|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#71
|
|||
|
|||
"He should have been arrested for being a gob****e "
On 04/05/17 14:22, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Thu, 04 May 2017 10:34:51 +0100, Peter Keller And many other uses. Commuting, enjoying town roads, getting places in towns, .... Commuting and getting places in towns is faster by car... ....at the dead of night. And you can't enjoy a town road, it's just built up ugliness. It is even uglier when viewed from a stationary car. |
Ads |
#72
|
|||
|
|||
"He should have been arrested for being a gob****e "
On 05.05.2017 01:22, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Thu, 04 May 2017 10:34:51 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 04.05.2017 00:49, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Wed, 03 May 2017 10:32:09 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 03.05.2017 07:07, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Sun, 30 Apr 2017 09:33:22 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 30.04.2017 01:50, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Sat, 29 Apr 2017 13:54:26 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 29.04.2017 01:07, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Fri, 28 Apr 2017 09:57:38 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 28.04.2017 01:45, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Thu, 27 Apr 2017 10:06:01 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 27.04.2017 05:37, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Wed, 26 Apr 2017 10:15:38 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 26.04.2017 00:12, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Tue, 25 Apr 2017 10:05:33 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 25.04.2017 01:56, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Mon, 24 Apr 2017 10:20:30 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: As for your comments about the kind of person who rides a bicycle, I take that as a compliment as it comes from YOU. And I have no interest in looking good in YOUR eyes. After all I ride a bicycle. And we all know what YOU think of bicyclists. You think they are the ****witted pits of humanity. And because it is YOU who think that, that is an extremely great compliment. We must be doing something right. Poor people have to use a bicycle. But you can choose (assuming you aren't poor). That is not what you said above. I will use a bicycle when I choose, which is usually. You have yet to give a good reason for doing so. I do not have to justify myself to anyone. Especially not for the likes of YOU. Intolerant sod who cannot bear to have other people with different ideas and thoughts than YOURS. So you don't have a reason then. I'll just have to assume you're poor. I do not have to give a reason to YOU. You can assume what you like. Why do you bother entering discussions when you don't reveal any information? Because you keep asking questions. Besides, I have revealed some information. Like what a wonderful means of transport a bicycle is. That is not information. That's an opinion with nothing to back it up. I think that a bicycle is a wonderful means of transport for many things -- exhilarating, delightful, For leisure in the scenic countryside yes. Not commuting on roads. Oh yes. Very practical and delightful. A bike is practical and delightful in the countryside. Nd in lots of other places. Not a busy road. Often yes, with care. Easier, more comfortable, faster, can carry more stuff in a car. So? As is a car on roads. economical, So you are poor then. So? What does poverty have to do with bicycling? Because it's the only reason not to use a faster larger easier car to get where you're going. That is total bull****. There is no law against a rich person riding a bike where convenient and if s/he wants to. And plenty of reasons to do so. There doesn't have to be a law against something to make it a stupid thing to do. It really is a very great compliment to be called stupid by YOU. Especially by YOU. And I have no ****ing interest in looking good in YOUR eyes. After all I ride a ****ing bicycle. And we all know what YOU think of bicyclists. You think they are the ****witted pits of humanity. And because it is YOU who think that, that is an extremely great compliment. We must be doing something right. If that's the form of logic your brain uses, no wonder you failed your driving test. At least I have a bike, which is a very comfortable desirable exhilarating convenient economical viable means of transport for many things. convenient, Slower and carries less. Agreed. So? So unfit for purpose. That is total bull****. It might be unfit for some purposes but not all. Like I said, the fit purposes are cycling in the countryside, where cars can't go, and where you can enjoy the scenery. And many other uses. Commuting, enjoying town roads, getting places in towns, .... Commuting and getting places in towns is faster by car. Sometimes. But I love the feeling of commuting by bike. And to me the fact it takes a little longer is a real bonus. And you can't enjoy a town road, it's just built up ugliness. Who the **** are you to tell me what I can or can't enjoy? Where did you get insight into my feelings and desires? I do not presume to tell you what your feelings are. |
#73
|
|||
|
|||
"He should have been arrested for being a gob****e "
On Fri, 05 May 2017 10:54:58 +0100, Peter Keller wrote:
On 05.05.2017 01:22, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Thu, 04 May 2017 10:34:51 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 04.05.2017 00:49, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Wed, 03 May 2017 10:32:09 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 03.05.2017 07:07, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Sun, 30 Apr 2017 09:33:22 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 30.04.2017 01:50, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Sat, 29 Apr 2017 13:54:26 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 29.04.2017 01:07, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Fri, 28 Apr 2017 09:57:38 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 28.04.2017 01:45, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Thu, 27 Apr 2017 10:06:01 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 27.04.2017 05:37, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Wed, 26 Apr 2017 10:15:38 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 26.04.2017 00:12, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Tue, 25 Apr 2017 10:05:33 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 25.04.2017 01:56, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Mon, 24 Apr 2017 10:20:30 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: As for your comments about the kind of person who rides a bicycle, I take that as a compliment as it comes from YOU. And I have no interest in looking good in YOUR eyes. After all I ride a bicycle. And we all know what YOU think of bicyclists. You think they are the ****witted pits of humanity. And because it is YOU who think that, that is an extremely great compliment. We must be doing something right. Poor people have to use a bicycle. But you can choose (assuming you aren't poor). That is not what you said above. I will use a bicycle when I choose, which is usually. You have yet to give a good reason for doing so. I do not have to justify myself to anyone. Especially not for the likes of YOU. Intolerant sod who cannot bear to have other people with different ideas and thoughts than YOURS. So you don't have a reason then. I'll just have to assume you're poor. I do not have to give a reason to YOU. You can assume what you like. Why do you bother entering discussions when you don't reveal any information? Because you keep asking questions. Besides, I have revealed some information. Like what a wonderful means of transport a bicycle is. That is not information. That's an opinion with nothing to back it up. I think that a bicycle is a wonderful means of transport for many things -- exhilarating, delightful, For leisure in the scenic countryside yes. Not commuting on roads. Oh yes. Very practical and delightful. A bike is practical and delightful in the countryside. Nd in lots of other places. Not a busy road. Often yes, with care. Easier, more comfortable, faster, can carry more stuff in a car. So? Four reasons that a bicycle is pointless. As is a car on roads. economical, So you are poor then. So? What does poverty have to do with bicycling? Because it's the only reason not to use a faster larger easier car to get where you're going. That is total bull****. There is no law against a rich person riding a bike where convenient and if s/he wants to. And plenty of reasons to do so. There doesn't have to be a law against something to make it a stupid thing to do. It really is a very great compliment to be called stupid by YOU. Especially by YOU. And I have no ****ing interest in looking good in YOUR eyes. After all I ride a ****ing bicycle. And we all know what YOU think of bicyclists. You think they are the ****witted pits of humanity. And because it is YOU who think that, that is an extremely great compliment. We must be doing something right. If that's the form of logic your brain uses, no wonder you failed your driving test. At least I have a bike, which is a very comfortable desirable exhilarating convenient economical viable means of transport for many things. I have one too. It's only useful for leisure cycling on countryside paths. For anything else the car is easier, faster, and more convenient. convenient, Slower and carries less. Agreed. So? So unfit for purpose. That is total bull****. It might be unfit for some purposes but not all. Like I said, the fit purposes are cycling in the countryside, where cars can't go, and where you can enjoy the scenery. And many other uses. Commuting, enjoying town roads, getting places in towns, .... Commuting and getting places in towns is faster by car. Sometimes. But I love the feeling of commuting by bike. And to me the fact it takes a little longer is a real bonus. Try spending more time in the countryside. Cities are a piece of ****. And you can't enjoy a town road, it's just built up ugliness. Who the **** are you to tell me what I can or can't enjoy? Where did you get insight into my feelings and desires? I do not presume to tell you what your feelings are. Your feelings are wrong if you enjoy tall concrete buildings. -- Next time you wave at me, use more than one finger please. |
#74
|
|||
|
|||
"He should have been arrested for being a gob****e "
On 12.05.2017 08:28, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Fri, 05 May 2017 10:54:58 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 05.05.2017 01:22, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Thu, 04 May 2017 10:34:51 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 04.05.2017 00:49, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Wed, 03 May 2017 10:32:09 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 03.05.2017 07:07, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Sun, 30 Apr 2017 09:33:22 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 30.04.2017 01:50, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Sat, 29 Apr 2017 13:54:26 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 29.04.2017 01:07, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Fri, 28 Apr 2017 09:57:38 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 28.04.2017 01:45, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Thu, 27 Apr 2017 10:06:01 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 27.04.2017 05:37, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Wed, 26 Apr 2017 10:15:38 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 26.04.2017 00:12, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Tue, 25 Apr 2017 10:05:33 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 25.04.2017 01:56, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Mon, 24 Apr 2017 10:20:30 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: As for your comments about the kind of person who rides a bicycle, I take that as a compliment as it comes from YOU. And I have no interest in looking good in YOUR eyes. After all I ride a bicycle. And we all know what YOU think of bicyclists. You think they are the ****witted pits of humanity. And because it is YOU who think that, that is an extremely great compliment. We must be doing something right. Poor people have to use a bicycle. But you can choose (assuming you aren't poor). That is not what you said above. I will use a bicycle when I choose, which is usually. You have yet to give a good reason for doing so. I do not have to justify myself to anyone. Especially not for the likes of YOU. Intolerant sod who cannot bear to have other people with different ideas and thoughts than YOURS. So you don't have a reason then. I'll just have to assume you're poor. I do not have to give a reason to YOU. You can assume what you like. Why do you bother entering discussions when you don't reveal any information? Because you keep asking questions. Besides, I have revealed some information. Like what a wonderful means of transport a bicycle is. That is not information. That's an opinion with nothing to back it up. I think that a bicycle is a wonderful means of transport for many things -- exhilarating, delightful, For leisure in the scenic countryside yes. Not commuting on roads. Oh yes. Very practical and delightful. A bike is practical and delightful in the countryside. Nd in lots of other places. Not a busy road. Often yes, with care. Easier, more comfortable, faster, can carry more stuff in a car. So? Four reasons that a bicycle is pointless. Four reasons why some people may prefer not to use a bicycle. NOT four reasons why a bicycle is pointless. As is a car on roads. economical, So you are poor then. So? What does poverty have to do with bicycling? Because it's the only reason not to use a faster larger easier car to get where you're going. That is total bull****. There is no law against a rich person riding a bike where convenient and if s/he wants to. And plenty of reasons to do so. There doesn't have to be a law against something to make it a stupid thing to do. It really is a very great compliment to be called stupid by YOU. Especially by YOU. And I have no ****ing interest in looking good in YOUR eyes. After all I ride a ****ing bicycle. And we all know what YOU think of bicyclists. You think they are the ****witted pits of humanity. And because it is YOU who think that, that is an extremely great compliment. We must be doing something right. If that's the form of logic your brain uses, no wonder you failed your driving test. At least I have a bike, which is a very comfortable desirable exhilarating convenient economical viable means of transport for many things. I have one too. It's only useful for leisure cycling on countryside paths. For anything else the car is easier, faster, and more convenient. Speak for yourself. I find bicycles are useful for many more things than leisure cycling on countryside paths. Thank God I am not like you. convenient, Slower and carries less. Agreed. So? So unfit for purpose. That is total bull****. It might be unfit for some purposes but not all. Like I said, the fit purposes are cycling in the countryside, where cars can't go, and where you can enjoy the scenery. And many other uses. Commuting, enjoying town roads, getting places in towns, .... Commuting and getting places in towns is faster by car. Sometimes. But I love the feeling of commuting by bike. And to me the fact it takes a little longer is a real bonus. Try spending more time in the countryside. Cities are a piece of ****. You do not have a ****ing clue where I spend my time. Hint: I am not on uk.rec.cycling 24/7. And you can't enjoy a town road, it's just built up ugliness. Who the **** are you to tell me what I can or can't enjoy? Where did you get insight into my feelings and desires? I do not presume to tell you what your feelings are. Your feelings are wrong if you enjoy tall concrete buildings. I do not give a **** what you think of my feelings. And I have no ****ing interest in looking good in YOUR eyes. After all I ride a ****ing bicycle. And we all know what YOU think of bicyclists. You think they are the ****witted pits of humanity. And because it is YOU who think that, that is an extremely great compliment. We must be doing something right. |
#75
|
|||
|
|||
"He should have been arrested for being a gob****e "
On Fri, 12 May 2017 10:07:30 +0100, Peter Keller wrote:
On 12.05.2017 08:28, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Fri, 05 May 2017 10:54:58 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 05.05.2017 01:22, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Thu, 04 May 2017 10:34:51 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 04.05.2017 00:49, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Wed, 03 May 2017 10:32:09 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 03.05.2017 07:07, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Sun, 30 Apr 2017 09:33:22 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 30.04.2017 01:50, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Sat, 29 Apr 2017 13:54:26 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 29.04.2017 01:07, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Fri, 28 Apr 2017 09:57:38 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 28.04.2017 01:45, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Thu, 27 Apr 2017 10:06:01 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 27.04.2017 05:37, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Wed, 26 Apr 2017 10:15:38 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 26.04.2017 00:12, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Tue, 25 Apr 2017 10:05:33 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 25.04.2017 01:56, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Mon, 24 Apr 2017 10:20:30 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: As for your comments about the kind of person who rides a bicycle, I take that as a compliment as it comes from YOU. And I have no interest in looking good in YOUR eyes. After all I ride a bicycle. And we all know what YOU think of bicyclists. You think they are the ****witted pits of humanity. And because it is YOU who think that, that is an extremely great compliment. We must be doing something right. Poor people have to use a bicycle. But you can choose (assuming you aren't poor). That is not what you said above. I will use a bicycle when I choose, which is usually.. You have yet to give a good reason for doing so. I do not have to justify myself to anyone. Especially not for the likes of YOU. Intolerant sod who cannot bear to have other people with different ideas and thoughts than YOURS. So you don't have a reason then. I'll just have to assume you're poor. I do not have to give a reason to YOU. You can assume what you like. Why do you bother entering discussions when you don't reveal any information? Because you keep asking questions. Besides, I have revealed some information. Like what a wonderful means of transport a bicycle is. That is not information. That's an opinion with nothing to back it up. I think that a bicycle is a wonderful means of transport for many things -- exhilarating, delightful, For leisure in the scenic countryside yes. Not commuting on roads. Oh yes. Very practical and delightful. A bike is practical and delightful in the countryside. Nd in lots of other places. Not a busy road. Often yes, with care. Easier, more comfortable, faster, can carry more stuff in a car. So? Four reasons that a bicycle is pointless. Four reasons why some people may prefer not to use a bicycle. NOT four reasons why a bicycle is pointless. Same thing. As is a car on roads. economical, So you are poor then. So? What does poverty have to do with bicycling? Because it's the only reason not to use a faster larger easier car to get where you're going. That is total bull****. There is no law against a rich person riding a bike where convenient and if s/he wants to. And plenty of reasons to do so. There doesn't have to be a law against something to make it a stupid thing to do. It really is a very great compliment to be called stupid by YOU. Especially by YOU. And I have no ****ing interest in looking good in YOUR eyes. After all I ride a ****ing bicycle. And we all know what YOU think of bicyclists. You think they are the ****witted pits of humanity. And because it is YOU who think that, that is an extremely great compliment. We must be doing something right. If that's the form of logic your brain uses, no wonder you failed your driving test. At least I have a bike, which is a very comfortable desirable exhilarating convenient economical viable means of transport for many things. I have one too. It's only useful for leisure cycling on countryside paths. For anything else the car is easier, faster, and more convenient. Speak for yourself. I find bicycles are useful for many more things than leisure cycling on countryside paths. Thank God I am not like you. They're slower, they carry less, and require more effort. So what is this advantage you speak of? convenient, Slower and carries less. Agreed. So? So unfit for purpose. That is total bull****. It might be unfit for some purposes but not all. Like I said, the fit purposes are cycling in the countryside, where cars can't go, and where you can enjoy the scenery. And many other uses. Commuting, enjoying town roads, getting places in towns, .... Commuting and getting places in towns is faster by car. Sometimes. But I love the feeling of commuting by bike. And to me the fact it takes a little longer is a real bonus. Try spending more time in the countryside. Cities are a piece of ****. |
#76
|
|||
|
|||
"He should have been arrested for being a gob****e "
On 12.05.2017 23:56, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Fri, 12 May 2017 10:07:30 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 12.05.2017 08:28, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Fri, 05 May 2017 10:54:58 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 05.05.2017 01:22, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Thu, 04 May 2017 10:34:51 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 04.05.2017 00:49, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Wed, 03 May 2017 10:32:09 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 03.05.2017 07:07, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Sun, 30 Apr 2017 09:33:22 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 30.04.2017 01:50, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Sat, 29 Apr 2017 13:54:26 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 29.04.2017 01:07, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Fri, 28 Apr 2017 09:57:38 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 28.04.2017 01:45, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Thu, 27 Apr 2017 10:06:01 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 27.04.2017 05:37, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Wed, 26 Apr 2017 10:15:38 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 26.04.2017 00:12, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Tue, 25 Apr 2017 10:05:33 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 25.04.2017 01:56, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Mon, 24 Apr 2017 10:20:30 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: As for your comments about the kind of person who rides a bicycle, I take that as a compliment as it comes from YOU. And I have no interest in looking good in YOUR eyes. After all I ride a bicycle. And we all know what YOU think of bicyclists. You think they are the ****witted pits of humanity. And because it is YOU who think that, that is an extremely great compliment. We must be doing something right. Poor people have to use a bicycle. But you can choose (assuming you aren't poor). That is not what you said above. I will use a bicycle when I choose, which is usually. You have yet to give a good reason for doing so. I do not have to justify myself to anyone. Especially not for the likes of YOU. Intolerant sod who cannot bear to have other people with different ideas and thoughts than YOURS. So you don't have a reason then. I'll just have to assume you're poor. I do not have to give a reason to YOU. You can assume what you like. Why do you bother entering discussions when you don't reveal any information? Because you keep asking questions. Besides, I have revealed some information. Like what a wonderful means of transport a bicycle is. That is not information. That's an opinion with nothing to back it up. I think that a bicycle is a wonderful means of transport for many things -- exhilarating, delightful, For leisure in the scenic countryside yes. Not commuting on roads. Oh yes. Very practical and delightful. A bike is practical and delightful in the countryside. Nd in lots of other places. Not a busy road. Often yes, with care. Easier, more comfortable, faster, can carry more stuff in a car. So? Four reasons that a bicycle is pointless. Four reasons why some people may prefer not to use a bicycle. NOT four reasons why a bicycle is pointless. Same thing. No it isn't. I only need to find one occasion where a bicycle is not pointless to prove you a liar. As is a car on roads. economical, So you are poor then. So? What does poverty have to do with bicycling? Because it's the only reason not to use a faster larger easier car to get where you're going. That is total bull****. There is no law against a rich person riding a bike where convenient and if s/he wants to. And plenty of reasons to do so. There doesn't have to be a law against something to make it a stupid thing to do. It really is a very great compliment to be called stupid by YOU. Especially by YOU. And I have no ****ing interest in looking good in YOUR eyes. After all I ride a ****ing bicycle. And we all know what YOU think of bicyclists. You think they are the ****witted pits of humanity. And because it is YOU who think that, that is an extremely great compliment. We must be doing something right. If that's the form of logic your brain uses, no wonder you failed your driving test. At least I have a bike, which is a very comfortable desirable exhilarating convenient economical viable means of transport for many things. I have one too. It's only useful for leisure cycling on countryside paths. For anything else the car is easier, faster, and more convenient. Speak for yourself. I find bicycles are useful for many more things than leisure cycling on countryside paths. Thank God I am not like you. They're slower, they carry less, and require more effort. So what is this advantage you speak of? I regard all of those as advantages in many circumstances. "What is this life if, full of care, We have no time to stand and stare. No time to stand beneath the boughs And stare as long as sheep or cows. No time to see, when woods we pass, Where squirrels hide their nuts in grass. No time to see, in broad daylight, Streams full of stars, like skies at night. No time to turn at Beauty's glance, And watch her feet, how they can dance. No time to wait till her mouth can Enrich that smile her eyes began. A poor life this if, full of care, We have no time to stand and stare." William Henry Davies. convenient, Slower and carries less. Agreed. So? So unfit for purpose. That is total bull****. It might be unfit for some purposes but not all. Like I said, the fit purposes are cycling in the countryside, where cars can't go, and where you can enjoy the scenery. And many other uses. Commuting, enjoying town roads, getting places in towns, .... Commuting and getting places in towns is faster by car. Sometimes. But I love the feeling of commuting by bike. And to me the fact it takes a little longer is a real bonus. Try spending more time in the countryside. Cities are a piece of ****. You do not have a ****ing clue where I spend my time. Hint: I am not on uk.rec.cycling 24/7. You said towns above, or have you forgotten already? I am not only in towns. And why do you care where I am anyway? Control freak. or have you forgotten already? Thanks greatly for that excellent compliment emanating from YOU. It really is a very great compliment to be called forgetful by YOU. Especially by YOU. And I have no ****ing interest in looking good in YOUR eyes. After all I ride a ****ing bicycle. And we all know what YOU think of bicyclists. You think they are the ****witted pits of humanity. And because it is YOU who think that, that is an extremely great compliment. We must be doing something right. And you can't enjoy a town road, it's just built up ugliness. Who the **** are you to tell me what I can or can't enjoy? Where did you get insight into my feelings and desires? I do not presume to tell you what your feelings are. Your feelings are wrong if you enjoy tall concrete buildings. I do not give a **** what you think of my feelings. And I have no ****ing interest in looking good in YOUR eyes. After all I ride a ****ing bicycle. And we all know what YOU think of bicyclists. You think they are the ****witted pits of humanity. And because it is YOU who think that, that is an extremely great compliment. We must be doing something right. Admittance of being a troll detected. And ****ing glad of it. Now please ejaculate to me the further esteemed honour of being the unholy spawn of a bandy-legged hobo and a syphilitic camel. That would really make me ecstatic. |
#77
|
|||
|
|||
"He should have been arrested for being a gob****e "
On Sat, 13 May 2017 10:24:37 +0100, Peter Keller wrote:
On 12.05.2017 23:56, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Fri, 12 May 2017 10:07:30 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 12.05.2017 08:28, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Fri, 05 May 2017 10:54:58 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 05.05.2017 01:22, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Thu, 04 May 2017 10:34:51 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 04.05.2017 00:49, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Wed, 03 May 2017 10:32:09 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 03.05.2017 07:07, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Sun, 30 Apr 2017 09:33:22 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 30.04.2017 01:50, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Sat, 29 Apr 2017 13:54:26 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 29.04.2017 01:07, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Fri, 28 Apr 2017 09:57:38 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 28.04.2017 01:45, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Thu, 27 Apr 2017 10:06:01 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 27.04.2017 05:37, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Wed, 26 Apr 2017 10:15:38 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 26.04.2017 00:12, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Tue, 25 Apr 2017 10:05:33 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 25.04.2017 01:56, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Mon, 24 Apr 2017 10:20:30 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: As for your comments about the kind of person who rides a bicycle, I take that as a compliment as it comes from YOU. And I have no interest in looking good in YOUR eyes. After all I ride a bicycle. And we all know what YOU think of bicyclists. You think they are the ****witted pits of humanity. And because it is YOU who think that, that is an extremely great compliment. We must be doing something right. Poor people have to use a bicycle. But you can choose (assuming you aren't poor). That is not what you said above. I will use a bicycle when I choose, which is usually. You have yet to give a good reason for doing so. I do not have to justify myself to anyone. Especially not for the likes of YOU. Intolerant sod who cannot bear to have other people with different ideas and thoughts than YOURS. So you don't have a reason then. I'll just have to assume you're poor. I do not have to give a reason to YOU. You can assume what you like. Why do you bother entering discussions when you don't reveal any information? Because you keep asking questions. Besides, I have revealed some information. Like what a wonderful means of transport a bicycle is. That is not information. That's an opinion with nothing to back it up. I think that a bicycle is a wonderful means of transport for many things -- exhilarating, delightful, For leisure in the scenic countryside yes. Not commuting on roads. Oh yes. Very practical and delightful. A bike is practical and delightful in the countryside. Nd in lots of other places. Not a busy road. Often yes, with care. Easier, more comfortable, faster, can carry more stuff in a car. So? Four reasons that a bicycle is pointless. Four reasons why some people may prefer not to use a bicycle. NOT four reasons why a bicycle is pointless. Same thing. No it isn't. I only need to find one occasion where a bicycle is not pointless to prove you a liar. We have four reasons a car is better, you need to at least equal that for your bicycle. As is a car on roads. economical, So you are poor then. So? What does poverty have to do with bicycling? Because it's the only reason not to use a faster larger easier car to get where you're going. That is total bull****. There is no law against a rich person riding a bike where convenient and if s/he wants to. And plenty of reasons to do so. There doesn't have to be a law against something to make it a stupid thing to do. It really is a very great compliment to be called stupid by YOU. Especially by YOU. And I have no ****ing interest in looking good in YOUR eyes. After all I ride a ****ing bicycle. And we all know what YOU think of bicyclists. You think they are the ****witted pits of humanity. And because it is YOU who think that, that is an extremely great compliment. We must be doing something right. If that's the form of logic your brain uses, no wonder you failed your driving test. At least I have a bike, which is a very comfortable desirable exhilarating convenient economical viable means of transport for many things. I have one too. It's only useful for leisure cycling on countryside paths. For anything else the car is easier, faster, and more convenient. Speak for yourself. I find bicycles are useful for many more things than leisure cycling on countryside paths. Thank God I am not like you. They're slower, they carry less, and require more effort. So what is this advantage you speak of? I regard all of those as advantages in many circumstances. How is carrying less any use? So you make 10 (slower) trips instead of one? "What is this life if, full of care, We have no time to stand and stare. No time to stand beneath the boughs And stare as long as sheep or cows. No time to see, when woods we pass, Where squirrels hide their nuts in grass. No time to see, in broad daylight, Streams full of stars, like skies at night. No time to turn at Beauty's glance, And watch her feet, how they can dance. No time to wait till her mouth can Enrich that smile her eyes began. A poor life this if, full of care, We have no time to stand and stare." William Henry Davies. Poetry is for poofters. convenient, Slower and carries less. Agreed. So? So unfit for purpose. That is total bull****. It might be unfit for some purposes but not all. Like I said, the fit purposes are cycling in the countryside, where cars can't go, and where you can enjoy the scenery. And many other uses. Commuting, enjoying town roads, getting places in towns, .... Commuting and getting places in towns is faster by car. Sometimes. But I love the feeling of commuting by bike. And to me the fact it takes a little longer is a real bonus. Try spending more time in the countryside. Cities are a piece of ****. You do not have a ****ing clue where I spend my time. Hint: I am not on uk.rec.cycling 24/7. You said towns above, or have you forgotten already? I am not only in towns. And why do you care where I am anyway? Control freak. It's towns that get discussed on here, where bicycles get in the way of cars. There is no problem with them in the countryside where people go to enjoy the scenery. or have you forgotten already? Thanks greatly for that excellent compliment emanating from YOU. It really is a very great compliment to be called forgetful by YOU. Especially by YOU. And I have no ****ing interest in looking good in YOUR eyes. After all I ride a ****ing bicycle. And we all know what YOU think of bicyclists. You think they are the ****witted pits of humanity. And because it is YOU who think that, that is an extremely great compliment. We must be doing something right. Cut and paste bull****. And you can't enjoy a town road, it's just built up ugliness. Who the **** are you to tell me what I can or can't enjoy? Where did you get insight into my feelings and desires? I do not presume to tell you what your feelings are. Your feelings are wrong if you enjoy tall concrete buildings. I do not give a **** what you think of my feelings. And I have no ****ing interest in looking good in YOUR eyes. After all I ride a ****ing bicycle. And we all know what YOU think of bicyclists. You think they are the ****witted pits of humanity. And because it is YOU who think that, that is an extremely great compliment. We must be doing something right. Admittance of being a troll detected. And ****ing glad of it. Now please ejaculate to me the further esteemed honour of being the unholy spawn of a bandy-legged hobo and a syphilitic camel. That would really make me ecstatic. Why do you want me to ejaculate to you? Are you gay? Are all cyclists gay? Is that why they wear tight shorts? -- There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. (Ayn Rand (1905-1982) |
#78
|
|||
|
|||
"He should have been arrested for being a gob****e "
On 25.05.2017 07:08, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Sat, 13 May 2017 10:24:37 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 12.05.2017 23:56, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Fri, 12 May 2017 10:07:30 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 12.05.2017 08:28, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Fri, 05 May 2017 10:54:58 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 05.05.2017 01:22, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Thu, 04 May 2017 10:34:51 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 04.05.2017 00:49, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Wed, 03 May 2017 10:32:09 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 03.05.2017 07:07, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Sun, 30 Apr 2017 09:33:22 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 30.04.2017 01:50, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Sat, 29 Apr 2017 13:54:26 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 29.04.2017 01:07, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Fri, 28 Apr 2017 09:57:38 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 28.04.2017 01:45, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Thu, 27 Apr 2017 10:06:01 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 27.04.2017 05:37, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Wed, 26 Apr 2017 10:15:38 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 26.04.2017 00:12, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Tue, 25 Apr 2017 10:05:33 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 25.04.2017 01:56, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Mon, 24 Apr 2017 10:20:30 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: As for your comments about the kind of person who rides a bicycle, I take that as a compliment as it comes from YOU. And I have no interest in looking good in YOUR eyes. After all I ride a bicycle. And we all know what YOU think of bicyclists. You think they are the ****witted pits of humanity. And because it is YOU who think that, that is an extremely great compliment. We must be doing something right. Poor people have to use a bicycle. But you can choose (assuming you aren't poor). That is not what you said above. I will use a bicycle when I choose, which is usually. You have yet to give a good reason for doing so. I do not have to justify myself to anyone. Especially not for the likes of YOU. Intolerant sod who cannot bear to have other people with different ideas and thoughts than YOURS. So you don't have a reason then. I'll just have to assume you're poor. I do not have to give a reason to YOU. You can assume what you like. Why do you bother entering discussions when you don't reveal any information? Because you keep asking questions. Besides, I have revealed some information. Like what a wonderful means of transport a bicycle is. That is not information. That's an opinion with nothing to back it up. I think that a bicycle is a wonderful means of transport for many things -- exhilarating, delightful, For leisure in the scenic countryside yes. Not commuting on roads. Oh yes. Very practical and delightful. A bike is practical and delightful in the countryside. Nd in lots of other places. Not a busy road. Often yes, with care. Easier, more comfortable, faster, can carry more stuff in a car. So? Four reasons that a bicycle is pointless. Four reasons why some people may prefer not to use a bicycle. NOT four reasons why a bicycle is pointless. Same thing. No it isn't. I only need to find one occasion where a bicycle is not pointless to prove you a liar. We have four reasons a car is better, you need to at least equal that for your bicycle. No I don't. I do not have to justify my preference for a bicycle to YOU nor anyone else. You can rot in your heap of scrap. As is a car on roads. economical, So you are poor then. So? What does poverty have to do with bicycling? Because it's the only reason not to use a faster larger easier car to get where you're going. That is total bull****. There is no law against a rich person riding a bike where convenient and if s/he wants to. And plenty of reasons to do so. There doesn't have to be a law against something to make it a stupid thing to do. It really is a very great compliment to be called stupid by YOU. Especially by YOU. And I have no ****ing interest in looking good in YOUR eyes. After all I ride a ****ing bicycle. And we all know what YOU think of bicyclists. You think they are the ****witted pits of humanity. And because it is YOU who think that, that is an extremely great compliment. We must be doing something right. If that's the form of logic your brain uses, no wonder you failed your driving test. At least I have a bike, which is a very comfortable desirable exhilarating convenient economical viable means of transport for many things. I have one too. It's only useful for leisure cycling on countryside paths. For anything else the car is easier, faster, and more convenient. Speak for yourself. I find bicycles are useful for many more things than leisure cycling on countryside paths. Thank God I am not like you. They're slower, they carry less, and require more effort. So what is this advantage you speak of? I regard all of those as advantages in many circumstances. How is carrying less any use? So you make 10 (slower) trips instead of one? Lots of uses. I will use a car when appropriate, which is not often. (about twice in the last year). "What is this life if, full of care, We have no time to stand and stare. No time to stand beneath the boughs And stare as long as sheep or cows. No time to see, when woods we pass, Where squirrels hide their nuts in grass. No time to see, in broad daylight, Streams full of stars, like skies at night. No time to turn at Beauty's glance, And watch her feet, how they can dance. No time to wait till her mouth can Enrich that smile her eyes began. A poor life this if, full of care, We have no time to stand and stare." William Henry Davies. Poetry is for poofters. Thanks very much for that EXCELLENT compliment coming from YOU. Especially as it comes from YOU. Now please ejaculate in my direction the further honour from YOU of being a green-nostriled, crossed eyed, hairy-livered, goisher kopf, inbred trout-defiler. It really is a very great compliment to be called a poofter by YOU. Especially by YOU. And I have no ****ing interest in looking good in YOUR eyes. After all I ride a ****ing bicycle. And we all know what YOU think of bicyclists. You think they are the ****witted pits of humanity. And because it is YOU who think that, that is an extremely great compliment. We must be doing something right. convenient, Slower and carries less. Agreed. So? So unfit for purpose. That is total bull****. It might be unfit for some purposes but not all. Like I said, the fit purposes are cycling in the countryside, where cars can't go, and where you can enjoy the scenery. And many other uses. Commuting, enjoying town roads, getting places in towns, .... Commuting and getting places in towns is faster by car. Sometimes. But I love the feeling of commuting by bike. And to me the fact it takes a little longer is a real bonus. Try spending more time in the countryside. Cities are a piece of ****. You do not have a ****ing clue where I spend my time. Hint: I am not on uk.rec.cycling 24/7. You said towns above, or have you forgotten already? I am not only in towns. And why do you care where I am anyway? Control freak. It's towns that get discussed on here, where bicycles get in the way of cars. There is no problem with them in the countryside where people go to enjoy the scenery. I do agree that cars often get in the way of bicycles. And it is NOT only towns which get discussed here. or have you forgotten already? Thanks greatly for that excellent compliment emanating from YOU. It really is a very great compliment to be called forgetful by YOU. Especially by YOU. And I have no ****ing interest in looking good in YOUR eyes. After all I ride a ****ing bicycle. And we all know what YOU think of bicyclists. You think they are the ****witted pits of humanity. And because it is YOU who think that, that is an extremely great compliment. We must be doing something right. Cut and paste bull****. Thanks greatly for the compliment. It really is a very great compliment to be called a cut and paster by YOU. Especially by YOU. And I have no ****ing interest in looking good in YOUR eyes. After all I ride a ****ing bicycle. And we all know what YOU think of bicyclists. You think they are the ****witted pits of humanity. And because it is YOU who think that, that is an extremely great compliment. We must be doing something right. And you can't enjoy a town road, it's just built up ugliness. Who the **** are you to tell me what I can or can't enjoy? Where did you get insight into my feelings and desires? I do not presume to tell you what your feelings are. Your feelings are wrong if you enjoy tall concrete buildings. I do not give a **** what you think of my feelings. And I have no ****ing interest in looking good in YOUR eyes. After all I ride a ****ing bicycle. And we all know what YOU think of bicyclists. You think they are the ****witted pits of humanity. And because it is YOU who think that, that is an extremely great compliment. We must be doing something right. Admittance of being a troll detected. And ****ing glad of it. Now please ejaculate to me the further esteemed honour of being the unholy spawn of a bandy-legged hobo and a syphilitic camel. That would really make me ecstatic. Why do you want me to ejaculate to you? Are you gay? Are all cyclists gay? Is that why they wear tight shorts? Most bicyclists are very gay with their excellent means of transport. They could not be happier! Thanks greatly for the compliment especially as it cums from YOU. Now please vomit to me from YOU the further honour of being grimy, squalid, nasty and profane. And I will vomit all that nastiness, squalidness, griminess and profaneness straight back down your throat so that it comes out your nose. It really is a very great compliment to be called gay by YOU. Especially by YOU. And I have no ****ing interest in looking good in YOUR eyes. After all I ride a ****ing bicycle. And we all know what YOU think of bicyclists. You think they are the ****witted pits of humanity. And because it is YOU who think that, that is an extremely great compliment. We must be doing something right. |
#79
|
|||
|
|||
"He should have been arrested for being a gob****e "
On Thu, 25 May 2017 10:32:30 +0100, Peter Keller wrote:
On 25.05.2017 07:08, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Sat, 13 May 2017 10:24:37 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 12.05.2017 23:56, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Fri, 12 May 2017 10:07:30 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 12.05.2017 08:28, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Fri, 05 May 2017 10:54:58 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 05.05.2017 01:22, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Thu, 04 May 2017 10:34:51 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 04.05.2017 00:49, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Wed, 03 May 2017 10:32:09 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 03.05.2017 07:07, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Sun, 30 Apr 2017 09:33:22 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 30.04.2017 01:50, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Sat, 29 Apr 2017 13:54:26 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 29.04.2017 01:07, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Fri, 28 Apr 2017 09:57:38 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 28.04.2017 01:45, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Thu, 27 Apr 2017 10:06:01 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 27.04.2017 05:37, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Wed, 26 Apr 2017 10:15:38 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 26.04.2017 00:12, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Tue, 25 Apr 2017 10:05:33 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: On 25.04.2017 01:56, James Wilkinson Sword wrote: On Mon, 24 Apr 2017 10:20:30 +0100, Peter Keller wrote: As for your comments about the kind of person who rides a bicycle, I take that as a compliment as it comes from YOU.. And I have no interest in looking good in YOUR eyes. After all I ride a bicycle. And we all know what YOU think of bicyclists. You think they are the ****witted pits of humanity. And because it is YOU who think that, that is an extremely great compliment. We must be doing something right. Poor people have to use a bicycle. But you can choose (assuming you aren't poor). That is not what you said above. I will use a bicycle when I choose, which is usually. You have yet to give a good reason for doing so. I do not have to justify myself to anyone. Especially not for the likes of YOU. Intolerant sod who cannot bear to have other people with different ideas and thoughts than YOURS. So you don't have a reason then. I'll just have to assume you're poor. I do not have to give a reason to YOU. You can assume what you like. Why do you bother entering discussions when you don't reveal any information? Because you keep asking questions. Besides, I have revealed some information. Like what a wonderful means of transport a bicycle is. That is not information. That's an opinion with nothing to back it up. I think that a bicycle is a wonderful means of transport for many things -- exhilarating, delightful, For leisure in the scenic countryside yes. Not commuting on roads. Oh yes. Very practical and delightful. A bike is practical and delightful in the countryside. Nd in lots of other places. Not a busy road. Often yes, with care. Easier, more comfortable, faster, can carry more stuff in a car.. So? Four reasons that a bicycle is pointless. Four reasons why some people may prefer not to use a bicycle. NOT four reasons why a bicycle is pointless. Same thing. No it isn't. I only need to find one occasion where a bicycle is not pointless to prove you a liar. We have four reasons a car is better, you need to at least equal that for your bicycle. No I don't. I do not have to justify my preference for a bicycle to YOU nor anyone else. You can rot in your heap of scrap. If you cannot justify it, we will continue to make fun of you. Just remember which device is more advanced. Do you use a typewriter to access the internet? As is a car on roads. economical, So you are poor then. So? What does poverty have to do with bicycling? Because it's the only reason not to use a faster larger easier car to get where you're going. That is total bull****. There is no law against a rich person riding a bike where convenient and if s/he wants to. And plenty of reasons to do so. There doesn't have to be a law against something to make it a stupid thing to do. It really is a very great compliment to be called stupid by YOU. Especially by YOU. And I have no ****ing interest in looking good in YOUR eyes. After all I ride a ****ing bicycle. And we all know what YOU think of bicyclists. You think they are the ****witted pits of humanity. And because it is YOU who think that, that is an extremely great compliment. We must be doing something right. If that's the form of logic your brain uses, no wonder you failed your driving test. At least I have a bike, which is a very comfortable desirable exhilarating convenient economical viable means of transport for many things. I have one too. It's only useful for leisure cycling on countryside paths. For anything else the car is easier, faster, and more convenient. Speak for yourself. I find bicycles are useful for many more things than leisure cycling on countryside paths. Thank God I am not like you. They're slower, they carry less, and require more effort. So what is this advantage you speak of? I regard all of those as advantages in many circumstances. How is carrying less any use? So you make 10 (slower) trips instead of one? Lots of uses. I will use a car when appropriate, which is not often. (about twice in the last year). Any time you want to travel a long distance, get there quickly, get there dry, or carry something. This ends up being almost every time for most people. "What is this life if, full of care, We have no time to stand and stare. No time to stand beneath the boughs And stare as long as sheep or cows. No time to see, when woods we pass, Where squirrels hide their nuts in grass. No time to see, in broad daylight, Streams full of stars, like skies at night. No time to turn at Beauty's glance, And watch her feet, how they can dance. No time to wait till her mouth can Enrich that smile her eyes began. A poor life this if, full of care, We have no time to stand and stare." William Henry Davies. Poetry is for poofters. Thanks very much for that EXCELLENT compliment coming from YOU. Especially as it comes from YOU. Now please ejaculate in my direction the further honour from YOU of being a green-nostriled, crossed eyed, hairy-livered, goisher kopf, inbred trout-defiler. It really is a very great compliment to be called a poofter by YOU. Especially by YOU. And I have no ****ing interest in looking good in YOUR eyes. After all I ride a ****ing bicycle. And we all know what YOU think of bicyclists. You think they are the ****witted pits of humanity. And because it is YOU who think that, that is an extremely great compliment. We must be doing something right. Your cut and paste drops you to the intelligence level of Rod Speed. Are you his bit on the side? convenient, Slower and carries less. Agreed. So? So unfit for purpose. That is total bull****. It might be unfit for some purposes but not all. Like I said, the fit purposes are cycling in the countryside, where cars can't go, and where you can enjoy the scenery. And many other uses. Commuting, enjoying town roads, getting places in towns, .... Commuting and getting places in towns is faster by car. Sometimes. But I love the feeling of commuting by bike. And to me the fact it takes a little longer is a real bonus. Try spending more time in the countryside. Cities are a piece of ****. You do not have a ****ing clue where I spend my time. Hint: I am not on uk.rec.cycling 24/7. You said towns above, or have you forgotten already? I am not only in towns. And why do you care where I am anyway? Control freak. It's towns that get discussed on here, where bicycles get in the way of cars. There is no problem with them in the countryside where people go to enjoy the scenery. I do agree that cars often get in the way of bicycles. Are you dyslexic? And it is NOT only towns which get discussed here. Yes it is. Almost every thread in this group is about cars and bicycles getting in each others way. That cannot happen in the countryside. And you can't enjoy a town road, it's just built up ugliness. Who the **** are you to tell me what I can or can't enjoy? Where did you get insight into my feelings and desires? I do not presume to tell you what your feelings are. Your feelings are wrong if you enjoy tall concrete buildings. I do not give a **** what you think of my feelings. And I have no ****ing interest in looking good in YOUR eyes. After all I ride a ****ing bicycle. And we all know what YOU think of bicyclists. You think they are the ****witted pits of humanity. And because it is YOU who think that, that is an extremely great compliment. We must be doing something right. Admittance of being a troll detected. And ****ing glad of it. Now please ejaculate to me the further esteemed honour of being the unholy spawn of a bandy-legged hobo and a syphilitic camel. That would really make me ecstatic. Why do you want me to ejaculate to you? Are you gay? Are all cyclists gay? Is that why they wear tight shorts? Most bicyclists are very gay with their excellent means of transport. They could not be happier! That's not what gay means in this century. -- You can get by on good looks and charm for about fifteen minutes. After that, you'd better have a big dick or nice tits. |
#80
|
|||
|
|||
"He should have been arrested for being a gob****e "
On 31.05.2017 08:08, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
That's not what gay means in this century. I did not say anything about this century. If you mean homosexual why the **** do you not say it? |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Internet troll arrested - sending messages by electronic communication networks "to cause annoyance, inconvenience or anxiety". | Simon Mason | UK | 19 | February 18th 12 09:09 AM |
"Driver arrested over cyclist Audrey Fyfe's death" | Doug[_3_] | UK | 0 | November 12th 11 06:38 AM |
"Man arrested over Bexley road-rage attack on cyclist." | Doug[_10_] | UK | 27 | July 18th 11 06:12 PM |
"John "Cho" Gilmer keeps publishing his "Manifesto" over and over." | Hoodini | Racing | 0 | April 23rd 07 12:38 AM |