Liberal Forum

R.Suave » 08 Feb 2024, 10:03 am » wrote: ↑

08 Feb 2024, 10:03 am

Are you **** kidding me?

R.Suave » 08 Feb 2024, 8:41 am » wrote: ↑

08 Feb 2024, 8:41 am

How many allusions in the thread title?

Reference sheet for Veghead's advanced stage dementia.

1. Media Comment = You can't refute it it (VF caption is one of many examples). 
2. "Are these your words/fee-fees)?" or "**** writes itself" = random quotes strung together for you to pretend they are meaningful. 
3. Two pics: First pic- you admitted that you are lying about it, per the deal. Second pic- our notifications are comparable, minus the spam. 
4. "Does the rule apply to you?" = Yes, but I don't violate it because I answer member's questions. You don't. Thus, you are punished for it.
5. Questions/demands = Rule, idiot. 1k greenies.
6. Projection
7. "You are lying"  = You are lying by saying I am lying.
8. Creeping in profiles= **** you stalker. Die. 
9. Strikethroughs = Too much of a coward to read past 3 words...then makes an *** out of himself for it.

Blackvegatble's hypcorisy summed up in one post: [/size]
Blackvegetable » 7 minutes ago » wrote: ↑7 minutes ago
Very simple questions...

From which you are running...

GHETTOBLASTER » 07 Feb 2024, 9:54 pm » wrote: ↑

07 Feb 2024, 9:54 pm

Howdy Vegas.
Here ya go........https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curtis_Sliwa"In May 1977, Sliwa created the "Magnificent 13", a civilian group dedicated to combating violence and crime on the New York City Subway.[9] At the time, the city was experiencing a crime wave.[10] The Magnificent 13 grew and was renamed the Guardian Angels in 1979. The group's actions drew strong reactions, both positive and negative.[11]The majority of the members of the Guardian Angels were either Black or Hispanic.[7] Unarmed, the group required training in karate and fulfillment of legal requirements for citizens' arrest for all members before they were to be deployed.

It looks like Sliwa's gotten enough cash support to keep this operation afloat all these years and he was popular enough to run for NYC Mayor.
God Bless him and everyone else who takes enough pride in their neighborhoods to fight crime.
To be honest I would have moved out of there in a "NY Second" but I have met so many people from back there who feel like they can't   

Blackvegatble's hypcorisy summed up in one post: [/size]
Blackvegetable » 7 minutes ago » wrote: ↑7 minutes ago
Very simple questions...

From which you are running...

ROG62 » 08 Feb 2024, 9:15 am » wrote: ↑

08 Feb 2024, 9:15 am

and don't forget the photo he got duped into thinking was Trump cuz the caption says so on some obscure society page in vanity fair...

         

R.Suave » 08 Feb 2024, 10:01 am » wrote: ↑

08 Feb 2024, 10:01 am

Then you've convinced yourself of what you're desperate to believe.

Good job.

Meanwhile, I'm sure your demand is moving up the chain.

Huey » 08 Feb 2024, 9:44 am » wrote: ↑

08 Feb 2024, 9:44 am

Posted yesterday on a different thread about this:

There seems to be a conflict with what Curtis said and what the cops said.  But, I remember back in 79 when they were created.  People were happy to see them on the streets, and particularly in the subway.  They felt safer.

viewtopic.php?p=2487767#p2487767

GHETTOBLASTER » 08 Feb 2024, 10:13 am » wrote: ↑

08 Feb 2024, 10:13 am

I actually tracked that GETTY IMAGE PHOTO to where it originated.
It was the property of some other GAY GOSSIP JOURNALISM outfit.
They used that photo in an article about Kohn and they failed to mention who the young ****** Bitch was in that photo.
They most certainly would have given Trump honorable mention if that was him, since that's the exact sort of "girlie gossip" that pays their bills.   

RedheadedStranger » 08 Feb 2024, 10:14 am » wrote: ↑

08 Feb 2024, 10:14 am

I will follow up with Condé Nast this afternoon if I haven't heard anything back from them.

Can you think of any reason why they wouldn't write me back and say that it's accurate if it actually was?

I can... because it's not.

Huey » 08 Feb 2024, 10:17 am » wrote: ↑

08 Feb 2024, 10:17 am

Try again, BV.  Note that it was posted yesterday.

R.Suave » 08 Feb 2024, 10:27 am » wrote: ↑

08 Feb 2024, 10:27 am

Call your attorney.

RedheadedStranger » 08 Feb 2024, 10:30 am » wrote: ↑

08 Feb 2024, 10:30 am

I don't need an attorney to know that you were duped.

R.Suave » 08 Feb 2024, 10:28 am » wrote: ↑

08 Feb 2024, 10:28 am

Tiny,

Post the rule on "other threads".

Huey » 08 Feb 2024, 10:06 am » wrote: ↑

08 Feb 2024, 10:06 am

Try again.  I grew up there during that time frame.  So are you **** kidding ME?

Huey » 08 Feb 2024, 10:34 am » wrote: ↑

08 Feb 2024, 10:34 am

Well, you have my opinion concerning the situation.  If you would stop being so vague we might know what you are bitching about.  But no, you throw a hissy fit and line a post out.

R.Suave » 08 Feb 2024, 10:32 am » wrote: ↑

08 Feb 2024, 10:32 am

Leave no stone unturned in your quest..

R.Suave » 08 Feb 2024, 10:36 am » wrote: ↑

08 Feb 2024, 10:36 am

I doubt it, 1Stands..

Can you define "the situation"?
 

 

R.Suave » 08 Feb 2024, 10:35 am » wrote: ↑

08 Feb 2024, 10:35 am

Not more retelling, NoRecall


 

 

Huey » 08 Feb 2024, 10:49 am » wrote: ↑

08 Feb 2024, 10:49 am

After you tell me what concerns you about my post.

R.Suave » 08 Feb 2024, 11:25 am » wrote: ↑

08 Feb 2024, 11:25 am

No, you won't.

How does your chindribble relate to the OP?

R.Suave » 08 Feb 2024, 11:25 am » wrote: ↑

08 Feb 2024, 11:25 am

No, you won't.

How does your chindribble relate to the OP?

Reference sheet for Veghead's advanced stage dementia.

1. Media Comment = You can't refute it it (VF caption is one of many examples). 
2. "Are these your words/fee-fees)?" or "**** writes itself" = random quotes strung together for you to pretend they are meaningful. 
3. Two pics: First pic- you admitted that you are lying about it, per the deal. Second pic- our notifications are comparable, minus the spam. 
4. "Does the rule apply to you?" = Yes, but I don't violate it because I answer member's questions. You don't. Thus, you are punished for it.
5. Questions/demands = Rule, idiot. 1k greenies. Or **** your questions/demands.
6. Projection
7. "You are lying"  = You are lying by saying I am lying.
8. Creeping in profiles= **** you stalker. Die. 
9. Strikethroughs = Too much of a coward to read past 3 words...then makes an *** out of himself for it.

Blackvegatble's hypcorisy summed up in one post: [/size]
Blackvegetable » 7 minutes ago » wrote: ↑7 minutes ago
Very simple questions...

From which you are running...