Home

www.pastfilms.com 


Re: PING-> Pig-man Posted on: Thu, 4 Feb 2010 23:44:05 +0000 (UTC)

On 4 feb, 19:38, David Oberman wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Feb 2010 16:14:11 GMT, "steve" wrote:
> >Personally, I observe that many people
> >want us all to be our brothers keeper, but I do not agree with thier val=
ue
> >judgement and would take no steps to implement thier vision. =A0I reject=
thier
> >ideology, therefore I take no pragmatic steps in its furtherance.
>
> steve, would you lend me five bucks if I needed a hot meal? I'd help
> you out! Wouldn't you do the same for me?

as you well know, stewe's a demagogic spastic. for example, if i want
windows 7, should i

1. download it for free?
2. pay charity to bill gates?

wot stewe's really saying is he condescendingly defines what charity
is, what unnecessary consumerism is, and like a hegelian rightard, if
the real doesnt accord to language, well the real can go . itself,
so its like being condescended to by sasha grey
709744. Re: PING-> Pig-man
709745. Re: PING-> Pig-man
709746. Re: PING-> Pig-man
709747. Re: PING-> Pig-man
709748. Re: PING-> Pig-man
709749. Re: PING-> Pig-man
709750. Re: PING-> Pig-man
709751. Re: PING-> Pig-man
709752. Re: PING-> Pig-man
709753. Re: PING-> Pig-man
709754. Re: PING-> Pig-man
709755. Re: PING-> Pig-man
709756. Re: PING-> Pig-man
709757. Re: PING-> Pig-man
709758. Re: PING-> Pig-man
709759. Re: PING-> Pig-man
709760. Re: PING-> Pig-man
709761. Re: PING-> Pig-man
709762. Re: PING-> Pig-man
709763. Re: PING-> Pig-man