Being compared to Il Bomber is flattering, nonetheless I am not him.
Yes.
You posted a picture of an underage child in the roaster thread, with the caption âtake your pickâ. The easy inference to make is that you were calling said child a roaster. Maybe youâd like to remove your post or add a disclaimer in to absolve the child of any possible misconstrued notion.
Or maybe youâre just a hypocrite when it comes to the protection of underage kids just as you were with those of mental disabilities.
Should any forum member believe the image on this thread is similar to what Il Bomber Destro posted, please feel free to do so and I will consider its removal. Of course there was no objection before you begun to scramble to save face, but I am open to its removal should anyone other than this poster feel it is required.
There is also another avenue we can take should it be required, but more of that anon.
[QUOTE=âmyboyblue, post: 1112544, member: 180â]This is a very serious allegation you are making.
Should any forum member believe the image on this thread is similar to what Il Bomber Destro posted, please feel free to do so and I will consider its removal. Of course there was no objection before you begun to scramble to save face, but I am open to its removal should anyone other than this poster feel it is required.
There is also another avenue we can take should it be required, but more of that anon.[/QUOTE]
Donât go looking for populist opinion, fight your own battle and stop shooting flares.
The facts are you posted a picture of a child inferring he was a roaster. Do you stand by that? Did you turn off your morality radar when you posted that?
Maybe you should edit your post to avoid any perceived hypocrisy.
There are no flares. You are the only one objecting whereas a number of those did to yours. I suspect you are merely scrambling desperately to save yet another rebrand, but unfortunately it looks as there will be no saving you this time Rudi
[QUOTE=âmyboyblue, post: 1112544, member: 180â]This is a very serious allegation you are making.
Should any forum member believe the image on this thread is similar to what Il Bomber Destro posted, please feel free to do so and I will consider its removal. Of course there was no objection before you begun to scramble to save face, but I am open to its removal should anyone other than this poster feel it is required.
There is also another avenue we can take should it be required, but more of that anon.[/QUOTE]
And Iâm not scrambling for you to remove it - do what you please, Iâm merely highlighting your brazen hypocrisy as Il Bomber did the last time you undertook a moral crusade.
The dice has been thrown bomber, we live or die by public opinion. This is a serious accusation you have casually thrown out there, even attempting to link a post of mine to your disgusting one. It is not something I am going to tolerate. I will take it further should it need to be.
Do what you please. I couldnât give a flying fuck but there are definite parallels to be drawn.
If you donât wish for the child to be inferred as a roaster then remove your post or put some disclaimer in, if you want it inferred that he is then donât do anything with it.
Your scrambling is getting increasingly pathetic il bomber destro. I think for your sake youâd be better off letting it go now until another makes a calling. Your contention here is vile and sad and the work of a desperate desperate man. Feel free to continue, I will await other input. Yours is bankrupt beyond belief.
Iâm making a salient point which you are refusing to address.
Does your post infer that said child is a roaster? To me, thatâs very much an obvious inference to make. You havenât addressed this yet. Is that what your post alludes to?
You are getting all high strung and defensive yet unwilling to clarify your own post. Iâm merely pointing out a huge hypocrisy on your point just like you thought using âretardsâ and âmongsâ was acceptable words to insult people but âdowneysâ wasnât.
