It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Bundy Militia Used Women As Human Shields

page: 15
16
<< 12  13  14   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 15 2014 @ 11:36 PM
link   
reply to post by TKDRL
 


Yeah, that was one of the interviews I listened to.

I feel for ya, brother, with the headstrong women.

Mine would be just the other way 'round - grabbing me by the collar and trying to keep ME in the house. yes, that actually happened, a few months ago. she blocked the door with her body when there was a ruckus and some screaming going on outside in the street, and what sounded like two gunshots, and I was headed for the door.

"No you don't mister" she says.

How in the hell do you argue with that? Especially when they get "that look"?


edit on 2014/4/15 by nenothtu because: (no reason given)




posted on Apr, 15 2014 @ 11:40 PM
link   

nenothtu
reply to post by undo
 


Not ostracise - I'd buy you a coffee for inclusion, just not a beer.

And not Starbucks, either. those folk are pure evil.




i've drank before. booze makes me relaxed. but i gave it up. also gave up a bunch of other stuff as well.

anyway, i don't know how else to put this to you but -- holey rusted metal batman, get yer facts straight.



posted on Apr, 15 2014 @ 11:43 PM
link   

undo
reply to post by nenothtu
 


yeah very dangerous thing they were doing. i agree with you on that 100%, and i think the gov could've handled it better as well. still doesnt mean "Bundy Militia Used Women as Human Shields." it doesn't matter if it sounds crazy to us, it still needs to be accurately reported


yes, the headline was inaccurate, but it wasn't my headline.

The idea was floated, and even worse, publicized. I'm hoping that something said here will catch on, and make them rethink the next time it happens, and someone says "well Sheriff Mack had this GREAT idea back during the Bundy Uprising..."



posted on Apr, 15 2014 @ 11:50 PM
link   

nenothtu

diggindirt
What several folk here have apparently failed to see---this was a protest. It was not a war.



Well now, I admit freely that it's been many, MANY years since I've been to a protest, since I saw how ineffective they are. I HAVE been on the sharp end of things when the bullets started flying, but those were anything but protests. they meant for folk to die. Since I've not been to any actual protests in so long, please tell me - when did it become proper etiquette for "protestors" to show up armed?

Obviously, that change occurred sometime in the interim, since this was alleged to be a "protest", and not a young war brewing with militia and government staring at one another through the wire, and all armed to the teeth.




It was a protest, pure and simple, against the militaristic tactics of the federal government in a civil matter.



Protest against militaristic tactics? How does one do that by using... militaristic tactics? Does one fight fire with fire, or dos one use water instead?




Whether it was over grazing rights or selling raw milk, it was a gathering of the people to exercise their right to peaceably assemble to petition the government for redress of wrong.



Redress of grievances. "Wrong" was determined entirely in the other direction, and appears to b sort of subjective in this case.




Lots of ideas are tossed around during these planning sessions. You might be amazed...if you were ever involved enough or cared enough about an issue to do more than sit and type on your keyboard.
The paternalistic attitude I see on this board absolutely disgusts me. The idea of a partnership in marriage seems alien to those of you who are slandering the men and women who are out there doing what needs to be done.



Son (I add that to emphasize my "paternalistic attitude"), I've done a good bit more than just type on my keyboard. There are more options than just walking in the streets carrying a sign and yelling, alternated with bouts of furious typing. I may have gone a different route than you, but I've not just been sitting on my ass wondering where the "any" key is.

"Partnership in marriage" would imply to me... a partnership. When both of you do the same things, one of you is entirely unnecessary. There is a division of labor in a partnership, and each does their part, what they do best, for the good of the whole. they don't butt heads both trying to pull the same lever.

Doing what needs to be done? For whom? For Bundy, or for his cows? To quote Clint Eastwood, "Dyin' ain't much of a livin', boy". Dying for cows, probably scrapes near the bottom of the barrel for causes worth dying for. Dying for a rancher who's throwing a snit because he didn't get his way in fattening his herd on the public dime probably doesn't rank much higher.




My great-grandmother campaigned for 30 years before she saw laws passed that allowed her to vote. I've been at this activism for change for over 40 years. I've had some victories and a few defeats. But one thing I can say with certainty---the keyboard warriors didn't get anything done, it was the people with their feet in the streets, making the noise who got the attention of the slime in their state capitals and DC.



See above for what I think of your "keyboard warriors" assessment. They're right up there with the "sign toting warriors" for effective. Have you ever heard the phrase "never bring a knife to a gunfight"? I guess paper cuts from the sign wielding "warriors" CAN be pretty nasty.




When was it not proper to be armed at a protest? The cops are always armed. It's been many, many a moon since I've attended a protest without my weapon.
This was a protest. The militia were there in support of the protest. What's hard to understand about it? The militia didn't begin it, they showed up to support it. When a group of that size shows up, out of respect for the abilities of the people involved, the leadership of the supporting organization will be consulted in the planning stages. Lots of ideas are tossed out in the planning stages and as the protest continues.

Do you fight fire with fire or use water? You use whatever is most effective in getting your goal accomplished. In this case it was to defuse the situation that was developing. A good combination of fire and water in the fight accomplished the goal of having the thugs removed without bloodshed. I'd say the good guys won the first round.

Partnership in marriage? You betcha. My husband has certain strengths that I don't possess. He is no warrior despite having served honorably in the US Air Force. He didn't shoot at anybody, his talents lie with language so he was in the Security Service. My strengths are organizational and the ability to speak coherently so while he is always in the background in our public life, his support is no less just because his physical disabilities don't allow for him to head up the march.

Now, you admit that you haven't attended a protest in many years. And yet you somehow have all the knowledge and wisdom required to run one effectively, efficiently and safely. You stand in judgement of the people who are out there with boots on the ground because they didn't act just like you presume they should. You make cracks about how you've supported them in the past and then turn around and admit you've never been to a protest rally in many, many years. So you've been sending bucks to people you've never seen in action? Or was all your support given in your keyboard warrior persona?

As for protests not accomplishing anything---I suppose you missed the '60s. Rosa Parks started something by refusing to obey an unjust law. She didn't have a gun but a lot of the people who came to support her did and all the cops who opposed her supporters had guns and fire hoses and dogs.
I lived in Nashville in April of 1968---under martial law. I know bad things can happen---even when 99.9% of those involved have pure motives in their hearts.
Nixon promised to pull us out of Nam and did it---only to turn the military contractors loose on US citizens with his War on Drugs. Reagan expanded it to the world. Now we have the entire camel in the tent and the smell is overpowering. The people must stop that war too. With peaceful protests.
If you think 500 people showing up on a legislator's doorstep won't get their attention, you are very wrong, sir. Especially if a goodly portion of those people are voters in his/her district. I'm an activist because I don't want to shoot anybody or have anybody shoot me. I want to work within the framework laid out by the founding fathers toward a "more perfect union." Sometimes that means breaking unjust laws or refusing to bow to arbitrary authority as did the men who won freedom in the American Revolution. Sometimes it means protesting in front of a legislator's office until the message is received, loud and clear. The legalization of marijuana and hemp in numerous states has been accomplished with just such protests. Not a fighting war. It is the government killing people in the War on Drugs.

Fluoride has been removed from several municipal water systems as a result of protests. Not by war.

There is NOT today, a giant, corporately-owned amusement park and golf course in the US Recreational Area known as Land Between the Lakes because of protests. Nobody got shot but a bunch of concerned, activist citizens got into the streets and the halls and offices of the state and federal legislators.

If you want war and think you know how to run one, there are wars aplenty in foreign lands. Go for it. But stop it with trying to demonize people who are doing work about which you know nothing. You've acknowledged your ignorance on the subject so now all that's left is to apologize to those you've offended. That's what a real man does.
Your attitude of absolute righteousness in knowing just how to manage a scenario like this protest because you've been in the midst of gunfire is just ludicrous.
Maybe I begin to see the reason you haven't attended a protest---
---they wouldn't let you step in and run it....so you stay home with your testosterone and your keyboard.

As for your question about taking a knife to a gun fight? I prefer to have both. Bullets run out sooner or later.



posted on Apr, 16 2014 @ 12:24 AM
link   

diggindirt

Now, you admit that you haven't attended a protest in many years. And yet you somehow have all the knowledge and wisdom required to run one effectively, efficiently and safely. You stand in judgement of the people who are out there with boots on the ground because they didn't act just like you presume they should. You make cracks about how you've supported them in the past and then turn around and admit you've never been to a protest rally in many, many years. So you've been sending bucks to people you've never seen in action? Or was all your support given in your keyboard warrior persona?



I'm out for the night, but before I go this requires a response. I don't know how you got the notion that I have the knowledge to run a protest. I don't. I don't involve myself in such useless efforts. My talents lie in entirely other directions than "protests". I don't, and never have, "sent bucks", nor have I ever claimed to. My support of the militias has already been spelled out, and it has now come to an end, as of this morning. It was boots on the ground and face in the dirt, and had not a single, solitary thing to do with "protests". I can' even begin to imagine what gave you the idea that it did.

I'll let the "keyboard warrior" crack slide. You have no idea who I am or what I'm capable of, so it matters nary a bit what you think of it.

I didn't miss the 60's.

I lived in Cleveland during the Hough Riots. Now THERE was a protest for you!

I've sat at the Woolworth's counter.

I live, right now, in an inner city. I look around me and see not a single goddamned gain from all of that. Maybe out in the suburbs you see something different.




If you want war and think you know how to run one, there are wars aplenty in foreign lands. Go for it.



Been there, done that, checked it off and got the t-shirt... and I was damned good at it. That is PRECISELY why I don't want to see it here - but if it's a war you must have, then at least get it right!

Men with guns facing off with other men with guns is not my idea of a "protest", peaceful or otherwise, but I DO have some idea of how that scenario all too often plays out.

I guess I'm just not a "real man", because I apologize to NO ONE when they are in the wrong. I can't imagine caring if they are offended or not. I never promised not to offend them.

I have no idea how to run a protest, nor any desire to run one. I'll leave that to you and the Flower Children. Militias aren't for "protest" - they have another purpose entirely, but as I said I'm done with them now, too, so carry on. Make protestors out of them if you can. I'm going fishing for the next few years until they get played out.

I'm done with it.



posted on Apr, 16 2014 @ 01:18 AM
link   
reply to post by nenothtu
 


Some things just aren't worth dying for, I believe in picking your battles. Besides, the trash isn't gonna take itself out.



posted on Apr, 16 2014 @ 02:17 PM
link   

SubTruth
We all have to ask ourselves........What is the real truth and who is feeding us lies. What if the PTB wanted to undermine the militia movement how would they sell something like that?

Maybe they would plant people and have them do and say things that would be an instant turn off for masses. The truth is so hard to see today under all the layers of lies and the lairs telling them.


it kinda reminds me of the rumors and lies spread about gays and jews, by a certain german political party, when they were in power...



posted on Apr, 16 2014 @ 02:25 PM
link   

stargatetravels
So everyone tears the OP a new one when they think it's liberal spin or don't like the source, but when we find out a militia member did say it and Fox & The Blaze report the exact same thing, nobody mentions it?
Typical ATS political nonsense, this thread is a sad example of how ats is now a political cess pool


because everyone is ignoring the fact that this ex-sheriff arrived to the party late, and as a result, did not get to put this idea up for vote for implementation...so as i'm understanding it, the women we saw up front were actually unconnected to this man's idea, as they were there before he got the chance to suggest it...his idea never went any further than the inside of his own head....



posted on Apr, 16 2014 @ 11:09 PM
link   

nenothtu
You're gonna need some paper to back that claim up. Any conviction will do. Otherwise, it's just hot air and sour grapes.


Okay!


nenothtu
I'd knock her ass out and carry her away.


Like. A. #ing. Possession.

It is clear you are a womanizer, your friend AlphaHawk too, who don't have a good handle on what it means to say "EQUAL. RIGHTS."

Let's look at some quotes of yours to back up my claim, shall we?


nenothtu
Besides - someone HAS to be left to serve the coffee for the men who are playing cards and sitting this one out while the boys hide behind momma's aprons. You don't think that coffee is gonna make itself, do you?



my job is to protect her - even from herself, if need be.


You're quite disgusting, you know that?

Also,


nenothtu
Oddly, I'm not the one here advocating throwing them out to be shot by a BLM firing squad.

Hmmmm...



nenothtu
Evidently your mileage varies, and you'd be shoving her forward INTO the mouth of the cannon. Being as how that is who YOU are


stop putting words into my mouth and claiming you know me, because you, do, not!

A quote by ME, DISCREDITING EVERYTHING YOU F**KING ARE ABOUT TO REGRET EVER SAYING TO ME!


I agree, but we're going up against the most powerful, and the most dangerous threat to humanity next to a natural disaster, and if everyone's happy I'll be damned if I'm going to listen to said threat's demands that we fight against one another in its best interest. They had the chance to back down and prevent unneeded deaths, but government forces are pushing these people to their breaking points. They're doing this reluctantly and regretfully, because they feel they have no other choice. There was sorrow and pain in that man's voice. But if we fall back into this perpetual cycle of fighting against one another instead of the government, via this diversionary tactic and disinformation, rather than uniting against a much greater threat that has the potential to destroy the human race and the planet upon which we live, they've already won.
United we stand.
Divided we fall.
Together we're unstoppable.


In response to this post by AlphaHawk


And that tactic sickens me.

It doesn't bother me if a woman wants to take up arms and stand at the front, that's not my issue, and if that's what you thought was my issue, I apologise, maybe I wasn't clear enough?

My issue is the tactic of putting women there alone, even willingly, is cowardly and disgusting.


The link to the post in case you refuse to believe, so that even if you refuse to acknowledge its existence, you'll at least feel foolish being the misogynistic, egomaniacal control-freak you are in denying it.

You cannot deny women the right to stand up at the front, like men, alone, like men, who have that right. That is prejudiced, sexist bulls**t.
Women are not here to SERVE YOU.
Women are not here to BE YOUR #-THING.
Women are not here to BE A SYMBOL TO REMIND YOU OF YOUR SICK SENSE OF SUPERIORITY.
If your wife wanted to be at the front line, and fight, like any warrior (male OR female, they had both varieties back in the day), you have a right to argue with her till you're blue in the face, yeah sure. But the moment you put your hands on her AND FORCE HER TO YOUR WILL AND EXERT SAID WILL FORCEFULLY OVER HER, YOU YOURSELF HAVE BECOME AN OPPRESSOR!.

I believe in relationships where both partners have equal say, and equal freedom to do whatever-in-THE-F**K they want. She is an adult, she can make her own damned decisions and take care of her goddamned-self. Unless you WANT the dependent, subservient and self-hating low-self-esteem type that strokes your own ego...in that case, I give you my middle finger, and fart in your general direction.


Strong, fit women who can put up a fight and take care of themselves are among the sexiest on the planet.

And no, I wouldn't throw her into the fire (and I most certainly would not hit her either!) if she wanted to be one of those women on the front line, I'd join her side and FIGHT BY HER SIDE LIKE A REAL MAN, and be the one man right there with them, standing right next to her. I think by this point you feel very foolish by making the baseless assumption and comparison of me being like Richard Mack, because I am not. The only ways we are alike is the sense that we know women can take care of themselves and we know the government is evil and ruthless. That is where the similarities end.
edit on 16-4-2014 by Davian because: (no reason given)

edit on 16-4-2014 by Davian because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 16 2014 @ 11:22 PM
link   
Violent violation huh?

So tell me, how many BLM Agents were pushed, thrown to the ground, tazed, or had rifles aimed at their heads?

Oh wait... that happened to the protesters.

So who really showed violent tendencies here again?
edit on 16-4-2014 by MrWendal because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 17 2014 @ 12:52 AM
link   
Um hey guys,we aren't discussing a fine tuned military op here. People wander around and if the lady wants a point slot and she can shoot YOU stop her.I wouldn't try.



posted on Apr, 17 2014 @ 12:58 AM
link   
"Bundy Militia Used Women As Human Shields"

Total BeeEss.

No shots were fired.

no pictures showed any "line of women" waiting to get shot at.

the whole "strategy" was to freak out the Feds with words and it worked.

perfect reverse psy-ops.



posted on Apr, 17 2014 @ 01:29 AM
link   

xuenchen
"Bundy Militia Used Women As Human Shields"

Total BeeEss.

No shots were fired.

no pictures showed any "line of women" waiting to get shot at.

the whole "strategy" was to freak out the Feds with words and it worked.

perfect reverse psy-ops.

...Pretty much sums it up. This.
All of this. Pretty much accurate description of the reality of the situation.



posted on Apr, 17 2014 @ 02:11 PM
link   

Davian

*********

nenothtu
You're gonna need some paper to back that claim up. Any conviction will do. Otherwise, it's just hot air and sour grapes.

*********

Okay!

*********

nenothtu
I'd knock her ass out and carry her away.

*********

Like. A. #ing. Possession.



First, I see that you've not got a firm grasp on "paper". It refers to stuff found in court documents, made from trees, and having legal determinations written upon the surface of it. Without some proof that I am a "woman beater", what you've got there is called "hearsay", not even rising to the level of "admission". Which brings me to...

Point Two: You've not got a firm grasp on hyperbole, either. No, I'm not going to explain it to you. Buy a dictionary.

So, you've made a concrete accusation, with no backup.

Third: She IS a possession. Loves being possessed, as a matter of fact. Just ask her!




It is clear you are a womanizer, your friend AlphaHawk too, who don't have a good handle on what it means to say "EQUAL. RIGHTS."



Yeah baby! A "womanizer"! Can ya call me that again? I kinda like it, and the little missus can't stop laughing about it.




Let's look at some quotes of yours to back up my claim, shall we?


*****************
nenothtu
Besides - someone HAS to be left to serve the coffee for the men who are playing cards and sitting this one out while the boys hide behind momma's aprons. You don't think that coffee is gonna make itself, do you?



What? Coffee makes itself at your house? I'm sad for you, though, if your little missus doesn't even think enough of you to throw the occasional cup of coffee at you!




****************

my job is to protect her - even from herself, if need be.

****************

You're quite disgusting, you know that?



Yeah, I know. It's one of my finer points! No wonder your wife won't make you any coffee - you won't even bother to protect her! Hell fire, will she even throw a sandwich together for you every few days? Must be a miserable existence for you - but wait, I may be mistaken... You may not be married. If not, I can sort of see why... can't find one that'll have you?




Also,

**********

nenothtu
Oddly, I'm not the one here advocating throwing them out to be shot by a BLM firing squad.

Hmmmm...

**********



Yeah, how 'bout that. I'm STILL not the one advocating throwing them to the BLM firing squads. That would be YOU doing that. No wonder you can't get one to give you a cup of coffee. Not only will you not protect them, you actually advocate killing them off.

... and YOU have the nerve to call ME "quite disgusting"?




***************

nenothtu
Evidently your mileage varies, and you'd be shoving her forward INTO the mouth of the cannon. Being as how that is who YOU are

***************

stop putting words into my mouth and claiming you know me, because you, do, not!



No, but thanks for asking!

It's pretty clear that you want to kill them off, advocating putting them before the cannons and whatnot, and practically having an aneurysm because I think that's just the dumbest idea I've ever heard. I can go back and get the quotes if I need to, but it's much more fun t just handle this ignorance as it comes, rather than going backwards and chewing it again.




A quote by ME, DISCREDITING EVERYTHING YOU F**KING ARE ABOUT TO REGRET EVER SAYING TO ME!



You're wrong. I don't have any regrets, certainly not any regret of saying I'd drag my little missus AWAY from the bullets you want to throw her IN TO. There is nothing I ever will or even can say to you that I'm going to regret.

You don't know me, apparently. NO regrets.



****

I agree, but we're going up against the most powerful, and the most dangerous threat to humanity next to a natural disaster, and if everyone's happy I'll be damned if I'm going to listen to said threat's demands that we fight against one another in its best interest. They had the chance to back down and prevent unneeded deaths, but government forces are pushing these people to their breaking points. They're doing this reluctantly and regretfully, because they feel they have no other choice. There was sorrow and pain in that man's voice. But if we fall back into this perpetual cycle of fighting against one another instead of the government, via this diversionary tactic and disinformation, rather than uniting against a much greater threat that has the potential to destroy the human race and the planet upon which we live, they've already won.
United we stand.
Divided we fall.
Together we're unstoppable.

****

In response to this post by AlphaHawk

- And that tactic sickens me.

It doesn't bother me if a woman wants to take up arms and stand at the front, that's not my issue, and if that's what you thought was my issue, I apologise, maybe I wasn't clear enough?

My issue is the tactic of putting women there alone, even willingly, is cowardly and disgusting.

-

The link to the post in case you refuse to believe, so that even if you refuse to acknowledge its existence, you'll at least feel foolish being the misogynistic, egomaniacal control-freak you are in denying it.



I don't deny it's existence - I deny it's relevance. How does that apply at all to your viewpoint that women ought to be shot first?




You cannot deny women the right to stand up at the front, like men, alone, like men, who have that right. That is prejudiced, sexist bulls**t.


Who are you to tell me what I can and cannot deny? I was talking about MY wife, not yours. I could care less what you do with yours or that you want her dead. If my wife is ok with my tyrannical rule, and the fact that I'd die to save her, who are you to deny her choice?




Women are not here to SERVE YOU.
Women are not here to BE YOUR #-THING.
Women are not here to BE A SYMBOL TO REMIND YOU OF YOUR SICK SENSE OF SUPERIORITY.


You remind me of my sick sense of superiority well enough - don't need a woman for that, I've got you!



If your wife wanted to be at the front line, and fight, like any warrior (male OR female, they had both varieties back in the day), you have a right to argue with her till you're blue in the face, yeah sure. But the moment you put your hands on her AND FORCE HER TO YOUR WILL AND EXERT SAID WILL FORCEFULLY OVER HER, YOU YOURSELF HAVE BECOME AN OPPRESSOR!.


Fair enough. At least she'd be alive to whine about it ("it" being my "oppressiveness" in keeping her from dying). I'll tell you what - when I go get her, I'll leave yours there for dead, per your request. Does that work for you?

As an aside, isn't the use of force being oppressive in ALL cases? That being the case, I'd be saving her from herself, saving her from becoming an oppressor by my oppressiveness in dragging her off the battlefield - it's a public service, keeping her from oppressing those poor little BLM agents, and saving her life to boot. Win - win!




I believe in relationships where both partners have equal say, and equal freedom to do whatever-in-THE-F**K they want. She is an adult, she can make her own damned decisions and take care of her goddamned-self. Unless you WANT the dependent, subservient and self-hating low-self-esteem type that strokes your own ego...in that case, I give you my middle finger, and fart in your general direction.




Talk about your stereotypes of women! Have you just not dealt with them much?

Now, in the matter of relationships, what you are advocating here is two leaders in one relationship. It's ok if that's what you want, but be prepared for a lifetime of being dragged around by your 'nads if that's what you get. The problem with two leaders in one organization is that nothing ever gets done, since they are both always trying to lead in different directions, and more effort is put into fighting it out than doing.

If you're just in it for the insults, then may the fleas of a thousand camels infest your armpits when you lift your arm to fling that bird.




Strong, fit women who can put up a fight and take care of themselves are among the sexiest on the planet.



I can see you with that sort, and if that's what you like, have at it. Then again, ANY woman would fit that description compared to you, I think. After all, you not only don't have the testicular fortitude to protect women, you feel so inferior to them that you'd actually throw them to the wolves to rid yourself of them.




And no, I wouldn't throw her into the fire



Then why are you so irate at me for saying that I'd get her the hell out of it? Can't have it both ways - you'd either turn your back on her or not. I made MY choice, and I'll stick with it. You need to make one.




(and I most certainly would not hit her either!)



Of course not - she would doubtless kick your ass if you did.




if she wanted to be one of those women on the front line, I'd join her side and FIGHT BY HER SIDE LIKE A REAL MAN, and be the one man right there with them, standing right next to her.



Sure, mac, sure. It's one thing to throw out flowery words to try and attract women with your high and mighty enlightenment, and quite another to actually try dodging the bullets. I'm going to come right out and say it - I don't believe you. I've seen men talk the talk before, using nearly the same words as you do, and I've seen those same men hide and whimper when it really got to the point of tossing lead. You are not practical, going by your own words, and that tells me all I need to know about how you would handle the ultimate in practical, when reality invaded your fantasy.

Translated, that means that from all those flowery ideological words, I can tell you wouldn't know a real man if he pissed on the toes of your shoes.




I think by this point you feel very foolish by making the baseless assumption and comparison of me being like Richard Mack, because I am not. The only ways we are alike is the sense that we know women can take care of themselves and we know the government is evil and ruthless. That is where the similarities end.



You want to put your women in battle, AT THE GODDAMNED FRONT.

I see a lot of similarity between you and Mack right where it counts...

No, I don't feel foolish at all. I call 'em like I see 'em.


edit on 2014/4/17 by nenothtu because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 17 2014 @ 02:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Davian
 




It helps if you understand hyperbole, sarcasm and humour... if you don't then you have no business calling out nenothtu.
He and his gal are happy and he would do anything to save her from dying for some cattle? What's your problem? That he kids around? That he's an old school kinda guy?

Get a grip man....


I don't talk the way he does but I also "get" what he's saying and what a joke is and what lengths you'd go to in order to protect loved ones.



new topics

top topics



 
16
<< 12  13  14   >>

log in

join