Lol: ISIS Celebrates Supreme Court Ruling By Throwing Gays Off Rooftops As Hundreds Cheer

[aaronleland]

One of those killed was a 15 year old boy who was raped. The first few posters applauded this. Fucking scum.

 

[Harry Dresden]

One of those killed was a 15 year old boy who was raped. The first few posters applauded this. Fucking scum.

notice how all of them including steve left the thread?.....i wonder why?...

 

[mdk]

The supreme court just sent 4 people to their death
Could have made a different ruling and maybe saved some lives.

Exactly. The Supreme Court missed an opportunity here. If they would ruled differently, ISIS would have changed their policies concerning homosexuals. Those four Justices have gay blood all over their hands.

 

[tyroneweaver]

MDK, remember the time i gave room some rabbit turds and told you they were smart pills. And you said these taste like ####
Well... you're getting smarter.

 

[Kondor3]

...It utterly depraved and sickening.

Indeed. Homosexuality is, indeed, utterly depraved and sickening.

 

[Tilly]

...It utterly depraved and sickening.

Indeed. Homosexuality is, indeed, utterly depraved and sickening.

Please don't hack up my posts in order to misrepresent what i said.

 

[Kondor3]

...It utterly depraved and sickening.

Indeed. Homosexuality is, indeed, utterly depraved and sickening.

Please don't hack up my posts in order to misrepresent what i said.

Given that the link exists to the original, and that it was intended as a glaringly obvious and self-evident (to anyone who's ever read your crap) excerpt, in order to facilitate a counterpoint, and given the use of the elipsis preceding your text fragment, in order to get your goat and goad you into a response...

Please feel free to go pound sand, Princess... now... go whine about it elsewhere.

 

[bodecea]

...It utterly depraved and sickening.

Indeed. Homosexuality is, indeed, utterly depraved and sickening.

Please don't hack up my posts in order to misrepresent what i said.

Given that the link exists to the original, and that it was intended as a glaringly obvious and self-evident (to anyone who's ever read your crap) excerpt, in order to facilitate a counterpoint, and given the use of the elipsis preceding your text fragment, in order to get your goat and goad you into a response...

Please feel free to go pound sand, Princess... now... go whine about it elsewhere.

So...what kind of point is it if you have to change another poster's post? Answer: Not much.

 

[Tilly]

...It utterly depraved and sickening.

Indeed. Homosexuality is, indeed, utterly depraved and sickening.

Please don't hack up my posts in order to misrepresent what i said.

Given that the link exists to the original, and that it was intended as a glaringly obvious and self-evident (to anyone who's ever read your crap) excerpt, in order to facilitate a counterpoint, and given the use of the elipsis preceding your text fragment, in order to get your goat and goad you into a response...

Please feel free to go pound sand, Princess... now... go whine about it elsewhere.

If you want to bash homosexuals, don't use my post to do it. It's dishonest, Princess.

 

[Kondor3]

...It utterly depraved and sickening.

Indeed. Homosexuality is, indeed, utterly depraved and sickening.

Please don't hack up my posts in order to misrepresent what i said.

Given that the link exists to the original, and that it was intended as a glaringly obvious and self-evident (to anyone who's ever read your crap) excerpt, in order to facilitate a counterpoint, and given the use of the elipsis preceding your text fragment, in order to get your goat and goad you into a response...

Please feel free to go pound sand, Princess... now... go whine about it elsewhere.

So...what kind of point is it if you have to change another poster's post? Answer: Not much.

Oh, be quiet, and mind your own business.

I could have accomplished the exact same thing by including the entire lame-ass and long post, and simply increased the size of the font and/or bolded the part to be counterpointed.

The 'excerpt' technique is oftentimes employed around here as a matter of expediency, rather than subjecting the eyes to pointless visual noise; something that I and a great many others do, frequently, every day, day-in-day-out, without whiny-baby spittle bubbling out of the mouths of pansies, pissing and moaning about the 'excerpt' technique.

Now, on the other hand, had I gone out of my way to change the verbiage, or misrepresented it in any way, you might have had a point I merely quoted verbatim, a general remark, the proceeded to add my own counterpointing context, sans any indicating that the flake-in-question agreed with me or not.

Now, go dry-hump somebody else's pants-leg, Queenie.

 

[Kondor3]

...It utterly depraved and sickening.

Indeed. Homosexuality is, indeed, utterly depraved and sickening.

Please don't hack up my posts in order to misrepresent what i said.

Given that the link exists to the original, and that it was intended as a glaringly obvious and self-evident (to anyone who's ever read your crap) excerpt, in order to facilitate a counterpoint, and given the use of the elipsis preceding your text fragment, in order to get your goat and goad you into a response...

Please feel free to go pound sand, Princess... now... go whine about it elsewhere.

If you want to bash homosexuals, don't use my post to do it. It's dishonest, Princess.

I used an EXCERPT from your post, and that nothing more than a general statement that did not even reference your own attitude on homosexuality one way or another.

It did not even serve to alter the original intention of your words that throwing queers off a rooftop was despicable, which would have been a policy violation.

Instead, it merely utilized your generic verbiage in a different and playfully counterpointing context.

Enjoy, sweet-cheeks.

Now... like your pissing-and-moaning friend... go dry-hump somebody else's pants cuff for a while, Junior...

<end of sequence>

 

[whitehall]

The sodomite revolution in the U.S. wasn't about "rights". It was about political power and the left's determination to destroy the fabric of society. It's ironic that the idiotic sodomites generally root for the psychotic jihadists while they would be the first to be executed under Sharia law.

 

[bodecea]

...It utterly depraved and sickening.

Indeed. Homosexuality is, indeed, utterly depraved and sickening.

Please don't hack up my posts in order to misrepresent what i said.

Given that the link exists to the original, and that it was intended as a glaringly obvious and self-evident (to anyone who's ever read your crap) excerpt, in order to facilitate a counterpoint, and given the use of the elipsis preceding your text fragment, in order to get your goat and goad you into a response...

Please feel free to go pound sand, Princess... now... go whine about it elsewhere.

So...what kind of point is it if you have to change another poster's post? Answer: Not much.

Oh, be quiet, and mind your own business.

I could have accomplished the exact same thing by including the entire lame-ass and long post, and simply increased the size of the font and/or bolded the part to be counterpointed.

The 'excerpt' technique is oftentimes employed around here as a matter of expediency, rather than subjecting the eyes to pointless visual noise; something that I and a great many others do, frequently, every day, day-in-day-out, without whiny-baby spittle bubbling out of the mouths of pansies, pissing and moaning about the 'excerpt' technique.

Now, on the other hand, had I gone out of my way to change the verbiage, or misrepresented it in any way, you might have had a point I merely quoted verbatim, a general remark, the proceeded to add my own counterpointing context, sans any indicating that the flake-in-question agreed with me or not.

Now, go dry-hump somebody else's pants-leg, Queenie.

Poor Kondor, look how defensive he is. Can't help but know why.....

 

[bodecea]

The sodomite revolution in the U.S. wasn't about "rights". It was about political power and the left's determination to destroy the fabric of society. It's ironic that the idiotic sodomites generally root for the psychotic jihadists while they would be the first to be executed under Sharia law.

Ok, Skippy, name a gay person who "generally roots for" the jihadists. Name one.

 

[mdk]

MDK, remember the time i gave room some rabbit turds and told you they were smart pills. And you said these taste like ####
Well... you're getting smarter.

This gibberish wounds me deeply.

 

[Tilly]

...It utterly depraved and sickening.

Indeed. Homosexuality is, indeed, utterly depraved and sickening.

Please don't hack up my posts in order to misrepresent what i said.

Given that the link exists to the original, and that it was intended as a glaringly obvious and self-evident (to anyone who's ever read your crap) excerpt, in order to facilitate a counterpoint, and given the use of the elipsis preceding your text fragment, in order to get your goat and goad you into a response...

Please feel free to go pound sand, Princess... now... go whine about it elsewhere.

So...what kind of point is it if you have to change another poster's post? Answer: Not much.

Oh, be quiet, and mind your own business.

I could have accomplished the exact same thing by including the entire lame-ass and long post, and simply increased the size of the font and/or bolded the part to be counterpointed.

The 'excerpt' technique is oftentimes employed around here as a matter of expediency, rather than subjecting the eyes to pointless visual noise; something that I and a great many others do, frequently, every day, day-in-day-out, without whiny-baby spittle bubbling out of the mouths of pansies, pissing and moaning about the 'excerpt' technique.

Now, on the other hand, had I gone out of my way to change the verbiage, or misrepresented it in any way, you might have had a point I merely quoted verbatim, a general remark, the proceeded to add my own counterpointing context, sans any indicating that the flake-in-question agreed with me or not.

Now, go dry-hump somebody else's pants-leg, Queenie.

You doctored my post to make it look like I'd said something completely different, something that you, in your desire to bash homosexuals, were in agreement with. Don't do it again, you lame tosser.

 

[Tilly]

...It utterly depraved and sickening.

Indeed. Homosexuality is, indeed, utterly depraved and sickening.

Please don't hack up my posts in order to misrepresent what i said.

Given that the link exists to the original, and that it was intended as a glaringly obvious and self-evident (to anyone who's ever read your crap) excerpt, in order to facilitate a counterpoint, and given the use of the elipsis preceding your text fragment, in order to get your goat and goad you into a response...

Please feel free to go pound sand, Princess... now... go whine about it elsewhere.

So...what kind of point is it if you have to change another poster's post? Answer: Not much.

Oh, be quiet, and mind your own business.

I could have accomplished the exact same thing by including the entire lame-ass and long post, and simply increased the size of the font and/or bolded the part to be counterpointed.

The 'excerpt' technique is oftentimes employed around here as a matter of expediency, rather than subjecting the eyes to pointless visual noise; something that I and a great many others do, frequently, every day, day-in-day-out, without whiny-baby spittle bubbling out of the mouths of pansies, pissing and moaning about the 'excerpt' technique.

Now, on the other hand, had I gone out of my way to change the verbiage, or misrepresented it in any way, you might have had a point I merely quoted verbatim, a general remark, the proceeded to add my own counterpointing context, sans any indicating that the flake-in-question agreed with me or not.

Now, go dry-hump somebody else's pants-leg, Queenie.

Awww, whiny-baby spittle is bubbling out of the mouth of kondom3, the pansy, he's pissing and moaning in a desperate effort to justify his misrepresenting what other people write. Awww, bless.

 

[AvgGuyIA]

...It utterly depraved and sickening.

Indeed. Homosexuality is, indeed, utterly depraved and sickening.

Please don't hack up my posts in order to misrepresent what i said.

Given that the link exists to the original, and that it was intended as a glaringly obvious and self-evident (to anyone who's ever read your crap) excerpt, in order to facilitate a counterpoint, and given the use of the elipsis preceding your text fragment, in order to get your goat and goad you into a response...

Please feel free to go pound sand, Princess... now... go whine about it elsewhere.

So...what kind of point is it if you have to change another poster's post? Answer: Not much.

Oh, be quiet, and mind your own business.

I could have accomplished the exact same thing by including the entire lame-ass and long post, and simply increased the size of the font and/or bolded the part to be counterpointed.

The 'excerpt' technique is oftentimes employed around here as a matter of expediency, rather than subjecting the eyes to pointless visual noise; something that I and a great many others do, frequently, every day, day-in-day-out, without whiny-baby spittle bubbling out of the mouths of pansies, pissing and moaning about the 'excerpt' technique.

Now, on the other hand, had I gone out of my way to change the verbiage, or misrepresented it in any way, you might have had a point I merely quoted verbatim, a general remark, the proceeded to add my own counterpointing context, sans any indicating that the flake-in-question agreed with me or not.

Now, go dry-hump somebody else's pants-leg, Queenie.

Normally an edit should indicate /... Snip.../ so that the reader knows the statement was edited.

 

[Kondor3]

Indeed. Homosexuality is, indeed, utterly depraved and sickening.

Please don't hack up my posts in order to misrepresent what i said.

Given that the link exists to the original, and that it was intended as a glaringly obvious and self-evident (to anyone who's ever read your crap) excerpt, in order to facilitate a counterpoint, and given the use of the elipsis preceding your text fragment, in order to get your goat and goad you into a response...

Please feel free to go pound sand, Princess... now... go whine about it elsewhere.

So...what kind of point is it if you have to change another poster's post? Answer: Not much.

Oh, be quiet, and mind your own business.

I could have accomplished the exact same thing by including the entire lame-ass and long post, and simply increased the size of the font and/or bolded the part to be counterpointed.

The 'excerpt' technique is oftentimes employed around here as a matter of expediency, rather than subjecting the eyes to pointless visual noise; something that I and a great many others do, frequently, every day, day-in-day-out, without whiny-baby spittle bubbling out of the mouths of pansies, pissing and moaning about the 'excerpt' technique.

Now, on the other hand, had I gone out of my way to change the verbiage, or misrepresented it in any way, you might have had a point I merely quoted verbatim, a general remark, the proceeded to add my own counterpointing context, sans any indicating that the flake-in-question agreed with me or not.

Now, go dry-hump somebody else's pants-leg, Queenie.

Normally an edit should indicate /... Snip.../ so that the reader knows the statement was edited.

Indeed.

An ellipsis indicates the same thing.

 

[Tilly]

...It utterly depraved and sickening.

Indeed. Homosexuality is, indeed, utterly depraved and sickening.

Please don't hack up my posts in order to misrepresent what i said.

Given that the link exists to the original, and that it was intended as a glaringly obvious and self-evident (to anyone who's ever read your crap) excerpt, in order to facilitate a counterpoint, and given the use of the elipsis preceding your text fragment, in order to get your goat and goad you into a response...

Please feel free to go pound sand, Princess... now... go whine about it elsewhere.

So...what kind of point is it if you have to change another poster's post? Answer: Not much.

Oh, be quiet, and mind your own business.

I could have accomplished the exact same thing by including the entire lame-ass and long post, and simply increased the size of the font and/or bolded the part to be counterpointed.

The 'excerpt' technique is oftentimes employed around here as a matter of expediency, rather than subjecting the eyes to pointless visual noise; something that I and a great many others do, frequently, every day, day-in-day-out, without whiny-baby spittle bubbling out of the mouths of pansies, pissing and moaning about the 'excerpt' technique.

Now, on the other hand, had I gone out of my way to change the verbiage, or misrepresented it in any way, you might have had a point I merely quoted verbatim, a general remark, the proceeded to add my own counterpointing context, sans any indicating that the flake-in-question agreed with me or not.

Now, go dry-hump somebody else's pants-leg, Queenie.

The sodomite revolution in the U.S. wasn't about "rights". It was about political power and the left's determination to destroy the fabric of society. It's ironic that the idiotic sodomites generally root for the psychotic jihadists while they would be the first to be executed under Sharia law.

Ok, Skippy, name a gay person who "generally roots for" the jihadists. Name one.

Please don't hack up my posts in order to misrepresent what i said.

Given that the link exists to the original, and that it was intended as a glaringly obvious and self-evident (to anyone who's ever read your crap) excerpt, in order to facilitate a counterpoint, and given the use of the elipsis preceding your text fragment, in order to get your goat and goad you into a response...

Please feel free to go pound sand, Princess... now... go whine about it elsewhere.

So...what kind of point is it if you have to change another poster's post? Answer: Not much.

Oh, be quiet, and mind your own business.

I could have accomplished the exact same thing by including the entire lame-ass and long post, and simply increased the size of the font and/or bolded the part to be counterpointed.

The 'excerpt' technique is oftentimes employed around here as a matter of expediency, rather than subjecting the eyes to pointless visual noise; something that I and a great many others do, frequently, every day, day-in-day-out, without whiny-baby spittle bubbling out of the mouths of pansies, pissing and moaning about the 'excerpt' technique.

Now, on the other hand, had I gone out of my way to change the verbiage, or misrepresented it in any way, you might have had a point I merely quoted verbatim, a general remark, the proceeded to add my own counterpointing context, sans any indicating that the flake-in-question agreed with me or not.

Now, go dry-hump somebody else's pants-leg, Queenie.

Normally an edit should indicate /... Snip.../ so that the reader knows the statement was edited.

Indeed.

An ellipsis indicates the same thing.

Snip and elipse to your hearts content, but don't do it in an attempt to change the meaning of my words.