ALL HAIL PRESIDENT TRUMP

"

diablofdb wrote:

man I leave this thread two days and I cum back to something really different.

It was just a back and forth between me and scrotie which i think is pretty much done since i understand his position and he does mine.

I'm not that interested in all the other people barging in on it to missrepresent, make it biblical oriented or use it for some agenda push.

People have kept silence on trump so i guess it's all fine? I reckon not that much is happening.

Peace,

-Boem-

"

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.

"

Turtledove wrote:

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

I missed the part where ANYONE made the claim the withdrawal method is 100% effective, or even just plain effective, at preventing pregnancy.

I did pick up at least an implication that getting pregnant using the withdrawal method is 100% the couple's fault, therefore a duty to carry to term. Which is a bizarro harsh opinion, but not what you're claiming was said.

In other news, I'm really regretting accidentally causing this derail by mentioning in passing that I'm for legal first-trimester abortions. I never wanted this. And actually, now that I think about it, I regret nothing and fuck all y'all. :D

"

Boem wrote:

How about the choice to not let the man cum inside? Seems a 100% safe route to me. I don't get the whole let's use fringe cases to justify this practice, when people can make simple individual choices to not get pregnant.

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

"

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

This is part of the cult45 hypnosis. Their minds have been trained to blank out parts of history that conflict with their world view.

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

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.

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

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

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

No idea. I don't think Google is an honest player and may have ties to bad actors. I certainly don't use any of their services.

"

Xavderion wrote:

"

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

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

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.