Lurker > Raze_Razel

What's the point of meme when the facts speak for themselves?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VX0wEBAxY1o

LinkPizza posted...

Raze_Razel

How was I rushing for the high moral ground? Youre the only one who keeps saying shit about high and mighty. I never said anything like that. And there are plenty of people nicer than me. You just wont see them because they dont like interacting with mean people like you And you were assuming I was rushing for the high moral ground But you are also assuming that is grooming While I dont know what happening in that picture, it does not look like grooming Unless you have proof thats what they were doing, and not just assumptions. Because this far, assumptions is all youve given

As for the kids, as long as they arent stripping for them, who cares. Most kids can only read so much at that young of an age. And if they can read the sign, they wont even know what it means. You know how many dirty jokes are in childrens shows. And they dont understand those, either

As for who we are, its people of the gay community. As for your article, thats call a bad seed when doing drugs or what not. Most drag queens I know are actually pretty nice. And dont really do drugs They are usually fun, and put on fun shows You seem to be basing everything you know about a bunch of people on one person And thats not how things work I dont know anything about Desmond and whoever they are with. But to base everyone off of a bad seed is wrong. That would be me saying youre a rapist because I know several straight people who raped someone. It doesnt work like that. People should be based off of their own merits. Not lumped in with other bad seeds

As I said earlier, I dont know whats going on in the photo. And because of how biased as hell YOU are, I dont trust anything you say about the photo. You just seem to be making assumptions. So, I cant answer you question as I dont know whats going on. Not being able to answer your question due to lack of information is different than avoiding a question or copping out Its just a picture with literally no context No article or anything. And with how bias you are, why would I take your word for what it is So, no. I still dont know what youre talking about

And I havent tried to gaslight you at all. Im gay, so I know aniut gay communities. Youre making assumptions based on contextless photos, and whatever else. So, when I say youre either homophobic or dont know about the gay community, thats not gaslighting. Thats a fact And Im not fishing for excuses. Theres nothing to make excuses for. You still havent proven grooming yet If youre so sure, you have proof, yeah? So, show me the actual proof. Contextless photos literally dont prove anything

Stereotypes can be true But trying to base whos straight and gay off of those dont always work. There are tons of gay guys who look like youre average straight guy. And many gay guys who have straight marriages. Or are dating females. So, you can try to base it off stereotypes, but that gets you nowhere. The only ones youll probably know are gay are the ones who are already out and dont care. Anyone hiding it makes it hard for most straight people to get Even I have trouble sometimes

And whatever is happening in that picture isnt common. Thats why Im saying you know nothing about the gay community. If you think thats common, then you dont know anything about us Its not common. Not during pride month, or the rest of the year Not even is in cities with significant LGBTQ+ communities And you dont have to believe anything I said. Thats fine. Because I dont believe anything youve said either Not only are you biased, but youre acting like youre knowledgeable about gay culture, when you do obviously are not Also, can you prove I know anything about the picture? If I did, Id say something about it. You posted a picture with no context or article. How can anyone know anything about it?

Again, I havent taken the moral high ground. Thats YOUR assumption, and yours alone Nor have I dodged anything Again, thats YOU assuming that No gaslighting, either. You just dont know about gay culture. And think YOU can lecture a gay person on/about it Plenty of straight people understand the gay community. You just arent one of them Photos without any context dont prove anything Youre the only one gaslighting here. The only one And the gay community has been trying to band together with everyone for years. But people like you and everyone you deal with are the ones that dont want to. Maybe if they werent trying to ban us from existence, wed believe them we they say they want to band together

Epic temper-tantrum right here.

>Gets the photographic evidence deleted....then asks for it.
>Gets me temp-banned, for literally no reason against the TOU.
>Writes all that drivel, trying to frame the narrative in favour of him.
>Hams up the victims status
>Claims no grooming ever happens, while photos and articles of 10 year old boys inches away from a drag queen's genitals, as well as pretend-snorting ketamine is NOT considered grooming....

...but I'll give you credit here.....You used the term "Bad Seed", good for you. See unlike Adam or Jen, they don't use that word. Which is all I ever wanted 'someone like you' to acknowledge. Just because you are gay, just because you think you perfected the narrative of being a constant victim, you still have to acknowledge that there are those in the community you chose to speak for that bolsters the very stereotype you are trying to steer from. Instead you rather pull ever dirty trick on the internet to edit and censor people's true concerns, instead of enlightening them.

...and you want to know what is the result of your censorship and victim-acting gets you?.....Jen's 31 white-supremist men ready to crash your party.... All you clowns worry more about being a hero of your own causes, but never educate the masses into how to see these things for the sake of tolerance and peace. Never denouncing the 'bad seeds' as well; which bolsters the claims of 'others' ready to "band together to end your existence".

I'll openly admit to Velasquez'ing any pedo on either side of political or gender spectrum. ...people on your side rarely don't because you know what is politically at stake if you do. I mean, not only is it tough for you to defend such obvious grooming practices at Drag Queen parties as it is, but there are even movements within the LGTBQ community trying to legitimize pedophila....and yet, there is rarely any denouncement of those people with the entirety of that community to begin with....why?...

Does that constant victimhood place you so high on that moral pedestal that you don't need to acknowledge concerns of grooming and pedophila, which does in fact happen in those circles?

Ezra Miller just got fired from being the Flash for being a groomer....explain that.

Jen0125 posted...

Is this guy still going about the neon lights being bad for kids

..and what did the neon sign say?....come on now, this is the comprehension part of the english exam.

Adam_Savage posted...

at least you aknowledge you are irrational, though that's putting it lightly

Your word, thrown back at you, nice try

You keep deflecting to that picture pretending like whatever happens in that picture is a common occurrence.

It's Pride month, isn't it.... It's common enough.

But as far as I can tell, it's not a normal occurrence anywhere..

Only where there is a significant LGBTQ community, major cities, blue states... wherever the term "camel-jockey" came from....

But like I said, I also have no idea what the picture is at all..

Third time you typed that....I don't believe you. You already hinted about your grasp on the subject matter. YOU KNOW what I'm getting at here. Be a bigger person and explain yourself, explain this, that's all I ask.....

And trust me, when people are trying to ban gays and trans people, those people aren't the one willing to "band together" as you say...

Let me elaborate on that comment,.... When you're not explaining yourself, you fail in relaying your message. The burden is on you. And instead of 'educating', you take that moral high ground and dodge the issue with deflection and projections; pure gaslighting. When photos and articles I've shown demand an explanation, and you're acting all high n' mighty on your laurels believing you don't have to explain anything because the gay community contains some super-secret knowledge about the universe that petty mortal could never understand......you think you're really winning the hearts and minds of people you demand blind respect from with that attitude?

...then you have people like Jen speaking about 'white supremacy', as if she doesn't quite understand that because people like her (and you) choose to speak for a marginalized community. You honestly think there are no repercussions when you refuse to fill in the gaps in the first place?

Photos like that prove the subtleties of grooming children, it's a fact. The burden is on you on proving how it's not. OR denounce the practice because it doesn't represent what the community is about.... But the truth is, you can't...you're coming up short on the explanations. Believing a void, or a lack of connection to the details, maintains the hazy smoke to dodge your own responsibility as a decent human being on the matter. You want the respect, understanding, and tolerance...well, this is how you start....but I'm not holding my breath, too much gaslighting already here.

...otherwise, that 'banding together' is the reactionary result of your own arrogant shortcomings....which has been the point of my ravings for the past page on this thread.

As for that photo, I DON'T know what's going on as that's the first time I've seen the photo. So why would I acknowledge a photo when I don't know what's going on, and haven't seen it before this topic?

Don't cop out. You know the score. You know the arguments. This isn't a new topic. Desmond is Amazing isn't a new topic either. You're the "hero" here. You've placed the argument on your shoulders. The picture is pretty clear as day. That is an ADULT CLUB, those are children (I'd wager to be in the 5-6 year old range, kindergarten age)

Again, I don't know what you're talking about...

yeah...you do...

The one deflecting is you.

Deflecting what?...I've been pretty consistent with what I've been saying all along. "Protecting Children"...it's not a rocket science idea....

I don't know what's going on in that photo.

...taking CHILDREN to an ADULT CLUB, with signs about FELLIATO, teaching STRIPTEASING, for MONEY.

I mean, FFS, can you be mature enough to at least admit this happens?

But if you really think the whole gay community is like that, then you're either homophobic, or don't know anything about gay people at all.

Gaslighting.... you ASSUME that I assume this indicative of the entire gay community, you wish I thought like that to fit your narrative. Like I said about, about the "true" Family Values Republican pedo'...doesn't matter which side you're from, 'grooming is grooming, and grooming is bad, k?".... Just because you excel in your victimhood, doesn't pardon you from the deviance of such practices.

One doesn't have to be in the club to understand just basic principles of human decency. ...you're just fishing for every excuse to not call this grooming, because you represent a letter in the alphabet.

Most gay people are just normal everyday people, living normal everyday lives. Many you can't even tell are gay

Are they grooming children?....then I really don't care. Then can be gay all they want, whenever and wherever they want.

(You can pretend you do, but you won't, and trying to base it on stereotypes will get you nowhere).

That's the problem with stereotypes...they tend to be true... and if you're wasting energy saying, "it doesn't happen, it doesn't happen, it doesn't happen"....and WHEN (not if) it does, what are your excuses then? So back to my bigger question: If you were truly so high n' mighty, then why not "educate" to me as to the value of having CHILDREN, in an ADULT CLUB, with a sign about FELLIATO, teaching STRIPTEASING, for MONEY......educate me on the inherent value to the cause."
...and I'll double down...."what is the inherent value of teaching a kid like Desmond how to (pretend) snort up ketamine?"

LinkPizza posted...

Who rushing for any moral high ground?

You

While I try to be nice, there are people way nicer than me here.

Doubtful thus far

So, you're first mistake was assuming.

Assuming what? Grooming such as this is a black and white issue. Either you're all for the protection of children, or spend more energy trying to project away from it for a particular bias reason.

And what do you mean by "rent free" results

Glad you asked. The problem with "wokeness" (especially on manners like this) is that there are some who overstep their mandate to more than just basic across-the-board equality. It's not a manner of merely having other people earn respect for their agency, but to live "rent free" in their minds. Equality + Perks, and a little bit more, and a little more after that.... In your case, it's one thing to tell YOU it's okay to be gay, it's another to wrangle up 5 year olds, take them to strip clubs and teaching them to be adult performers working for cash. It's the whole "get them when they're young" adage playing out. They're not doing this for equality and winning the hearts and minds of people for acceptance....it's gerrymandering the vernacular, so to speak. trying to win over their own agency before they develop into reasonable adults with agency of their own. ... And anyone daring to speak out and question this, gets 'gaslighted'; falling back on the struggle for 'oh woe is me' equality. .....

A: "No, this isn't grooming your kids (when it actually is), you're just a bigot!
B: "Oh wait, I don't want to be a bigot, I'll back off."
A: "lol, rent free!...OKAY KIDDIES, AS THE SIGN SAYS: "IT'S NOT GOING TO LICK ITSELF!"

We just want to be treated as equals

Who's "we"? People of the gay community?....or these actual groomers?

And part of that is tolerance.

Sell it then... I've asked for an explanation on that picture, what am I supposed to tolerate?

Explain this:
https://thefederalist.com/2020/02/17/video-emerges-of-drag-kid-desmond-is-amazing-pretending-to-snort-ketamine/
(*I'd post the actual video, but it seems 'they' took it down....I wonder why)

And that begins at a young age. And if they grow up knowing about gay people from a young age, and understand that they aren't any different from them, that's how we breed tolerance. Learning at an older age becomes too late for some people. Hence why younger children should learn that gay people exist.

So answer the question that you're avoiding: "If you were truly so high n' mighty, then why not "educate" to me as to the value of having CHILDREN, in an ADULT CLUB, with a sign about FELLIATO, teaching STRIPTEASING, for MONEY......educate me on the inherent value to the cause."

I mean, it couldn't have been left with watching Netflix cartoons with the message SUBTLY put into them...like the "Dragon Prince", or "Steven Universe". Popular media is chalk full of "wokeshit" (despite failing revenues, different topic, I digress).. instead taking the depraved route of taking CHILDREN to an ADULT CLUB, with signs about FELLIATO, teaching STRIPTEASING, for MONEY.

Adam_Savage posted...

go for it.

Ladies first.

BTW, your ID is named after a guy who molested his sister at young age....just sayin'....

LinkPizza posted...

No. Its probably for the best because you dont seem like a good person. And seem to be biased against people who are different. Just because Im gay doesnt mean Im a predator Children learning about how relationships arent only between men and women, but between two men or two women is also ok. And can help kids who later do find out theyre not straight. It would have helped me some if I understood that I was allowed to be different Also, the stuff youre saying is really out there And its probably not worth the time to read anything you post as that seems like time wasting

Your first mistake is rushing for that moral high ground of sanctimonious platitudes.

I'm not biased against anyone that is different, but if people in your camp are pushing envelopes to achieve that 'rent free' result. It's not going to work the way you think. Because like the rest, you refuse to even acknowledge what is going on in that photo to begin with. You have particular groups of so-called 'white supremacists' always ready to defend what's theirs. And all you got is gaslighting.

If you were truly so high n' mighty, then why not "educate" to me the value of having CHILDREN, in an ADULT CLUB, with a sign about FELLIATO, teaching STRIPTEASING, for MONEY......educate me on the inherent value to the cause.

Also, the stuff youre saying is really out there

Even if this a matter of discovering the simplistic nature of your own sexuality at a young age, explain how acting like a desirable fuck-toy for cash helps with that?

Not worth the time

Sure, because you have no excuse for this, in any proper corner of society (gay or otherwise) which is the bottom line here.

I get that it hurts like hell trying to get respect in this world, but you seriously think deflecting an issue like this helps? Especially when those you accuse of misunderstanding would rather band together and go the 'simple route'?

ZangsBeard posted...

I don't have to, I was literally responding to your, repeated, and bolded comments. If you can't figure out that's not bringing it up, when you've felt the need to hammer on the topic... well, it tracks for your posting style.

As opposed to calling me "obsessed" in the face of those on this thread who are defending this practice with their deflections and projections?

Why play at rhetoric games for something that any decent human being should be concerned about?

ZangsBeard posted...

You're really asking whose obsessed when I haven't brought it up at all? Interesting...

ZangsBeard posted...

Damn, he sure is obsessed with pederasty.

try again

ZangsBeard posted...

Damn, he sure is obsessed with pederasty.

Projection...

I'm protecting children...and you're laughing at me for it....

Who's obsessed?

Jen0125 posted...

I'm not reading any of that lol

HA...."triple post"..."I'm triggered!"......flip the switch and you're suddenly above it all. "There are no groomers within the LGBTQ community, despite photo evidence."

LinkPizza posted...

Probably for the best

...probably is, considering what they've been exposing about themselves on the topic.

Adam_Savage posted...

he sure does think about little kids having sex a lot.

And you spending a lot of time defending and/or deflecting away from that fact.

At least I'm trying to protect the children,...bigger question is, "Why don't you take a seat" and explain your angle in all this? What would you gain for succeeding into derailing the facts of the case like this?

link

Not bothering reading your obviously bias article that really doesn't prove anything except all pedo-groomers should be dealt with.

Did you expect me to crawl into a fetal position and admit defeat because a right-winger fucks kids too? I mean, what's ironic about something like that is someone teaching 'family values', and yet they violate children. That's his own brand of hypocrisy. While on the left, certain drag queens like GROOMING CHILDREN, by taking them to ADULT CLUBS, teaching them about STRIPPING and POLE DANCING, while people are throwing MONEY at them. With a sign in the room saying "IT'S NOT GOING TO LICK ITSELF" a sign about SUCKING COCK, they are teaching CHILDREN how to SUCK COCK and STRIP, in an ADULT CLUB, FOR MONEY...all under the 'friendly' and "harmless' disguise of good ol' LGBTQ fun and "education"

... well wouldn't that be holding them to the same standard? Wouldn't it? The community's struggle to find equality and legitimacy in regular society, but then (like said "Family Values Republican" or Jen's and the legit side of any particular feminism movement) there is always going to be someone in that group that is going to undo all that their group advocates for.

Except the catch is, if a "true" Family Values Republican caught a someone molesting children among their ranks, they would definitely 2A the creep and be done.

But you, Jen, ZangsBeard, and Zareth haven't denounced this practice at all. You're not managing your own. Even for the sake of preserving the optics to the greater message of equality. There's like 5 major things wrong in that photo, and all you're done it deflect and project, and given not one iota of proof saying otherwise. Instead you'd rather label with word like 'deranged' and 'troll'...and you still have no excuse proving me wrong.

and is it the strip club or the drag queens you have issue with? or both?

Saying again: Because you have CHILDREN, being taken to ADULT CLUBS, learning about STRIPPING and POLE DANCING, and people are throwing MONEY at them. And to add the cherry on top, you have a sign saying "IT'S NOT GOING TO LICK ITSELF":....**Hey kiddo they're talking about ice-cream right? RIGHT?**.....NO, it's a sign about SUCKING COCK, they are teaching CHILDREN how to SUCK COCK and STRIP, in an ADULT CLUB, FOR MONEY...all under the 'friendly' and "harmless' disguise of good ol' LGBTQ fun and "education".../smh

Don't have a problem with strip clubs. Don't have a problem with RESPONSIBLE Drag Queens.....throwing impressionable children into the mix? When they themselves have no idea who they are? Well it's definitely an issue to at least 31 someones willing to crash a Pride Parade for....

Be clear here, you're not championing for some kind of gender parity activism. That argument is usually co-opt'd as a trojan horse to what's really going on in the seedy underbelly like this

if you say you don't think drag queens are inherently sexual, do you still take issue with drag queen story hours at the public library? if so, why?

Okay more deflection....you can't win on the CHILDREN, being taken to ADULT CLUBS, learning about STRIPPING and POLE DANCING, and people are throwing MONEY at them debate. You need to try and tip the scale with 'drag queen story hours'; then my answer is, depends on the story being told, depends on the audience too, and the parents who allow it.

and also don't be disingenuous and say that i believe those 31 people represent the entire right. but they represent a larger than usual amount of them at this point in time.

no, saying exactly THAT is being disingenuous...... "I'm not saying, what I exactly meant to say"....?

You're the one showing which flavour of Kool-Aid you drink already...

are we supposed to argue there are NO white supremacist domestic terrorism risks in this country because it makes you uncomfortable or hurts your feelings?

"hurt feelings" cute; nice try..... But yeah, if there is a nefarious scheme in grooming children in this way, you've have still yet to prove how this shouldn't be uncomfortable for anyone to see that. You're not winning any points for defend this, and there will always be those like the "31" plotting to counter-protest because people like you are trying to normalize such grooming practices...WHEN IT IS OBVIOUSLY GROOMING!

riple post lol but actually nevermind. i don't care what deranged things you are going to say. all i can say is that i hope you are a troll pretending to be deranged.

You're advocating for grooming CHILDREN, being taken to ADULT CLUBS, learning about STRIPPING and POLE DANCING, and people are throwing MONEY at them

....and I'm deranged.....lol, k....

Jen0125 posted...

i literally don't think being exposed to different types of people is grooming.

"Exposed" is right..... Again, it's about optics. YOU might think it's all fine, and you would very wrong, and very disturbed if you did. Like maybe put yourself on a federal registry if that's the case.

you only think that because you believe the "normal default" is cisgender heterosexual.

I guess you have to get some kind of use for your gender studies degree.... but to prove you wrong, "normal" isn't taking impressionable children into an adult strip club.

you only think it's grooming because you think they aren't valid.

They aren't valid because they are groomers.

it's obvious to people who don't sit here and discriminate against others what your ideals are.

drop them buzzwords all you want, but you're still not arguing the evidence. Argue the point, not the person.

• Adult Strip Club
• "It's not going to lick itself"
• 5-6 year old children
• learning stripper moves
• throwing money at them

....this is not normal, even if you hide it behind some LGBTQ nobility, that is a toxic mix of what grooming is all about.

why do you believe drag queens are inherently sexual?

Why do you believe, that this is about sexuality.....what if it's about 'bolstering numbers'?

many drag queens don't do anything sexual in their acts.

Deflection.... what you believe isn't what is happening in the photo. You can't just start pointing at other drag events and show how it's NOT grooming anyone, (And I'll be fair, I agree, not all drag events are like that), but the argument is about this photo, and several incidences like that, even "Desmond is Amazing"....young children getting thrown into this ideology for

They're performers, entertainers and comedians in costume. you're kind of weird to think that is inherently sexual because.. why?

Because you have CHILDREN, being taken to ADULT CLUBS, learning about STRIPPING and POLE DANCING, and people are throwing MONEY at them. And to add the cherry on top, you have a sign saying "IT'S NOT GOING TO LICK ITSELF":....**Hey kiddo they're talking about ice-cream right? RIGHT?**.....NO, it's a sign about SUCKING COCK, they are teaching CHILDREN how to SUCK COCK and STRIP, in an ADULT CLUB.....FOR MONEY...all under the 'friendly' and "harmless' disguise of good ol' LGBTQ fun and "education"...

...feel free to remove your head from your ass so I can stop typing in caps, okay?

Zareth posted...

Yes, that image represents every single person on the left. Absolutely every single one.

yeah, that's not being disingenuous, is it...?

Just like how those 31 'white-supremacists' represents every single person on the right? ...that people like Jen would want you to believe?

But I would say that those on the 'left' aren't exactly admonishing those in the photo for the sake of maintain optics too right?\

Was it too hard for someone in the LGBTQ communities to say "maybe we shouldn't have kiddie-drag-grooming parties in strip clubs since we're fighting for equality here, this doesn't look good for the message, y'know!"

Zareth posted...

He thinks that image is proof that everyone on the left is grooming children

I love to read how you can explain how it's not.

That event in question was taken at an adult strip club, allowing children to enter, with "It's not going to lick itself" glowing in the background, it was also said they were teaching kids about drag, how to dance like a stripper, when grown men were throwing dollars at them......and that isn't grooming, how?

Jen0125 posted...

lol

...exactly....

Be coy and trolly all you want, but let's be real here. You and Zareth can 'try' and pull every excuse from your ass to say how this is not 'grooming' (and you'd fail since it's so obvious), but when so-called 'white-supremacists' start counter protesting, are you really surprised by their reaction? When these fringe groups become so 'empowered' they begin to overstep?

I mean are you two so eager to push the 'white man bad' narrative to cover up what grooming actually entails?

Do you think RTS like star craft are dead?

Blizzard is dead, imo. Starcraft is played out.

But speaking to the RTS genre as a whole, it's alive and well; it's just no one is daring enough to push the genre forward.

Stagnant is the word I'd choose...

Jen0125 posted...

what would you like me to say about that lol

Say what you see

DeathMagnetic80 posted...

Honestly his mom should be sued for taking him there in the first place.

His Dad lived in Kenosha too. By all rights, Kyle is a resident of that place as well.

He may have gotten off on a technicality because of some janky wording in the law

'janky'..../smh.... "Romeo and Juliet" was a phrase that got used a lot in the trial, as Rittenhouse was on the cusp of being a legal adult. Just because he was a month away from being legal, it's something that can be overlooked.

that they decided allowed him to be in legal possession of the rifle in question (which I still think was bullshit)

If you can't understand basic gun laws, then don't hurt yourself in trying.

as the intent of the law was clearly so minors could hunt with a parent or guardian present, not show up to protests to stir up shit),

that's ironic, since who were the ones burning down the neighbourhood IN THE FIRST PLACE?

none of this would have happened and he'd just be the short dork that sucker punches girls on video that no one ever heard of.

more irony

So not only is she ultimately responsible for the deaths that night, she's responsible for kind of fucking up her kid's life.

Can't see how having such conviction is 'fucking up' someone's life. Kyle went down there to protect was he believed to be important to himself, family, and friends; relatively simple concept. Might not be important to you, since you're fine with burning down towns and the homes and livelihoods of other people, but that would just make you a hypocritical coward lacking in a similar weight of convictions on par to his. The old adage of "don't dish out what you can't take".

He's just gonna scratch out a living on the right wing grifter circuit with George Zimmerman signing autographs for white nationalists that think its rad he killed some damn libz.

....as the BLM founders are laughing all the way to the bank, dodging taxes as they run toward their multi-million dollar mansions......

Jen0125 posted...

normal citizens

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/6/0/9/AAcmjpAADVSJ.jpg

Sorry missed the last part of your sentence, the pink neon glow was distracting. Want to try again?

Jen0125 posted...

meanwhile 31 white men arrested trying to "counter protest" a LGBTQ+ event wearing masks (i thought those would kill you?), bullet proof vests and armed with rifles.

Meanwhile, a leftist attempted to assassinate a SCOTUS judge in a murder/suicide plot.

Your point?

ReturnOfFa posted...

christ you guys are miserable. it's like an eternal daytime talkshow.

Umm, okay, thanks for posting and being a part of the talkshow....?

Jen0125 posted...

just be glad you aren't a woman on the receiving end of that type of man's rhetoric tbh

>cries misogyny when misandrist feminism has been exposed to be equally (if not more nefariously) toxic...

Nice projection, I guess...

ZannoL posted...

Amber has become so despised by everyone that now a Saudi man has made her a proposal in order to escape all the hate:

HAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAA

Oh man,...I have to know if that's really her only avenue in life at this point. To be some Arab Prince's fuck-toy....

wolfy42 posted...

Do you cook with chili peppers?

I do

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mzJj5-lubeM

...it's called gameFAQs

Lokarin posted...

Soo..... what'd Depp do that warrants $2million?

The publists he had went rogue to make a bunch of defamatory statements online about Heard, after the UK trial. But Depp has since fired that guy, as those statements weren't approved by him. However, Depp still had to own the statement, so he has to pay....but Depp's net worth is like $150,000,000 so it's a parking ticket to him.

streamofthesky posted...

https://youtu.be/HMeaBvJI5_w?t=229

Legal Eagle covering the verdict.
3:49 - 4:22 and 6:59 - 7:18 in particular is pretty good. Really shuts down some narratives.
I'll link directly to 3:49 in the video, just to help. :)

@10:00 ...proves the real issue that I've been standing by the whole time. Still makes me right, but I'll admit for the wrong the reasons.

On principle, I've always questioned Heard's ability to make any appeal stick, despite what Jen "knows". Again there are more legal troubles for Heard since there is still a question of her perjuring herself, as well (as the video says) ACLU is open to being sued by her as well. So her continued path is not going to be easy at all.

But what was explained on the video is that in order for Heard to do ANYTHING next, she needs to pay up the $10,350,000 first. The Appeals Court isn't going to do anything for her, until that is settled. That is it, end of story.....

But someone in a passing conversation told me, Depp still needs to pay his $2 million to Heard, as Heard needs to pay him $10,350,000. The money does NOT get subtracted, they both need to front their money first, and then it'll balance out later... Trying to confirm that.

Either it is $8,350,000 or $10,350,000, Heard's net worth is estimated only at around $6,000,000....She's dead, flat, broke.... and she's been blackballed by Hollywood too (I'd be surprised if she was still finding work), her IMDB only has two indy movies in post-production. If she was a fast rising star as her lawyers made her out to be, she would've had at least a dozen or more on the line...but nope...no one wants her. She'll need to give up her Aquaman 2 money and whatever was left from the 7,000,000 divorce settlement from before. She'll never be able to get an appeal, she won't be able to afford any lawyer, even the discount lawyers she used in the trial.

TonyCIifton posted...

You can really tell who the angry incels are when reading through topics like this.

As opposed to the angry femi-nazis that's been discredited now,..?

flip-sides, yo.

Lokarin posted...

Walmart

Their back to school sales.

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/4/6/0/AAcmjpAADTS0.jpg

VampireCoyote posted...

no, they wont

in the US at least the word ice cream cant be used unless the product is made with milk/cream

stuff like breyers frozen dairy blah blah blah exist but they arent called ice cream and even the majority of the store brands are actual ice cream if you check the ingredients

Actually, there would need to be certain FDA approved measurements in order to still call the "cream" part of "ice cream" still "cream"....IMO, there could still be cream in that "frozen dairy product", but it would be minuscule amounts as the rest would be preservatives, filler, and whole ton more of sugar. One would have to question if you can even call it "ice cream" after all that.

Breyers is the fancy ice cream, because it uses real cream. True. But ask those shopping the bottom shelf what they're really buying.

Adam_Savage posted...

they're both two extremely different situations

different, but related.

Again, Disney hemorrhaging money playing gender politics. Depp is recovering from being slandered. Both need a win, Disney moreso....

DragonClaw01 posted...

I still have a hard time believing Johnny can act well any more. As much as I laughed at the phycho, psychologist Heard's team brought out, I actually have to agree with him that Johnny's cognitive state has went down significantly. I mean Johnny could barely speak properly the second time he went to the stand & seem confused. It worked out well for him there because when he said he didn't recall something you believed it, but if you can barely testify, good luck being the protagonist in a movie. He seemed pretty washed.

...but you're forgetting one thing....."He's Captain Jack Sparrow".

...no really, that's Sparrow's whole shtick, acting all drunk and whimsical as such. Wouldn't take much to get back in that role.

Also that whole slurred speech thing, is because of ADD and anxiety issues he admitted having all his life, which could explain his substance abuse issues which is not uncommon among those types. And obviously doesn't bode well being in an abusive relationship with a psyhco-bitch like Heard either, probably sent him over the edge.

VampireCoyote posted...

where the heck are you coming up with the idea that MOST ice cream products arent ice cream??

Unless you're shopping at a Whole Foods, or other hoity-toity 'organic' grocery stores, most lower-end grocery stores, even mid-tier restaurants will sell you non-ice cream product and pass it off as "ice cream" nonetheless.

Adam_Savage posted...

no opinion on it, so

Lying again, since you got all triggered over the reasons behind Disney's financial woes, which failing at playing gender politics is one of them....so yeah, you do have an opinion.

VampireCoyote posted...

frozen dairy desserts do exist but where the heck are you coming up with the idea that MOST ice cream products arent ice cream??

So what's the difference between the two? An ice-cream is made from milk fats while a frozen dessert is made from vegetable oil fats. Vanaspati is a hydrogenated vegetable oil used in cooking, a cheaper substitute for ghee or butter.

https://movieweb.com/johnny-depp-disney-exec-predicts-return-pirates/

"I absolutely believe post-verdict that Pirates is primed for rebooting with Johnny as Captain Jack back on board. There is just too much potential box-office treasure for a beloved character deeply embedded in the Disney culture. With [producer] Jerry Bruckheimer riding high on the massive success of Tom Cruise in Top Gun: Maverick, there is huge appetite for bringing back bankable Hollywood stars in massively popular franchises."

Suddenly Disney is all friendly, huh Adam?

I'm a PhD and an MD, been to space, and hold patents on the plastic ends you see on shoelaces.

Jen0125 posted...

Do you think each side bar is a trial since it's a direct private argument to the judge?

SInce it's part of the main trial....yes...

But Appealing is another trial altogether.

Nice try.

Bacon

How can it be overrated, if it's always the best?

Steak

Never overrated, if done well.

Burritos (of various kinds)
Nachos
Pizza (whichever kind. can be your niche favorite preference)

An all-purpose food, imo. Load them up, or just have cheese. No big deal really

Ice Cream

Overrated.... Most Ice Cream products are fake. Processed chemicals. Rando-dairy product #13908, and food colouring. ...and they call it Ice Cream?

Fried Chicken

Chicken that is fried....can't see how that's overrated.

Big Burger

Like Burritos, Nachos, and Pizza, it's an all-purpose food.....but the exception here is the idea of the "Big" burger...a novelty food, meant for big-mouthed fat-asses worshipping their own gluttony....it's quite overrated because it's impractical as a meal in of itself.

Jen0125 posted...

What you're talking about is called a motion. Not a trial. Just fyi.

It's a trial,...just 15 minute version of one.

During which the court of appeals is a structured discussion between the appellate lawyers and the panel of judges focusing on the legal principles in dispute.

In that time, according to you're silly "stupid lawyer" angle, is that they would have to have a separate trial over the lawyers to PROVE they were stupid, before forming their argument to the appellate; otherwise, again, what proof would that had that the lawyers were stupid? that's can't be done in 15 minutes, unless it was prepared BEFOREHAND.

But thanks to Adam shooting himself in the foot with all those links, the real reason Heard is appealing is because social media tainted the jury and the judge was unfair in her instructions. The problem is the Appellate doesn't argue with the jury, and the judge's instructions were clear in servicing the scope of the trial.

They're also not going to speak about fact of the case, even evidence that was 'supposedly' suppressed during the Depp's trial.

...so that's three times you two have been wrong.

Revelation34 posted...

Where is she going to get the money to appeal? Gofundme?

Only Fans.

She can show us "how Depp used the wine bottle in her", she can still plead her case to the masses that way. Except I'm not a simp, so I'll probably wait for the clips of her act to show up on EF^KT along with other camgirls who punch themselves in the face for views....

Jen0125 posted...

No they wouldn't have. You are still wrong.

Yes, they would've have. As explained a million times now. It would be wrong to think they can approach the Appeal court with zero evidence that it was incompetent lawyers; they would need to prove that FIRST, before speaking to the Appeal court about her trial against Depp.

So you are wrong there. In this, and the fact that she's appealing based on other factors that Adam is yipping on about now...

Adam_Savage posted...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/arts-entertainment/2022/06/02/amber-heard-appeal-johnny-depp-trial/

"Heard lawyer: Actress will appeal, thinks social media influenced jury."

Considering that 'social media' got all their information from the trial. It could've gone both ways if there was actual EGREGIOUS evidence against Depp, proving wHaT a MoNsTeR he was....He would've been thrown to the wolves like Harvey Weinstein had. Which actually was the case for the past 5-6 years, getting fired from Pirates and Fantastic Beasts. But truth prevailed.

https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/tv/story/2022-06-02/amber-heard-johnny-depp-verdict-defamation-trial-appeal-bredehoft

"As Amber Heard plans appeal, her lawyer says she cant pay Johnny Depp $10.4 million"

Not anyone else's fucking problem at this point. Heard is done. Done in Hollywood. Dropped by fashion companies (probably, it would be smart of them to since I doubt they don't want Heard advertising for their "bruising kits"). Elon already had her, doubt he'll take her in. ...She's broke, and finished, that was the point....

https://www.newsweek.com/amber-heard-possible-appeal-requirements-1712273

"What Amber Heard Needs to Prove for Successful Appeal"

Heard must first prove that the "judge made a serious error that made the trial unfair to her" as part of any possible appeal. He also said that an appellate court does not review facts, or the credibility of the witnesses, and "does not second guess the jury's determination as which testimony is credible or not."

So Jen listen up, your boy Adam sold you out with this one right here.... You're claiming "incompetent lawyers", was the way to go, except this article says she will be going after the Judge. See that's more simpler path to take, you don't need to go through other trials suing everyone that sucked at their job to prove to the Appeal courts. Except the real problem now is the Judge's directions were pretty cut and dry. Depp was suing for defamation, so the Judge's questions is straightforward. "Did Heard's Op-Ed refer to Depp?" and "Was the comment defamatory?"...yes and yes..... and as said in YOUR article, "an appellate court does not review facts, or the credibility of the witnesses, and "does not second guess the jury's determination as which testimony is credible or not."....so what is an Appellate court to do? Since Heard is basically thinking she can get a do-over on the whole thing, which isn't what they do....she's fucked....as is your whole counter-argument thus far.

https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2022/06/amber-heard-will-appeal-johnny-depps-defamation-win-her-lawyer-says

"Amber Heard Will Appeal Johnny Depps Defamation Win, Her Lawyer Says"

Sure,...all the leftist, feminist, woke journalist are going to double-down on all their previous statements made against Depp....this article doesn't say anything new.

Suppress how? so what? There were incidents not in Depp's favour about the actions he took, and for the most part proved was purely reactionary to the actual real monstrous abuse she laid on him, and that she lied about any assault too.

Thanks for all the evidence,...you proved nothing.

They are directly going for the appeal

uh huh...and?.....certainly not the way Jen thought before she opened her mouth and blew up the thread with her trolling.

Even I knew Heard would appeal, because she's a fuckin' petualant child pulling a temper tantrum, who's about 2 seconds away from officially being a poor Texan bumpkin trailer trash. She'll do what she can to hold on to whatever swag her Hollywood experiences bestowed on her.

Rules of discourse says you need to be consistent, can't flip-flop

Nothing I've said has been inconsistent though.... Jen thought Heard will appeal based on stupid lawyers, She was wrong about that. And she was wrong about what would need to happen so Heard can prove she had stupid lawyers. Now she's wrong simply because the Appeal court isn't going do what she thinks it's going to do, which is basically giving her another trial...

Adam_Savage posted...

the point is that amber heard, herself, proved you wrong

No, you're just saying that. Because you have no proof.

Jen0125 posted...

Wow shocking I hope they don't have a hard time working 15 different trials to do their appeal

Pay attention will you...... They're appealing for a different reason that you thought they should.... If they appealed your way they would've needed extra trials to prove the lawyers were incompetent. But that isn't what they are going for....

Now for this:

Remember when I said:
Raze_Razel posted... #172

I believe that most of all.... but it's America, everyone has a price....

As I tried to explain earlier, how Pirates 6 would never work with or without Depp in this point in time (until Adam_Savage had to make it all triggering and political)... The first step is to even get Depp to listen to them. Disney is desperate, no doubt. First the shareholders would first have to fire all the "woke" executives who are suckers for fringy social media trends that created these messes in the first place. Replace them all with those who are more aligned with making content that is profitable for the mainstream audience instead of trying to shove tailor-made fringe politics into the mouths of the majority. Once the effect of such changes are seen, it would garner more attention from A-list actors to want in on that action.

I'm sure that when they'll approach him for Pirates 6....or maybe 7, considering the damage to Pirates 6 is already in motion. It'll bomb no matter what. If they learn from that mistake, they'll want Depp to come to save the franchise.

They would grovel to him and offer all those Alpacas and the GDP of Guam to get him to the table... I don't even think Depp would say no to that.

Well...this just happened:
"The Movie Executive Who Fired Johnny Depp Is Officially Stepping Down"
https://insidethemagic.net/2022/06/toby-emmerich-stepping-down-fired-johnny-depp-rwb1/

Granted that this isn't from Disney (yet), it's from WB concerning Depp's firing from "Fantastic Beasts".....but it PROVES the big machine is already turning in favor of Depp, rectifying it's mistakes.

Now, Toby Emmerich, the Warner Bros. executive who fired Depp, has made the decision to step away from his post. Deadline reported:

the chairman of Warner Bros. Pictures Group is segueing to a lucrative five-year production deal on the lot, so hes not going far. He apparently was offered to stay, but would have had to cede oversee on Warner Bros. Animation and DC, an option the former New Line President didnt want.

While it seems that Emmerichs departure from his post isnt directly related to the Johnny Depp vs. Amber Heard trial, the executive did take heat for his choice to let Depp go two years ago.
...
At this time, the exact trajectory of Warner Bros. upcoming movies and whether or not Depp or Heard will have roles in them remains unclear.

...so reading between the lines (or just helping Adam_Savage learn how to read, lol). It's basically saying big-time movie EP Toby Emmerich (who had a hand in making movies like Dumb & Dumber, Se7en, Last Man Standing, Boogie Nights, Dark City, Austin Powers trilogy, Blade 2, Rush Hour trilogy, Elf, A History of Violence, The Hobbit Trilogy, It, ...and the new Elvis movie) still had a 5 year contract with WB. It seems Toby couldn't be fired directly, so they offered him a demotion. From making blockbuster movies, to making cheap DC cartoons (which most of them are garbage fluff anyways). But I guess he said screw that and left altogether.

In relation to what I said above, it's a strong and accurate prediction to think Disney would follow the same path as WB has. To get rid of all the "woke" execs, so the studios can be more appealing IF Depp returned to do business with them.

WB is wrestling with the fact that Aquaman 2 is going to bomb no matter what, because of Heard's bullshit lies and Depp getting fired from Fantastic Beasts (which too will be subject to failing as well).....so WB is frantically trying to save face here, it's quite obvious.

So what about Disney? Think the 'wisest' thing to do is the same thing? Junk the "wokeness", and make with the Alpacas?....we'll see....

Adam_Savage posted...

anyways, her lawyer said they're appealing

so yes, that is, in fact, a thing she is able to do

whodathunkit

Don't be disingenuous with the context here.

Their appeal is NOT on the basis that her lawyer were stupid, as Jen was implying should happen. Now the game changed in the short amount of time between the verdict read and before I made this thread, to right now after Heard's lawyer spoke in the interview on the Today show.

They are directly going for the appeal based on social media bias that influenced the jury's decision....that's the OFFICIAL reasoning now.

Except what Heard didn't account for was "Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus" ("False in one thing, false in everything.")

Like you Adam, once you lie even a little, you're done in the whole argument....like 'moving goalposts'....

Heard was proven over and over and over again, how she lied. Doesn't matter if the internet picked up on that and ran with it...She's still a fuckin' little liar. Who is just as done.

ReturnOfFa posted...

normal guy

Oh is that the video Heard edited before signing copyrights to TMZ?....yeah, let's see a 'normal guy' get pushed into a corner with Heard's bullshit and abuse before and after what you saw in the video (as was proven by the TMZ EP himself) shall we?

gaslight much?

What do these three have in common?

Better music that the shit you probably listen to, and I'm not even a Marylin Manson fan.

exactly. nobody here has been interested in defending here, just merely...acknowledging that Depp is not of solid character whatsoever.

He didn't need to be. He doesn't hide from his substance abuse problems, and pretty much every Ex from every major relationship he's had vouched for him. ....if Heard is calling him a monster, she failed to prove it. Depp having his moments of anger (because he was constantly cornered by her) doesn't mean he's a monster, it means he's an angry guy at his wits end....again, as was proven during the trial.....Want to know what a Monster is?...What Chris Brown did to Rihanna, that's what monsters do.

Jen0125 posted...

People on this board are extremely idiotic and weird.

...and you're taking one for the team to prove that?

streamofthesky posted...

Equity: equal outcome (regardless of circumstances, like ability or experience or hours worked)

That's why 'women' like Heard play mind-games, it wouldn't be hard for a Chris Brown type monster to break her in half. So her only strength is to lie, lie, and lie more, make pics and videos out of context so she can create her own story, while emasculate a father in front of his children, trash an apartment and blame it on the 'monster of the husband', ...she wanted to break him, to gain a similar outcome she couldn't have achieved as if she was a man with real outmatched physical strength.

Adam_Savage posted...

abuse

is

more

than

just

physical

depp, by his own admission, is an abuser.

Semantics, if that's your logic.

Adam_Savage posted...

that's not how that works, as i'm sure you know

Actually in this case it does. Little did you know other posters have confirmed the steps needed for Heard to succeed in an Appeal case. I took the common sense route, another posters used specific language to detail. Even if I go out of my way to link every law book in the matter, you'll ignore it and keep trolling. While the rest of the world is moving on.....You're alone on this, therefore if you're the one with a hard-on for proving how the appeal process works, despite everything that was said, well good luck to you. Nobody else cares but you (and Jen)...Burden is on you, I got nothing to prove.

prove your claim without trying to move the goalpost or deflect. this is the second time i've had to say this.

reminding you again what a Fuckin' liar you are, because you're the one that tried derailing this topic with your own personal politics defending groomers....you started moving those goalposts first.

(eleventh)

Imagine missing the plot, and no one telling him everyone is long past it.

is anyone even doing this

The entire world?

Adam_Savage posted...

humor me.

Nope, I'm not doing your homework for you. You're the one keep calling me wrong, the burden is on you to show me up. Get to Work.