From what I've seen lately, you might as well have wrote "the Kering Foundation" instead of making up a name.
but not sure many will agree with you that the Rotherham girls need to get their boots off poor Imp's neck.
Imagine still falling for this, years down the road. Did you hear about the woman who claimed to be a grooming gang victim but was actually hitting herself with a weapon to make it look like it? Now ask yourself how many didn't get caught.
Careful now, I predict that there will be an international conspiracy to cover up this fact, in order to make it appear that women are not averse to randomly targeting girls, which would then hide their malice towards men and young boys in particular.
I mean, it's not the most ridiculous idea. They have done it before, believe it or not. A female mass shooter targeting men shot at a group containing girls and every single feminist shill jumped on that to say that it wasn't targeting men.
Still, I think even they would draw the line at pushing children under a train. Maybe. Hopefully.
From what I've seen lately, you might as well have wrote "the Kering Foundation" instead of making up a name.
I find it interesting that you move from one boogeyman to another which you paint as all-powerful when you get fixated on it.
Did you hear about the woman who claimed to be a grooming gang victim but was actually hitting herself with a weapon to make it look like it?
Oh wow! Did you hear about the man who claimed to be a Holocaust victim but actually lived in Switzerland during the war? Don't tell the Stormfags that you would accept that as definitive proof that the Holocaust is a hoax.
I mean, it's not the most ridiculous idea.
Just for fun: do you think your criteria for what are ridiculous ideas are reasonable and/or shared by people?
A female mass shooter targeting men shot at a group containing girls and every single feminist shill jumped on that to say that it wasn't targeting men.
I know a feminist mass shooter who targeted men. Omar Mateen.
Still, I think even they would draw the line at pushing children under a train. Maybe. Hopefully.
I don't. It's called new information. You can't stick to the same things when you find new, more useful information.
Believing a historical event with tons of evidence behind it is not the same as believing a bunch of lying murder fantasists who literally have it in their ideology to avoid truth.
From what I've seen lately, you might as well have wrote "the Kering Foundation" instead of making up a name.
Imagine still falling for this, years down the road. Did you hear about the woman who claimed to be a grooming gang victim but was actually hitting herself with a weapon to make it look like it? Now ask yourself how many didn't get caught.
I mean, it's not the most ridiculous idea. They have done it before, believe it or not. A female mass shooter targeting men shot at a group containing girls and every single feminist shill jumped on that to say that it wasn't targeting men.
Still, I think even they would draw the line at pushing children under a train. Maybe. Hopefully.
I find it interesting that you move from one boogeyman to another which you paint as all-powerful when you get fixated on it.
Oh wow! Did you hear about the man who claimed to be a Holocaust victim but actually lived in Switzerland during the war? Don't tell the Stormfags that you would accept that as definitive proof that the Holocaust is a hoax.
Just for fun: do you think your criteria for what are ridiculous ideas are reasonable and/or shared by people?
I know a feminist mass shooter who targeted men. Omar Mateen.
Why?
I don't. It's called new information. You can't stick to the same things when you find new, more useful information.
Believing a historical event with tons of evidence behind it is not the same as believing a bunch of lying murder fantasists who literally have it in their ideology to avoid truth.
Depends on the topic.
I don't get it.