
- --
.''`. Paul Johnson <ba...@ursine.ca>
: :' : proud Debian admin and user
`. `'`
`- Debian - when you have better things to do than fix a system
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQE/F9L1J5vLSqVpK2kRArM5AJ9RkCFl8Xlw3nuYESOpBih8+d5jOwCeNU8I
SH4x1OCuWI0AePMgDnn0GpE=
=0PYJ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Michael Hirtes
wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> The Wed, 16 Jul 2003 15:33:36 GMT, Farlo <hall...@att.net> wrote:
> > Michael Hirtes <mhi...@KILL.ALL.THE.SPAMMERS.telemarketers.too.com> wrote:
> >> heartless pervert scumbags:
> >
> > LOL. How ironic!
>
> Yeah, the moment you quit publishing pornography to leach off society,
> I really think you loose all grounds to making that claim for anybody
> other than yourself. Everything else is just projection.
>
LOL! Never underestimate the phurri tendency to take ANYthing I say and
try to turn it into an attepted flame war.
And, we both know that you're just jealous.
Michael Hirtes
wrote:
> Michael Hirtes <mhi...@KILL.ALL.THE.SPAMMERS.telemarketers.too.com> wrote:
> >Any REAL furry would be in favor of animals being protected from
> >heartless pervert scumbags:
> >
> >http://www.pet-abuse.com/database/search.php?country=&state=&type_id=10&m
> >onth=00&year=&gender=&status=&search=search
>
> Those cases are disgusting. There is no excuse for those ******s.
Well, after looking through those case files, browse on over to the
various zoophile and furry-apologist sites out there, and you start to
understand the sense of disgust I have towards them.
Zoophilia is not love. It's animal abuse. It's an act of ultimate
selfishness & cruelty against an innocent, helpless creature. It's so
repellant that their behavior almost cost the Texas gays their Supreme
Court case (the conservatives screamed that legalizing sodomy would
fling open the doors to all sorts of depravity being made legal, such as
bestiality). No surprise that gays were outraged that they would be
lumped in with animal abusers (whom they too would beat the crap out of
if they had the chance).
Farlo
wrote:
> the conservatives screamed that legalizing sodomy would
> fling open the doors to all sorts of depravity being made legal, such
> as bestiality
Not so. Mr. Santorum is anything but a conservative. His views are in
lockstep with, well, damn ... Godwin. Really, Dachau wasn't far from his
ideological tree. The truly radical elements in American society may
call themselves "conservative", but when a public figure like Pat
Robertson publicly and sincerely prays to God for the deaths of three
supreme court justices in front of millions of viewers - then you know,
it's the conservatives that you should watch most closely.
--
Farlo
Paul R. Bennett
And wanna watch ME go "lock and load"?
The animals are bad enough, but children and "cub art"?
Don't go there, not even. I get far too angry with the apologists.
Bottom line on my young niece.. The murder trial for her accused killer is now
October
Don't go there Furry, not that subject. Don't even think about it
Paul
Baboo!
> Ha! fine words from someone who uses google.
Yes, and the droning of the newgroup elite is of a much higher caliber; certainly.
Catch AIDS and die kplzthnx
Paul Johnson
Hash: SHA1
The Fri, 18 Jul 2003 10:11:55 GMT, D.S <dsa...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> Ha! fine words from someone who uses google.
Yeah, but isn't BT fairly well known for having an internet customer
base willing to pay way too much for nothing in return? Aren't you a
BT customer?
- --
.''`. Paul Johnson <ba...@ursine.ca>
: :' : proud Debian admin and user
`. `'`
`- Debian - when you have better things to do than fix a system
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQE/GOI0J5vLSqVpK2kRAj6mAJ4/TOHZsQdQe6IxGrg6zs19NqjtLQCgjxwk
nZZGkYQw0XNygeVppp625fA=
=O7SE
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
D.S
Birnam wood to high alt.fan.furry. hill shall come against him.
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>Hash: SHA1
>
>The Fri, 18 Jul 2003 10:11:55 GMT, D.S <dsa...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>> Ha! fine words from someone who uses google.
>
>Yeah, but isn't BT fairly well known for having an internet customer
>base willing to pay way too much for nothing in return? Aren't you a
>BT customer?
BT is classic example of a poloticaly botched privatistaion. Lots of
the conservatives pals owned shares in it, so when they privatised it,
they allowed BT to own all the phone lines, and all the other phone
companies have to go through them as it were.
So, you get the problems of the public secotor, I.e monolithic and
potential unresponsive and ineffiencent, with the worst problems of
the private, Greed, Poor customer service etc.
You can pay BT for crappy internet, Or you can pay someone else for
crappy internet.
Or you can pay a fortune for what is amongst the slowwest broadband
with the least amount of coverage in the primary E.U countries.
It's all crappy, Since BT refuse to spend the money on maintaing and
upgradeing phone lines.
The United Kingdoms Telecom system is FUCKED UP big time.
David Formosa (aka ? the Platypus)
<mhi...@KILL.ALL.THE.SPAMMERS.telemarketers.too.com> wrote:
[...]
> LOL! Never underestimate the phurri tendency to take ANYthing I say and
> try to turn it into an attepted flame war.
If you didn't know that what you posted would start a flame war you
are more stupid then I have come to expect.
--
Please excuse my spelling as I suffer from agraphia. See
http://dformosa.zeta.org.au/~dformosa/Spelling.html to find out more.
Free the Memes.
Michael Hirtes
"David Formosa (aka ? the Platypus)" <dfor...@dformosa.zeta.org.au>
wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Jul 2003 15:41:50 GMT, Michael Hirtes
> <mhi...@KILL.ALL.THE.SPAMMERS.telemarketers.too.com> wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > LOL! Never underestimate the phurri tendency to take ANYthing I say and
> > try to turn it into an attepted flame war.
>
> If you didn't know that what you posted would start a flame war you
> are more stupid then I have come to expect.
And why would it become fodder for a flame war?
Think about it for a sec.
Is there actually a credible argument in FAVOR of abusing helpless
animals?
Brian Henderson
<mhi...@KILL.ALL.THE.SPAMMERS.telemarketers.too.com> wrote:
>Is there actually a credible argument in FAVOR of abusing helpless
>animals?
Well, it keeps these genetic misfits from polluting the gene pool...
;)
David Formosa (aka ? the Platypus)
<mhi...@KILL.ALL.THE.SPAMMERS.telemarketers.too.com> wrote:
> In article <slrnbhnm7r....@dformosa.zeta.org.au>,
> "David Formosa (aka ? the Platypus)" <dfor...@dformosa.zeta.org.au>
> wrote:
[...]
>> If you didn't know that what you posted would start a flame war you
>> are more stupid then I have come to expect.
>
> And why would it become fodder for a flame war?
Because every single post in this newsgroup on the subject of
Zooaphilia has ended up being fodder for a flame war. And anyone who
has been on this newsgroup for a non-trival amount of time knows this.
Onyx Dreamer
> Any REAL furry would be in favor of animals being protected from
> heartless pervert scumbags:
>
> http://www.pet-abuse.com/database/search.php?country=&state=&type_id=10&m
> onth=00&year=&gender=&status=&search=search
Why do you waste everyone's time with such obvious attempts to bate
others into useless stupid battles? The Furry fandom is not about
zooiphilia - pro or con. (So allunderstand my definition - furry must
have elements of animal and human to be furry in the context of this
groop.) Your post is an attempt is to cause useless flames, hurt the
feelings of others and damage the reputaion of this fandom with
misleading statements. This is truely sad. It only shows all that read
your posts that you are a hurt soul in need of help. I urge you to get
that professional help soon. These reckless and evil hearted attempts
to hurt others can only bring you more pain both now and in the
future. You know this to be true as you have felt this with your every
previous attempt. It is not the fandom that is causeing you pain. You
have been doing all the harm to yourself. I know you will most likely
continue to do this in the future because you will not be able to
accept this honest atemept to help and will see it only as an attack
on you (when it is the opposite).
That is for that reason I pity you.
Michael Hirtes
ebbpa...@aol.com (Onyx Dreamer) wrote:
> Michael Hirtes <mhi...@KILL.ALL.THE.SPAMMERS.telemarketers.too.com> wrote in
> message news:<mhirtes-2982E4...@news.central.cox.net>...
> > Any REAL furry would be in favor of animals being protected from
> > heartless pervert scumbags:
> >
> > http://www.pet-abuse.com/database/search.php?country=&state=&type_id=10&m
> > onth=00&year=&gender=&status=&search=search
>
> Why do you waste everyone's time with such obvious attempts to bate
> others into useless stupid battles?
My oh my. Did I hit a nerve there?
I was only stating that anyone who appreciates anthropomorphism would
naturally be against those who are selfish enough to be cruel to
animals. If there was any excuse for a furry to be socially active, this
would be the cause to take up on. I mean, who would want some sicko to
be selling "crush" videos at a furry dealer's room?
Somehow, I suspect you take umbrage with it because you yourself may
fall into that latter category.
If so, allow me to be the first to tell you to fuck off and die.
Matt Harpold
> > >
http://www.pet-abuse.com/database/search.php?country=&state=&type_id=10&m
> > > onth=00&year=&gender=&status=&search=search
> >
> > Why do you waste everyone's time with such obvious attempts to bate
> > others into useless stupid battles?
>
> My oh my. Did I hit a nerve there?
>
> I was only stating that anyone who appreciates anthropomorphism would
> naturally be against those who are selfish enough to be cruel to
> animals.
Actually, most of us really don't care. We're too busy worrying about real
issues like people blowing each other up, and skyrocketing unemployment.
This issue would probably be better served if you crossposted it to some
PETA newsgroup.
If there was any excuse for a furry to be socially active, this
> would be the cause to take up on. I mean, who would want some sicko to
> be selling "crush" videos at a furry dealer's room?
I don't want it or not want it. I don't get worked up about it.
>
> Somehow, I suspect you take umbrage with it because you yourself may
> fall into that latter category.
>
> If so, allow me to be the first to tell you to fuck off and die.
Yeah, I've never heard that one before. :D
-Matt/Turbine "Your recommended daily allowance of sweet, sweet apathy"
David Formosa (aka ? the Platypus)
<mhi...@KILL.ALL.THE.SPAMMERS.telemarketers.too.com> wrote:
[...]
> I was only stating that anyone who appreciates anthropomorphism would
> naturally be against those who are selfish enough to be cruel to
> animals.
You know as well as I do that the question of the crulty of Zoophilic
ativerties is a subject for wich there is no concencus within the
fandom. However over the years a sort of unoffical cease fire has
formed between thouse of the differing camps where by the
pro-zoophilic people do not advocate there views in exchange for the
anti-zoophilic people also remaining quite.
Because of this for the last 4 or so years the channel hasn't been
dominated by that boring debait. Re-opening this debait helps no one.
The chance that people would be converted from whatever state of views
that they had to something else was extreemly minimal.
I suggest that we would all be best surved by ignoreing any of your
attempts to stur up this topic again.
Michael Hirtes
> On Sat, 26 Jul 2003 01:10:03 GMT, Michael Hirtes
> <mhi...@KILL.ALL.THE.SPAMMERS.telemarketers.too.com> wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > I was only stating that anyone who appreciates anthropomorphism would
> > naturally be against those who are selfish enough to be cruel to
> > animals.
>
> You know as well as I do that the question of the crulty of Zoophilic
> ativerties is a subject for wich there is no concencus within the
> fandom. However over the years a sort of unoffical cease fire has
> formed between thouse of the differing camps where by the
> pro-zoophilic people do not advocate there views in exchange for the
> anti-zoophilic people also remaining quite.
>
> Because of this for the last 4 or so years the channel hasn't been
> dominated by that boring debait. Re-opening this debait helps no one.
> The chance that people would be converted from whatever state of views
> that they had to something else was extreemly minimal.
>
> I suggest that we would all be best surved by ignoreing any of your
> attempts to stur up this topic again.
Go ahead. Your ignoring of the ugly facts will not mean that they aren't
there.
Don Sanders
mhi...@KILL.ALL.THE.SPAMMERS.telemarketers.too.com says...
Go ahead, pick a ugly fact, there are hundreds, nay thousands out
there, why stop at z00philes?
--
Don Sanders.
Onyx Dreamer
> In article <5195598a.03072...@posting.google.com>,
> ebbpa...@aol.com (Onyx Dreamer) wrote:
>
> > Michael Hirtes <mhi...@KILL.ALL.THE.SPAMMERS.telemarketers.too.com> wrote in
> > message news:<mhirtes-2982E4...@news.central.cox.net>...
> > > Any REAL furry would be in favor of animals being protected from
> > > heartless pervert scumbags:
> > >
> > > http://www.pet-abuse.com/database/search.php?country=&state=&type_id=10&m
> > > onth=00&year=&gender=&status=&search=search
> >
> > Why do you waste everyone's time with such obvious attempts to bate
> > others into useless stupid battles?
>
> My oh my. Did I hit a nerve there?
>
*Sigh* I am the one that "hit a nerve" that is why you choose to try
to ignore my words in favor of the same failed stratagy as you have
done many times before.
> I was only stating that anyone who appreciates anthropomorphism would
> naturally be against those who are selfish enough to be cruel to
> animals. If there was any excuse for a furry to be socially active, this
> would be the cause to take up on. I mean, who would want some sicko to
> be selling "crush" videos at a furry dealer's room?
>
I have no idea what you are taling about. Nor do I care. The truth is
that you are trying to make others angry in an attempt to divert
yourself from the pain within you. Your soul is crying out. I can hear
it and I shead a single tear for your life - wasted on foolish
misdirected angish. The questions you should be asking are to yourself
and are not posed here.
> Somehow, I suspect you take umbrage with it because you yourself may
> fall into that latter category.
>
Funny. My post said nothing substancally about the proported topic of
"Zoo' save that it is being used as a foil (by you) to stab at others
and as a smoke screen to hide your wounded soul. I am certain that the
word "Umbrage" doesn't mean what you think it means. Since Umbrage
means "to become angry because of an offence" and I clearly could care
less about the 'topic' that you are trying to cause flames with. This
word is not only improperly used (honestly I care more about getting 2
for a dollar Grapeade from Walgreens then the suppossed 'topic').
Clearly you are using it in a pitiful attempt to cover up your own
anger. In fact, I dare say that you are the one that took 'umbrage'
with my post because it is the truth.
> If so, allow me to be the first to tell you to fuck off and die.
Thus comes the proof that I am correct about your misplaced anger. I
have no more time to post to try to help you at this time. I uege you
please talk to someone in the real world around you. Getting help is a
brave thing to do and it will make you far happier then these foolish
posts and flame wars ever will.