*** The Official CUCKposting thread ***

[BananaStand]

I spent hours digging up this link for you, so I understand why it was so hard for you to figure this out on your own.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fighti...#United_States

I got three sentences in and can already see this is irrelevant.

Saying "I wanna shoot a school someday" is not an "immediate breach of the peace"


Also you still haven't answered my question....if we're gonna lock up this 21 year old for boasting online, why is Madonna a free woman??

[MadMojoMonkey]

I got three sentences in and can already see this is irrelevant.

Saying "I wanna shoot a school someday" is not an "immediate breach of the peace"


Also you still haven't answered my question....if we're gonna lock up this 21 year old for boasting online, why is Madonna a free woman??

lol.

You're adorable, you know.

The answer to your question is in the reading, but I understand that you needed a lie-down after 3 long sentences.
Maybe take a nap and come back at it again later. I have faith in you, tiger.

[BananaStand]

lol.

You're adorable, you know.

The answer to your question is in the reading, but I understand that you needed a lie-down after 3 long sentences.
Maybe take a nap and come back at it again later. I have faith in you, tiger.

Dude, the author of the piece even admitted that the law isn't on her side.

[MadMojoMonkey]

Dude, the author of the piece even admitted that the law isn't on her side.

You mean the article which I haven't expressed a single thought on, don't you?
You think I've made some commentary on the stupid topic you brought up and not the stupid things you've said which I've quoted, don't you?

I get that you can't follow a thread of thought for more than a post or two though, since most people are so rude that they use more than 3 sentences to make a point.

[Poopadoop]

I love how every argument between Mojo and banana degenerates into a poo flinging contest after about 3 posts.

[BananaStand]

I love how every argument between Mojo and banana degenerates into a poo flinging contest after about 3 posts.

It wouldn't happen if he made JUST ONE on-topic post. I would give him credit for being a TREMENDOUS troll if he wasn't actually serious about splitting hairs over stupid irrelevant nonsense.

[BananaStand]

You mean the article which I haven't expressed a single thought on, don't you?
You think I've made some commentary on the stupid topic you brought up and not the stupid things you've said which I've quoted, don't you?

I get that you can't follow a thread of thought for more than a post or two though, since most people are so rude that they use more than 3 sentences to make a point.

Ok fine. let's play this fucking stupid game.

You made commentary on some commetns of mine that you quoted.

My comments were in response to Ong's comments

Ong's comments echoed exactly what was in the article

Therefore, by way of the transitive property, my comments on what is protected speech also reference the article, where it was stated definitively that the statements made, which Ong inadvertently quoted/paraphrased, are not illegal.

Then you chimed in saying "nyah nyah, they are illegal, nyah". Which is obviously wrong, as demonstrated by the statements of someone who's job it is to make these exact determinations.

Did I follow that thread of thought through enough posts for you?? We on the same page now Polly?