ALL HAIL PRESIDENT TRUMP

"

Boem wrote:

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

Spoiler

Nah, just kidding. I missed the "come on her belly" part earlier, but that's totally a reference to the withdrawal method.

Not sure why i am responsible for what you people read into it.

I'll be sure to say something like "just cum on her ass or in her armpit" next time. Or does that infer some other method i'm not particularly interested in?

All I'm saying is that if you're jizzing on her belly without putting it in her vag first, then your technique differs so greatly from mine that we're not really playing the same sport.

Turtledove, I think if Boem wants to say that the belly thing didn't mean the withdrawal method, we should roll our eyes and agree and not really believe him but drop the subject anyway.

Looks like the acceleration kinda succeeded in NZ. Police knocking on people's doors and intimidating them because they said something maybe politically incorrect (not illegal) on the internet. They went full commie lmao.

https://twitter.com/KTHopkins/status/1128251468128059392

Still haven't answered me, Impeacher: is Gmail a Kremlin asset?

"

The_Impeacher wrote:

We now know from the atrocities cultivated through 8chan and other right wing terrorism outlets that these people are a post away from going out and committing their murders.

Protecting human lives from terrorists is NOT communism.

The irony is killing me again, why are you doing this lmao

The reason I was asking was because there's this thing call DKIM authentication. I'll allow Wikipedia to explain:

"

DKIM allows the receiver to check that an email claimed to have come from a specific domain was indeed authorized by… that domain. It achieves this by affixing a digital signature, linked to a domain name, to each outgoing email message. The recipient system can verify this by looking up the sender's public key published in the DNS. A valid signature also guarantees that some parts of the email (possibly including attachments) have not been modified since the signature was affixed.

So to keep it short, encryption technology allows us to know if emails are real, if we have the DKIM signature and the sender's email service puts a public key out there. You can run these verifications yourself; there's plenty of websites that will run the check for you, and all you need is the sender's email domain name and the DKIM signature.

There's a cash reward for breaking DKIM encryption. No one has claimed it.

So you claim that WikiLeaks is a "Kremlin distribution outlet" but Gmail says the emails sent from its accounts are real, Hotmail says the emails sent from its accounts are real, etc. Some emails weren't verifiable (the sender's domain needs to still exist), but many WikiLeaks emails verify and zero fail DKIM verification. Sheeit, it seems like those Ruskies aren't so bad after all.

We can trust what those emails said. The Clinton campaign DID steal the nomination from Bernie. The Clinton campaign DID use allies in the media to steer the GOP nomination towards (what they believed was) the worst candidate they could. These are FACTS.

"

Boem wrote:

"

Turtledove wrote:

"

Boem wrote:

I find it amusing that missrepresentation is the basis for an argument.

We all have our quirks Turtle.

Peace,

-Boem-

You're the fellow that said the withdrawal method is 100% effective. Do you not remember saying that? Or are you saying that I'm wrong about the withdrawal method being an old ineffective method?

1) find me the post where i say "the withdrawal method is 100% effective" instead of infering my thoughts.

My thoughts are quite simple and haven't particularly changed on this, take personal responsibility when it comes to sex.
Which makes your other claim also missrepresentation, that i am against birth control methods.

2) I have nothing against people enjoying sex and using methods to prevent pregnancy, i do have an issue with abortion once a pregnancy occurs.
Use a condom, pull out, use UID's or the pill for all i care but realize that those are not fail-safe methods and that a child can still happen.

The moment a pregnancy occurs, it's no longer a story about two people in my eyes. Harsh, i know, i'm very inhumane like that.

Peace,

-Boem-

edit :

Ah right i almost forgot the last piece of "missrepresentation as an argument" strategy.

"abortion is a womens only debate", yeah good luck with that. Seems legit and totally not an attempt to shut down conversation without any argumentation.

That is what you said. It may not have been what you meant? I don't know but, it was what you said.

I'm not saying men can't have an opinion on abortion. But their opinion is an opinion on something that is outside their realm. For example, you can have an opinion on feminine tampons but seems strange to me if some man wants to dictate what feminine tampon the woman should be using. It is her body after all. Now a man may be more involved in the abortion decision than that if he's in a committed relationship but you should get my point?

Anyway here's what you said in two posts and the links to those two posts.

"

Boem wrote:

How about the choice to not let the man cum inside? Seems a 100% safe route to me.

https://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/2031510/page/809#p21953713

When you were challenged by someone else on the strange notion that the withdrawal method is 100% safe then this was your response.

"

I'm not sure what your getting at with your "loads of kids get made with that 100% safe route".
Give me some fringe article about a women getting pregnant after swallowing or having the guy cum on her belly.

https://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/2031510/page/810#p21954479

"

The_Impeacher wrote:

You don't believe in proactive counter-terrorism measures?

You called a dude who did nothing wrong a terrorist and you support Minority Report style thought-policing. If I didn't know any better I'd think you're a full blown commie.

"

Turtledove wrote:

Anyway here's what you said in two posts and the links to those two posts.

"

Boem wrote:

How about the choice to not let the man cum inside? Seems a 100% safe route to me.

Turtledove, I know I've pressed you hard on precision interpretation of what someone has said before, but there's a key difference here: I was being nitpicky about what the God Emperor of the United States said, while you're being anally retentive about the words of a Boem.

How about we all — me, TD, and Boem — just agree to the following:
1. The withdrawal method is not a foolproof pregnancy prevention technique.
2. It is possible (albeit strange) to cum on someone's belly without engaging in vaginal sex beforehand.
and then MOVE ON WITH OUR LIVES FOR FUCKS SAKE

I'll drop the subject, i'm not interested in this if people want to read into my thoughts when i say "i never said withdrawal is a 100% safe method" and then quote a post of me not saying that as proof.

I think my argument on abortion is pretty clear and so is scroties which is all i was interested in when i initially asked him.

Peace,

-Boem-

"

Xavderion wrote:

"

The_Impeacher wrote:

You don't believe in proactive counter-terrorism measures?

You called a dude who did nothing wrong a terrorist and you support Minority Report style thought-policing. If I didn't know any better I'd think you're a full blown commie.

So you think that the police shouldn't do anything until something catastrophic occur? If that's how the police operate in the US, no longer there's so many mass shooting. It's clear incompetence or ridiculous laws.


The person was treated as suspicious and that's it. Not even a suspect at that point.