I needed a diversion so I came here for an hour.

subllibrm said:
I don't want to know any names. That was pretty much my point

Bruh kept going on about the "network" and I was saying that those who were trafficked were not part of a network. If they were part of the network, they would not be victims but willing participants.
Click to expand...
Of course the victims were not part of the network.

Did you really think that’s what I was saying?
 
Bruh said:
No not everyone in the files are pedophiles those are the names that have been redacted and are the reason for the coverup.
Click to expand...

How do you know this?

Give us a good reason to believe you--not babbling about how we believe everything the government says, not assumptions about the way things work, not whacktard conspiracy theories about fake criminal laws on government Web sites.

Tell us, precisely, how you know (not assume) that the redacted names are the pedophiles.

Alternatively, acknowledge that you know jack, and speaking of Jack, shut the Hyles up.
 
Bruh said:
I was repeating what @Tarheel Baptist said.
Click to expand...

I personally believe that both sides use the Epstein Files to their own political advantage but there are no names ever named in indictments. There are victims (who’s names are usually retracted) but who the perpetrators were, we don’t know.
I’m not sure how much there is actuality there…as far as prominent political figures.
 
subllibrm said:
I don't want to know any names. That was pretty much my point

Bruh kept going on about the "network" and I was saying that those who were trafficked were not part of a network. If they were part of the network, they would not be victims but willing participants.
Click to expand...
it;s not 2 separate industries... . it;s all part of the same sex trade... .. and all of them both trafficked victims and networkers alike know the names of victims....... the perpetrators use threats - intimidation - and black mail concerning the release of that information to make deals with prosecutors .... and also to keep victims silent....

if victims who are currently adults want their stories to be told that;s fine... but even the release of that voluntary information has to be done carefully so as to protect those who don;t want everything to be known.....not everyone who wants information has a right to it ... ...who wants to be known as trash - used garbage and damaged goods for the rest of their life over something that was not their fault - but was done to them against their will as a child?...........

and it does happen.... of course not everyone is going to look at them that way.......... some will do like it says in jude 22 - have compassion and make a difference...... but there are many others who will not... they will use it against them.... .like i said it happened right here on a christian forum several years ago...
 
Last edited:
Ransom said:
How do you know this?

Give us a good reason to believe you--not babbling about how we believe everything the government says, not assumptions about the way things work, not whacktard conspiracy theories about fake criminal laws on government Web sites.

Tell us, precisely, how you know (not assume) that the redacted names are the pedophiles.

Alternatively, acknowledge that you know jack, and speaking of Jack, shut the Hyles up.
Click to expand...
Look if you cannot see the obvious that’s on you.

All the proof I need is for my government to release thousands of pages and redact names for me to understand that the redacted names are the guilty.

You probably still believe we should’ve been in Vietnam.
 
Tarheel Baptist said:
I personally believe that both sides use the Epstein Files to their own political advantage but there are no names ever named in indictments. There are victims (who’s names are usually retracted) but who the perpetrators were, we don’t know.
I’m not sure how much there is actuality there…as far as prominent political figures.
Click to expand...
Exactly my point all along. The perpetrators is who our government is covering for. And these people do not work at Walmart stocking shelves. They are very powerful people.

And I cannot trust people who would cover for people that would harm children.
 
Bruh said:
Don’t you live in a halfway house or something??
Click to expand...
Hey dude, as long as you’re following the forum rules, post as much as you wish. I wish more people would post. After all, we actually pay for our own internet, so we might as well use it. 😉
 
Dr. Duck said:
Hey dude, as long as you’re following the forum rules, post as much as you wish. I wish more people would post. After all, we actually pay for our own internet, so we might as well use it. 😉
Click to expand...
😂 that’s hilarious!! You did make me LOL not like a lot but a little
:cool:
 
Dr. Duck said:
I’d call President Bill Clinton pretty high ranking! And from Europe, Prince Andrew’s not exactly a nobody either.
Click to expand...
Bill Clinton, like many others is guilty by association, but no indictment.
Prince Andrew is the exception but not politically pertinent in the US.
 
Bruh said:
Exactly my point all along. The perpetrators is who our government is covering for. And these people do not work at Walmart stocking shelves. They are very powerful people.

And I cannot trust people who would cover for people that would harm children.
Click to expand...

I’m not sure they’re ‘covering’ but again, only know what I read.
IF there was true evidence of Trump being liable for criminal wrongdoing, no way would it be covered up.
 
Bruh said:
Look if you cannot see the obvious that’s on you.

All the proof I need is for my government to release thousands of pages and redact names for me to understand that the redacted names are the guilty.

You probably still believe we should’ve been in Vietnam.
Click to expand...
Every redacted name is a guilty party? You really don't understand the how or why of redactions do you? Witnesses and victims are two that immediately come to mind.
 
subllibrm said:
Witnesses and victims are two that immediately come to mind.
Click to expand...

Well, if victims are redacted, that just means they pedo'd themselves. We can't know if it's true, but it sure feels true. You can't argue with Bruh's personal sense of the certitude and truthiness of his own opinions. :ROFLMAO:
 
Bruh said:
You probably still believe we should’ve been in Vietnam.
Click to expand...

If I've ever even mentioned the Vietnam War around here, it was only in passing. And it ended when I was four. What makes you think I have any opinion about it at all?

No, like all your other beliefs, in the absence of any actual facts, you just assume your conclusions. :ROFLMAO:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top