🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <6cb5f784.0409041124.53a019c8@posting.google.com>
agent99@hsuchi.net (Agent 99) wrote:
>
> "privacy.at Anonymous Remailer" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> wrote:
>
> [snip]
> >Listen up people: according to rattfuck, having no tolerance for and
> standing up
> >against pedophilia makes one a sanctimonious prick.
>
> UFF, it's clear to me that you like to think about children a lot.
>
> So I have a few questions:
>
>

Yawn.

In article <6cb5f784.0409041124.53a019c8@posting.google.com>, Agent 99 
(agent99@hsuchi.net) dropped a +5 bundle of words...

> "privacy.at Anonymous Remailer" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> wrote:
> 
> [snip]
> >Listen up people: according to rattfuck, having no tolerance for and
> standing up
> >against pedophilia makes one a sanctimonious prick.
> 
> UFF, it's clear to me that you like to think about children a lot.
> 
> So I have a few questions:
> 
> Can you explain why you/UFF have such an enormous collection of
> messages (archive) from groups like alt.sex.incest,
> alt.binaries.pictures.erotica.pre-teen and other pedofile newsgroups,
> "since 1998!"?
> 
> Can you explain why, in the face of such material which you are
> insanely obsessed with, you have not reported it to the police?
> 
> In the case that what you are complaining about isn't illegal, can you
> tell me how many times you have petitioned your elected representative
> to criminalize what you are complaining about?
> 
> Can you tell me, if you're so against pedophilia, why you have such an
> obsession with it, "since 1998!", when most normal people and
> non-pedofiles, do their best to avoid it?
> 
> Can you explain why, if such messages are so abhorrent to you when
> posted to groups which normal people do not read, and are long since
> expired and lost, you/UFF choose to resurrect them and post your
> collections of them to scores of non-pedofile groups?
> 
> And, why you/UFF do your best to make sure they are archived at
> Google, where other pedofiles can enjoy them in future, and minors can
> stumble across them, while reading innocent newsgroups?
> 
> Can you explain why UFF has reposted on at least several occasions --
> in the manner described above, across non-pedofile groups, and having
> it archived at Google -- a story (about "Jamey") of child sex abuse,
> which he/you (UFF) claims he is against?
> 
> Can you explain why UFF even has in his possession such a story of
> child sex abuse, when he claims he is so against child sex abuse?
> 
> Can you explain how many pics of kids and stories about child sex
> abuse you/UFF have masturbated over, in your time reading pedofile
> groups "Since 1998!"?
> 
> Can you see that it's not necessary for ANYBODY to prove a link
> between UFF and child pornography and incest newsgroups, because UFF
> has done it himself again and again by posting samples of the
> evidently enormous personal collection of pedofile material he has
> built up "Since 1998!"?
> 
> Like somebody said in another pile of steaming excretia you just
> vomitted onto usenet:
> 
> 	"The fact is the little disgusting pervert was hanging out in pedo
> groups and doesn't have an explanation why."
> 
> We know this applies even more so to UFF, and we can add "SINCE 1998!"
> after the words "hanging out in pedo groups".
> 
> Since only a pedofile would hang out in incest and child porn
> newsgroups for so long, collect posts from such groups for so long,
> repost pedofile material and child sex abuse stories all over usenet
> for so long, only an idiot who is in serious denial would try and
> claim that UFF is not a major pedofile.
> 
> And since you, Anon -- let's suspend reality for a second and imagine
> you are not one of UFF's voices in the head -- are backing up UFF,
> it's reasonable to assume you are part of his pedo ring. Along with
> every other cyber-sociopath wannabe who feasts on every word that
> spews from his shithole.

They're assholes?

> 
> Have fun evading the questions, pedo, and then FOAD.
> 

-- 
Starshine Moonbeam
mhm31x9 Smeeter#29 WSD#30