Save the pedophiles from homosexual-sponsored extrajudicial violence!!! URGENT!!!

[JoePedo]

On or about April 24th, the North Coast Pride network, in response to an attack in Seaside, Oregon, published (http://www.dailyastorian.com/main.asp?SectionID=23&SubSectionID=393&ArticleID=60365) a call that "Today we say no to hatred, fear and inequality and yes to the inherent worth of all human beings. We welcome all law-abiding visitors to our community - no matter their sexual orientation, gender identity, race, color, national origin, immigration status, age, ability, or religion."

...but... they also issue a call for violence against law abiding citizens, carried outside a court of law, for no other reason than the status of their birth, that Hate crimes are the rhetoric of inequality acted out through violence. When we see the dignity of a category of people openly debated - queers denied equal rights and equated with pedophiles - more raw forms of hatred follow.

I, for one, find this attempt to incite violence against law-abiding persons on the basis of their sexual orientation to be deplorable, both to the bare conscience of human decency, and to the rule of law. Where does the violence stop? When there is an open call for the police and authorities to look the other way at the attempted murder of law-abiding citizens... where does it end? How long until "it's just a babyfag" gets turned into "it's just a stoner?" "It's just a Christian?" How long?

The time has come to TAKE ACTION!!!

By following this link

http://www.dailyastorian.com/main.asp?SectionID=23&SubSectionID=393&ArticleID=60365

...you can stand up to stop the homosexual agenda and end criminal violence against law-abiding citizens on the sole basis of their sexual orientation!!

Need a throwaway email?? No problem! Here's one (http://www.fepg.net/providers.html), two (http://www.emailaddresses.com/email_web.htm), no... three (http://dir.yahoo.com/business_and_economy/business_to_business/communications_and_networking/internet_and_world_wide_web/email_providers/free_email/) free email directories! Want to do more... ?

No problem! If you want to do more, you can do more! Not only can you speak out in the media decrying this group's active call to violent crime... but you can contact the group directly (http://gaylife.about.com/od/informationresources/a/oregoncc.htm) at ncpn@pacifier.com to demand answers to their call for criminal behavior! Still want to give them more of your mind? Give them a call - at 503-338-0601 - and tell them how you feel about their assault on the rule of law and human rights! Need a free VoIP provider? This listing (http://www.google.dk/search?hl=da&q=free+phone+call&meta=) should help you find one that's right for you!!!

Now... you may be asking yourself - why should I do this? Well... have we got an answer for you!!

Do it because you hate homosexuals :
It's got to be good for some chaos, right? Troll them into disarray!

Do it because you love homosexuals :
Studies show that over one in four voters (http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=2952575) are pedo. We don't want these people "hey, these guys tried to fucking kill us, man!" the next time the vote comes around, do we??

Do it for the drugs :
'cause hey - I can't keep preachin' the synths if someone comes along and kills me, can I?

Do it for the rule of law :
All bodies of national and international law rest upon the guarantee of due process, yet inciting murder squads bypasses this. Do we really want the foundations of law to be shattered?

Do it ...for great justice :
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights declares that all are free and equal irrespective of status - in its very first article. Surely, doesn't "babyqueer murder squads" violate this??

Do it... for the lulz! :
Norly. WTF could be lulzier? And it's so easy!!!

Now... we know the reasons, we have the tools to make a difference. Won't you take a stand and do what's right today??

Thank you.

[NiggerBabyRocketLauncher]

Fuck 'em.

[JoePedo]

Fuck 'em.

I agree - fuck these antipedophile agitators!!

But there is hope - by standing together, we can fight side by side against the antidemocratic forces of homosexually-sponsored hatred which have ravaged our lands and push back the darkness...

[NiggerBabyRocketLauncher]

No, I'm implying that I don't care.

[JoePedo]

No, I'm implying that I don't care.

...and that's the kind of apathy which lost us the drug war - but fear not, brother! Others are willing to fight the good fight, taking on the homosexual agents of antiqueer violence for the good of humanity... and for great justice!!

[NiggerBabyRocketLauncher]

That's nice.

[Proots]

Whoa, whoa, whoa - back up a minute there.

Homosexuals are having a get together - where everyone is included, regardless of sexual orientation, race, etc, etc - yet "pedophiles" are not allowed?

Am I getting that, right - or am I missing something?

[Dog]

Wait, what?

[Speedy]

They'll never get away with this.

[khuipinatik]

that's prejudice for you, same crap different names. i fear serial killers will be the next in line snif.

[The Better Version]

wait I don't get it JoeThePedo....are you for or against these people?

[JoePedo]

Homosexuals are having a get together - where everyone is included, regardless of sexual orientation, race, etc, etc - yet "pedophiles" are not allowed?

Am I getting that, right - or am I missing something?

Well, if by "get together" you mean "not being attacked, yes... you see...

Wait, what?

...in response to a violent attack, a small group issued a public press release in a newspaper which equivocated "inequality acted out through violence" with being "equated with pedophiles."

While this isn't exactly the only problem with it (let's talk about placing a critique of debating the dignity of an entire category of persons right before that, eh?) - in my opinion, it is near enough a direct incitement to violence as to demand a clear and precise clarification. To all appearances, they appear to be saying that being subjected to violence - without trial, mind you - is how "pedophiles" should be treated.

I propose this is enough of a threat to many things - from human dignity to the rule of law - that it needs to be challenged, and these people need to be pressed to clarify their statement quite carefully.

And I'm calling on you, &toklet, to do the right thing, and stand up... for great justice.

Like the phoenix, we shall always rise.

[JoePedo]

wait I don't get it JoeThePedo....are you for or against these people?

Well... I'm against the statement as they issued it, and a little "Wait - shouldn't pedos be free from illegal violence, too?" post would be much appreciated.

With any luck, they'll stop using "hey, go lynch that guy" tactics in the future, but... we can only hope.

[Resign the King]

Unless the texts have been edited they don't suggest to attack pedophiles they just say they don't want to be equated with pedophiles. "(queers denied equal rights and equated with pedophiles; immigrant families torn apart by government raids and Latinos blamed for stealing U.S. jobs)" If that is all you're getting in an uproar over, I don't see the point. All they are saying is they don't want to be labeled as pedophiles because it is a belief of some that homosexuality = pedophilia. Nowhere in the above article do I see them calling for violence against pedophiles. Saying you don't want to be called a pedophile doesn't automatically mean that you would think it was alright if a pedophile was killed.

Do it because you love homosexuals :
Studies show that over one in four voters are pedo. We don't want these people "hey, these guys tried to fucking kill us, man!" the next time the vote comes around, do we??

"Subjects who were highly arousable, insofar as they were unable to voluntarily and completely inhibit their sexual arousal, were more sexually aroused by all stimuli than were subjects who were able to inhibit their sexual arousal. Thus, arousal to pedophilic stimuli does not necessarily correspond with pedophilic behavior."

[JoePedo]

Subjects who were highly arousable, insofar as they were unable to voluntarily and completely inhibit their sexual arousal, were more sexually aroused by all stimuli...

I suggest you reat the part where it discusses whether arousal to paederotic stimulus equals or exceeds the arousal to heteroerotic stimulus; the total (rather than explicitly preferential) rate of arousal was 88.7%

Unless the texts have been edited they don't suggest to attack pedophiles...

I would say that using "equation with pedophiles" as a 'rightful' example of where inequality becomes violence is close enough to concern as to demand clarification.

And I will stick to that. Surely - if they're not trying to incite violence - they'd have no problems clarifying? It is only right to press them to do so, before somebody gets hurt.

As a side note...

they just say they don't want to be equated with pedophiles. ("queers denied equal rights and equated with pedophiles")

Pedos are queer, though not all queers are pedo. The word means "unusual," and its antonym is "mainstream" or "normative."

Nonetheless... I do feel that being "equated with pedophiles" as a "rightful" example of where inequality (supposedly) does rightfully become violence is questionable enough that clarification must be demanded for the good of humanity.

And hey... if you're right, if their intentions are innocent... then they will be hurt neither by requests to clarify, nor of denial of violence towards others... no?

[Yggdrasil]

I don't quite fully understand this. From what I can gather, a gay activist organization is, in retaliation for some petty thing, calling on members of the community to engage in illegal violence towards paedophiles, yes? I see the obvious flaws in the gay group's thinking, but is this really that significant? I mean, how much sway can a local gay organization wield?

[JoePedo]

Subjects who were highly arousable, insofar as they were unable to voluntarily and completely inhibit their sexual arousal, were more sexually aroused by all stimuli...

I suggest you reat the part where it discusses whether arousal to paederotic stimulus equals or exceeds the arousal to heteroerotic stimulus; the total (rather than explicitly preferential) rate of arousal was 88.7%

Unless the texts have been edited they don't suggest to attack pedophiles...

I would say that using "equation with pedophiles" as a 'rightful' example of where inequality becomes violence is close enough to concern as to demand clarification.

And I will stick to that. Surely - if they're not trying to incite violence - they'd have no problems clarifying? It is only right to press them to do so, before somebody gets hurt.

As a side note...

they just say they don't want to be equated with pedophiles. ("queers denied equal rights and equated with pedophiles")

Pedos are queer, though not all queers are pedo. The word means "unusual," and its antonym is "mainstream" or "normative."

Nonetheless... I do feel that being "equated with pedophiles" as a "rightful" example of where inequality (supposedly) does rightfully become violence is questionable enough that clarification must be demanded for the good of humanity.

And hey... if you're right, if their intentions are innocent... then they will be hurt neither by requests to clarify, nor of denial of violence towards others... no?

[The Better Version]

wow. Everything you had just said ImJoeThePedo, makes absolutely no sense. At first I thought I was just really stupid and I wasn't understanding this, but are you suggesting that this organization is calling on the prosecution of innocent people without due process rights? If so THAT'S CRAZY!

How on Earth did you ever reach these conclusions. From what I got, apparently 4 people beat the shit out of a couple homosexuals because they were gay and now the community where the incident happened, is outraged and basically decreeing that they will not sit by idyl and let this go on but to put an end to it. Obviously this is an unrealistic goal for this kind of violence will probably continue for the rest of our lives, but I still can't understand how this is equates to the demolition of of innocent law abiding citizens right to a a fair and speedy trial where they can challenge their case.

Now granted if it's not carefully written it could leave room for abuse but I sincerely doubt they would convict someone on the basis that he feels gays shouldn't be married. Now it's a whole different story when that person starts beating the shit out of gays. First off they are an organization....not the government which means if any law is going to be passed because of them it's not going to be absurd as you say it would and second off, regardless due process rights would still continue to exist.

But frankly my entire argument could be completely off topic because I still have yet to know what you are talking about. I don't know if it's because you are really smart or because you've never taken an English composition class or if you're just crazy but could you kindly spell out exactly what you are trying to tell us?

[Star Wars Fan]

calling now...

[Star Wars Fan]

called and a automated message came up

[Resign the King]

I suggest you reat the part where it discusses whether arousal to paederotic stimulus equals or exceeds the arousal to heteroerotic stimulus; the total (rather than explicitly preferential) rate of arousal was 88.7%

I would say that using "equation with pedophiles" as a 'rightful' example of where inequality becomes violence is close enough to concern as to demand clarification.

And I will stick to that. Surely - if they're not trying to incite violence - they'd have no problems clarifying? It is only right to press them to do so, before somebody gets hurt.

As a side note...



Pedos are queer, though not all queers are pedo. The word means "unusual," and its antonym is "mainstream" or "normative."

Nonetheless... I do feel that being "equated with pedophiles" as a "rightful" example of where inequality (supposedly) does rightfully become violence is questionable enough that clarification must be demanded for the good of humanity.

And hey... if you're right, if their intentions are innocent... then they will be hurt neither by requests to clarify, nor of denial of violence towards others... no?

If you want clarification that's fair enough. I can't see anyone reading that article and saying 'okay let's go kill some pedos now' though. What I think they are saying is that statements like 'gays are pedophiles' and 'latino's are stealing our jobs' lead to hate crimes. Pedophiles are the most hated group out there, I can understand why a group of people wouldn't want to be equated with pedophiles, I know I wouldn't, no offense.

Someone would be more likely to hurt someone for having sex with kids then having sex with someone of their own gender, and I think all they are saying is that being labeled a pedo leads to more violence against them. I can't speak for them but I imagine if questioned further they would condemn vigilante action (hate crimes) against pedophiles.

On the link to sexual arousal to pedophilic material I only have free access to the abstract, do you have another link?

[JoePedo]

I don't quite fully understand this. From what I can gather, a gay activist organization is, in retaliation for some petty thing,

Oh, a pretty big thing... I mean, two guys were beaten into unconsciousness in the ocean surf, it seems...

calling on members of the community to engage in illegal violence towards paedophiles, yes?

...at least pushing those boundaries.

I mean, how much sway can a local gay organization wield?

On the left coast, as the point organization for the response to a multistate hate crime?

You'd be surprised.

are you suggesting that this organization is calling on the prosecution of innocent people without due process rights? If so THAT'S CRAZY!

Yes, nigga. Yes it is.

That's why I'm opposed...

Now granted if it's not carefully written it could leave room for abuse but... it's a whole different story when that person starts beating the shit out of...

Bingo.

'n it just so happens that, to me, when a person being "equated with pedophiles" is an example of where it would be "right" for "rhetoric of inequality {to be} acted out through violence," one is pushing well into that whole different story.

Surely, if they "erred" by their insinuations, they would not be harmed by clarifying their... misequivocation... no? It's only if they are trying to incite violence against a surrogate victim that they would be harmed by a demand to be more... erm, precise... in their exact intentions there.

And I demand exactly that retraction of incitement to unlawful violence. If it comes in the form of a clarification rather than apology? So be it, it is no problem of mine.

[JoePedo]

calling now...

:) Sweet. Don't forget the media outlet and email... and speaking of not forgetting, don't let me forget to pass you some intel on the after-action report of one of your prior actions. I think you'll be secretly pleased. Hopefully, secretly....

I only have free access to the abstract, do you have another link?

Not... anymore... that I know of. If you're up for a little embarassment, you could always walk to your nearest college library and submit a request... hopefully, the "library surveillance" provisions have managed to sunset...

If you want clarification that's fair enough.

Glad to hear we're in agreement on the substantiative issues.

I myself am perfectly comfortable enough to go farther, using potentially-baiting questions and/or statements in my demands for clarification and considering the document atrocious as written, but give them credit that it may be a well-intentioned but poorly written document, and shall continue to give them that credit until they refuse clarification.

But - while, perhaps I'm a bit edgier about exclusions from the "regardless of" statements - it appears we agree on the justice of clarification of a position left unclear, and thus it appears we agree on actions. ;) Well met.

[Rust]

I don't quite fully understand this. From what I can gather, a gay activist organization is, in retaliation for some petty thing, calling on members of the community to engage in illegal violence towards paedophiles, yes?

No. Some homosexuals were assaulted and the group issued a press release denouncing the attacks. In it they made a comment essentially saying that violent attacks are preceded by hateful rhetoric and gave "equating homosexuals with pedophiles" as an example of that rhetoric.

JoePedo is trying to suggest that that means they were calling for violence against pedophiles.

[Star Wars Fan]

wow. Everything you had just said ImJoeThePedo, makes absolutely no sense. At first I thought I was just really stupid and I wasn't understanding this, but are you suggesting that this organization is calling on the prosecution of innocent people without due process rights? If so THAT'S CRAZY!

They 'equate' homosexuals with pedophiles. Hence them saying pedophiles are 'evil'

[Rust]

On the link to sexual arousal to pedophilic material I only have free access to the abstract, do you have another link?

http://www.ipce.info/ipceweb/Library/97-048_article.html

[0x29A]

PEDO POWER!!!

[samguy700]

ok this needs a tdlr
basicaly this stuff makes me want to rape children in revenge

[The Better Version]

They 'equate' homosexuals with pedophiles. Hence them saying pedophiles are 'evil'

no. that's exactly what they didn't say and I'mJoeThePedo took that statement waaay out of context. This is the full text of the quote:

"Hate crimes are the rhetoric of inequality acted out through violence. When we see the dignity of a category of people openly debated (queers denied equal rights and equated with pedophiles; immigrant families torn apart by government raids and Latinos blamed for stealing U.S. jobs) more raw forms of hatred follow."

I can't possibly locate anywhere else in that article that even has the word pedophile and furthermore the only place in the document that even mentions the word says that it's a bad thing to equate them as pedophiles which is the exact opposite of what Joe is saying.

My understanding is that Joe thinks this is a bad thing because he thinks this organization is attempting to go on an absurd witch hunt against anyone who expresses a hate crime, which in my opinion not only seems a very far stretch from what this article is conveying but is also very presumptuous in it's conclusions.

Now to I'mJoeThePedo....

wtf...I mean seriously what.....the....fuck. Are you schizophrenic or something? When you responded to my post the only thing I could understand was "bingo". After that it was all greek to me. Also I'm completely astonished that you would say that pedos=queers but not all queers are pedos.....really? I mean....our last debate seemed so intellectual but this sounds like a three year old wrote this. What's wrong with you? Your sentence structure is alright but you're so contradicting.

[Powdered Toast Man please]

maybe im a little high right now, but what the fuck does the original post even say?

Edit: nevermind, i read the title.

[Butcher]

Joe sometimes your posts get pretty incoherent so please tell me if I'm right with this. There are 2 points being made:
1. gays do not deserve violence directed at them
2. gays should not be equated with pedophiles.

with these points its implying that pedophiles DO deserve violence directed at them. It's like saying "hey don't lynch me, I'm not a nigger."

Is this accurate?

[Powdered Toast Man please]

damn, i sure am glad i read the title.

[JustAnotherAsshole]

http://i130.photobucket.com/albums/p254/Brian_totse/1236435576839.jpg

[Powdered Toast Man please]

this is basically what its saying:
i'm wholly in agreement that homosexuals should be protected from hate crime.

but when you complain about queers being "equated with pedophiles" i have to ask, aren't you just deflecting the attention of nazi thugs toward the next sexual minority on the food chain?

if you want to tackle hatred, you need to look to your own attitudes before you get too sanctimonious.

[The Better Version]

YESSSS!! Now I finally understand the topic and why Joe's going all up and arms over this. It makes so much sense now. Thanks starjones:thumbsup:

[Centipede2]

This whole thread doesn't make sense. The only guess I can make is JP is personally involved - perhaps with the organization or something - and calling favors.

Whatever the case though, if he's testing the waters for the "critical mass", or the friends one makes on the internet can make change in the real world, I don't know.

However, Mr., I think you've enriched the lives of us from &Z, and perhaps a little political change in your favor is due... the only thing I'd ask though, is to be on the inside and not out before acting as a pawn.

[JustAnotherAsshole]

this is basically what its saying:
i'm wholly in agreement that homosexuals should be protected from hate crime.

but when you complain about queers being "equated with pedophiles" i have to ask, aren't you just deflecting the attention of nazi thugs toward the next sexual minority on the food chain?

if you want to tackle hatred, you need to look to your own attitudes before you get too sanctimonious.



I see..

Well, the difference between Homosexuals and Pedophiles is that Pedophiles want to have sex with children, and that's not always what the children want. Since being sexually abused can and does fuck up children quite often, it is looked down upon.

I mean shit, children don't even understand what's happening to them. They lack the mental capacity to be put into adult situations, whatever the situation may be.

I'm not here to judge, but if an action has the potential to cause physical and mental damage to a child (Who's most likely not done anything to deserve it), you should refrain from that action.

[JoePedo]

ITT, we learn that JP's communications skills suck balls. Luckily...

It's like saying "hey don't lynch me, I'm not a nigger."

this is basically what its saying:

...we has translators! Thanks, guys! :)

Well, the difference between Homosexuals and Pedophiles is that...

Well, that's nice and all... but would you care to tell the class WTF that has to do with lynching innocent people?

If the answer is "nothing," well... you're sort of posting off topic and trying to derail the thread with irrelevant bullshit. If the answer is "something".... why not just share your call to violence with the forum rather than hiding behind copypasta'd bullshit? The choice is yours. :)

Whatever the case though, if he's testing the waters for the "critical mass", or the friends one makes on the internet can make change in the real world, I don't know.

However, Mr., I think you've enriched the lives of us from &Z, and perhaps a little political change in your favor is due... the only thing I'd ask though, is to be on the inside and not out before acting as a pawn.

Heh. Sadly, it's nothing so glamorous; my typing may not be straightforward, but the issues are pretty simple. However, if you're interested... a political cabal could probably be set up. Maybe check into the drug war a little here and there. ;)

Of course, I've got an authorship I have to pick up on invitation, so it could be a sec, but... hmm... :)

[JustAnotherAsshole]

Well, that's nice and all... but would you care to tell the class WTF that has to do with lynching innocent people?

I was responding to a certain comment. If my post doesn't match up exactly with your main post, sorry, but I wasn't replying to it. My reply to your main post was:

http://i130.photobucket.com/albums/p254/Brian_totse/1236435576839.jpg



If the answer is "nothing," well... you're sort of posting off topic and trying to derail the thread with irrelevant bullshit. If the answer is "something".... why not just share your call to violence with the forum rather than hiding behind copypasta'd bullshit? The choice is yours. :)


I think my post was at least somewhat relevant to the topic. To be honest though, I didn't read all of your post. I found it confusing (Could just me be, I don't know.) and stopped reading. Again, I was replying to a specific comment that I quoted, not the OP.


And it's not copypasta'd bullshit. I worked hard on that.. :(

[Slave of the Beast]

Can't we just lynch some pedo's and discuss the technicalities later?

[JoePedo]

Can't we just lynch some pedo's and discuss the technicalities later?

"We" cannot, in large part because of the vast pluralism of views on the subject. You, otoh, can if you so choose, and this suits most sides well; you get to get a rush of self-esteem by inflicting violence on your betters, and you will likely not be a member of the voting pool in prison. Definate win-win situation... unless you hit the wrong one and the drug supply dries up.

Nonetheless, as prior mentioned, there is no "we." Given your affinity towards bias-motivated violence, you probably will not be protesting its incitement. Other people probably do not share your affinity, or do not share it in the same way, and your post probably will not stop them; this is an individual action, not a consensus you can derail.

I was responding to a certain comment.

Ah, okay... that does change things a bit. You've got to admit, there's a tad bit of difference between "homosexuals and pedophiles are different" if one is replying to, say, assertions that it's the same sexual orientation, versus "pedophiles are different than homosexuals" as a reply to "maybe we should question inciting people to lynch pedos," lol... probably a BIG difference...

I think my post was at least somewhat relevant to the topic. To be honest though, I didn't read all of your post.

Ah. The tl;dr is "stop the incitement to lynching"... which means that if it is on-topic, lol...

I found it confusing (Could just me be, I don't know.)

Nah. It's not. There are apparently three types of people when it comes to a text-based format; those who mostly read scientific abstracts, those who read, and those who cannot read. Apparently, only the first of these can understand a damn thing I say, lol... though they do it quite well.

Buuuut... back to the topic - can I convince you to post to the media release that violence against pedos is still wrong? ;)

[Slave of the Beast]

"We" cannot, in large part because of the vast pluralism of views on the subject. You, otoh, can if you so choose, and this suits most sides well; you get to get a rush of self-esteem by inflicting violence on your betters, and you will likely not be a member of the voting pool in prison. Definate win-win situation... unless you hit the wrong one and the drug supply dries up.

Nonetheless, as prior mentioned, there is no "we." Given your affinity towards bias-motivated violence, you probably will not be protesting its incitement. Other people probably do not share your affinity, or do not share it in the same way, and your post probably will not stop them; this is an individual action, not a consensus you can derail.

I think there is a "we", because, speaking of plurals, I'm sure that more than one individual would be prepared to join me in a paedo-lynching party. Although I would certainly enjoy listening to your ridiculous "we" semantics whilst stood atop a stool in front of a cheering crowd, shortly before having said stool kicked away.

[JoePedo]

I think there is a "we", because, speaking of plurals, I'm sure that more than one individual would be prepared to join me in a paedo-lynching party. Although I would certainly enjoy listening to your ridiculous "we" semantics whilst stood atop a stool in front of a cheering crowd, shortly before having said stool kicked away.

Saaaayyy.... you're one of those homosexuals, aren't you?

[Slave of the Beast]

Saaaayyy.... you're one of those homosexuals, aren't you?

No. Ropemaker.

[Rust]

ITT, we learn that JP's communications skills suck balls.

That or you communicated just fine and are just trying to distance yourself from the claims you made (by associating with these more beneficial interpretations of what you actually said), now that people called you on your bullshit exaggerations.

[Centipede2]

...a political cabal could probably be set up.


Very interested..

[Irukanji]

Disregard, I grew up

[JoePedo]

That or you communicated just fine and are just trying to distance yourself from the claims you made (by associating with these more beneficial interpretations of what you actually said), now that people called you on your bullshit exaggerations.

You're hilarious, but technically, the cause for precise clarification to become important is just a liiiitle less, err, 'beneficial' than the call to demand clarification itself.

Nice try, though. ;) You 'n slave make a cute couple. Always knew you shared ideologies.

Very interested..

Very well... I'll try to wrap up submission and see if I can whip something up, then. ;)

[Rust]

You're hilarious, but technically, the cause for precise clarification to become important is just a liiiitle less, err, 'beneficial' than the call to demand clarification itself.


I'm glad we can both agree your initial comments were hyperbolic non-sense. :thumbsup:

[Star Wars Fan]

Can't we just lynch some pedo's and discuss the technicalities later?

no....

I think there is a "we", because, speaking of plurals, I'm sure that more than one individual would be prepared to join me in a paedo-lynching party.

and there'd be plenty of pedos to cap the angry mob who probably doesn't have any guns

[Slave of the Beast]

and there'd be plenty of pedos to cap the angry mob who probably doesn't have any guns

Because, uhh, armed paedo' uprisings are fairly commonplace, aren't they?

Lol.

[Miluardo]

I hope to get serious later but for now..

FOR GREAT JUSTICE!

[nshanin]

Pedos are queer

Actually they're quite common; about 25% of the population, I hear.

[Star Wars Fan]

Because, uhh, armed paedo' uprisings are fairly commonplace, aren't they?

Lol.

Like angry mobs shooting and hanging 'pedophiles' lol. ;)

The most I hear from antis is dick-waving on how hard-core they are and them rarely doing any killing or 'extermination'. And look how the antis get fucked up by pro-pedo and ephebo groups; the 'perverted-justice' forum got trashed numerous times by various groups, including channers from 12chan and 711chan /i/.

Actually they're quite common; about 25% of the population, I hear.

some sources put it as high as 70%

[Slave of the Beast]

Like angry mobs shooting and hanging 'pedophiles' lol. ;)

You're taking things literally again, autistard.

The most I hear from antis is dick-waving on how hard-core they are and them rarely doing any killing or 'extermination'. And look how the antis get fucked up by pro-pedo and ephebo groups; the 'perverted-justice' forum got trashed numerous times by various groups, including channers from 12chan and 711chan /i/.

Paedo's ain't fucking up shit once you incarcerate them without trial. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coalinga_State_Hospital)

[Star Wars Fan]

You're taking things literally again, autistard.

oh look. the neurotypical faggot is trying to make up an excuse....again


Paedo's ain't fucking up shit once you incarcerate them without trial. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coalinga_State_Hospital)

how nice given those aren't all pedos. i can has moar fail?

[Slave of the Beast]

oh look. the neurotypical faggot is trying to make up an excuse....again

The thing you call an excuse is what we neurotypicals call reality.

how nice given those aren't all pedos.

I never said they were.

i can has moar fail?

Sure you can; you're your own endless supply.

[driveby]

Homosexuality is the worst possible thing anyone can partake in. Pedophilia, while groutesque, is not as bad.

OP is a retarded, nonsensical rant.

[stupid noob]

>honeypot to collect personal information of pedos that contact the agency in the OP

[amcbeagle]

Let's all go on a picnic & hold hands.

[Zok Jr.]

Fuck child molesters

[iMagiNation]

Self-reported and physiological sexual arousal to adult and pedophilic stimuli were examined among 80 men drawn from a community sample of volunteers. Over 1/4 of the current subjects self-reported pedophilic interest or exhibited penile arousal to pedophilic stimuli that equalled or exceeded arousal to adult stimuli. The hypothesis that arousal to pedophilic stimuli is a function of general sexual arousability factors was supported in that pedophilic and adult heterosexual arousal were positively correlated, particularly in the physiological data. Subjects who were highly arousable, insofar as they were unable to voluntarily and completely inhibit their sexual arousal, were more sexually aroused by all stimuli than were subjects who were able to inhibit their sexual arousal. Thus, arousal to pedophilic stimuli does not necessarily correspond with pedophilic behavior.



.....no shit

['Ed Rush]

Can you imagine this conversation taking place on Zoklet in 2013? God damn this place is shit.

[iMagiNation]

Can you imagine this conversation taking place on Zoklet in 2013? God damn this place is shit.

:(

We can....bring it back!

OKAY

So the other day I was pedophiling a third world nation and....

Oh, no. :(

I can't do this.