whoa, shannon, wtf happened
i'll teach you to turn away.
when did that happen?!
lish "is there any word that 'not' sounds
cr...@got.net better in front of than 'pregnant'?" -bh
40.1% / 30 RANA 125 / 68
Ray Pearson
"i'll teach you to turn away." <cr...@got.net> wrote in message
news:3kr059F...@individual.net...
Not to mention "HOW CAN THAT HAPPEN"
Ruzinthra the Ruki
turn away.) choked out these words:
> http://www.bmezine.com/news/pubring/20050703.html
>
> when did that happen?!
about a month ago. it was on iam. end of June, i believe.
david
--
http://members.ebay.com/aboutme/derbarbier/
http://www.cafepress.com/derbarbier
http://shops.half.ebay.com/derbarbier
moc tod oohay ta r3ibrabr3d
i'll teach you to turn away.
RtR> On 28 Jul 2005 03:02:02 GMT, cr...@got.net (i'll teach you toRtR> about a month ago. it was on iam. end of June, i believe.
do you know any other details? i read the original article, & it
seemed pretty FREE SPEECH as far as i could tell. or doesn't BME have
first amendment coverage now that it's canadian again?
lish "& it means half as much
cr...@got.net as it used to to me." -mm
yttr...@gmail.com
appear in all pictures that can in any way be described as
"pornographic" must have signed waivers and supplied proof of their age
and willingness to participate. Every individual pictured that this
information cannot be supplied for generates a maximum of 20 years in
prison or something.
Now ask yourself how much porn is on BME.
BME isnt really banned in the US. Its just become risky to run from
the US.
Ray Pearson
<yttr...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1122564231.6...@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
>
> Now ask yourself how much porn is on BME.
>
> BME isnt really banned in the US. Its just become risky to run from
> the US.
this is the basis of my question, you cannot BAN anything on the internet, I
mean I suppose hacker worth his salt could blow up the site, but as far as
the gov't saying "you can't do that" and enforcing it doesn't happen. I'm
just saying.
Curt
> as far as the gov't saying "you can't do that"
> and enforcing it doesn't happen. I'm just saying.
Is that right, R? Are you certain?
--
Curt
http://curtjames.com/
i'll teach you to turn away.
ygc> It has to do with the new law about pornography. All individuals
ygc> appear in all pictures that can in any way be described as
ygc> "pornographic" must have signed waivers and supplied proof of thei
yeah, i know what the article WAS about.
the ARTICLE ITSELF is now GONE.
that's my question.
lish "who you don't hurt
cr...@got.net will never know you." -lh
Blaine Hamrick
It sounds to me like the Untied States under King George put pressure on
Canada to take the anti-US article off the server. In recent years - at
least, maybe more - Canada has had more freedom of speech than the Untied
States, even though their rights are perhaps not as much set forth in a
founding document as such. King George has demonstarted that he will not let
Constitutions or other pro-civil-rights legislation stop him from his reign
of terror. Would that I could move to Canada tomorrow! In the meantime,
support your local Republic of Texas: http://www.republic-of-texas.net/
yttr...@gmail.com
Judith Cookson
> Oh, thats just the usual paranoid scare tactic bullshit.
goddamit yttrx; can't you use a client that quotes the post to which you're
replying?
//jew
Ray Pearson
"Judith Cookson" <jcoo...@onastick.net> wrote in message
news:9eKdnQRRGby...@speakeasy.net...
coast elitism is showing just a dab. Yeah new yorkers can "think" who the
fuck is your senator? do the word carpetbagger ring a bell.
yttr...@gmail.com
yttr...@gmail.com
"Does" the word carpetbagger ring a bell.
<3
Ray Pearson
<yttr...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1122658823.9...@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Curt James
Schtick.
It should be obvious that the non-quote responses are by design and not
at all client-related.
--
Curt
http://curtjames.com/
yttr...@gmail.com
saw that stupid "show options" link so I could quote text.
Curt James
I say again, *Schtick*.
It should be obvious that the non-quote responses are by design and not
at all client-related.
Regardless of its web-based client nature, you are doing it
deliberately. (Of couse it's a guess, but let's be realistic.)
I mean, suddenly you've lost all concept of attribution and quoting a
snippet of the post you're replying to? HAR! Okay, I did say something
about doubting your intelligence due to your /fat always and
forever-n-ever equals slow/ belief and more recently because of your
idea that weight loss surgery has no place in any person's battle
against obesity, so, yeah, I suppose it's possible that you've been
posting the last - what, 20 or 30 it seems - let's say *buncha* posts
and just never saw the show options link. Riiiiiight.
--
Curt
http://curtjames.com/