"pederast" - that is a new word for me, but in context at the start of the article I deduced and inferred it...but still - I had to check the new word and this is what.....
A pederast is: A man who has sexual relations, especially anal intercourse, with a boy - just to put it on the table and be explicit and frank about it.
I sort of deduced it already in context, but nonetheless hadn't read that word before - so thanks for adding a word to the vocabulary.
Seems to me these faggots are a pile a sticks effing a lot up - and they are shame upon those of us "gay" with joy in life.
~
I'll read the rest cause I'm learning about South Africa in your writing and South Africa tis one of the founding members of BRICS so probably be advisable to understand the history from the perspective of somebody floated their boat globally and now settled peacefully one can hope when they are in their 9th decade!
Thanks, Ken, yes it was a new word for me too when researching SA history and I was shocked and so sad about these horrid deviants. There is no hope for them being eternally damned IMHO.
Thank you for being one of the few who cares to read and learn.
Perhaps - you were just facetiously presenting an counter point to this from the link previous:
From Scott Ritter - of all folks - the fella predicted "war" upon Iran so many times that I refuted - but lately I concur mostly with his "take" on the situation at hand - he said this:
~
First and foremost, Iran has been engaged in a strategic policy premised on a pivot away from Europe and the United States, and toward Russia, China, and the Eurasian landmass. This shift has been driven by Iran’s frustration over the US-driven policy of economic sanctions, and the inability and/or unwillingness on the part of the collective West to find a path forward that would see these sanctions lifted. The failure of the Iranian nuclear deal (the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, or JCPOA) to produce the kind of economic opportunities that had been promised at its signing has been a major driver behind this Iranian eastward pivot. In its stead, Iran has joined both the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) and the BRICS forum and has directed its diplomatic energies into seeing Iran thoroughly and productively integrated into both groups.
If that is the case, then maybe I understand the video presented - but I still think that video didn't merit a mention and if me and my family were stuck in effing Gaza - I'd say - "fuck it" - lets go to the beach.
ps - P&S - it is in the record - many times Scott Ritter was the boy who called "wolf" when it never happened, and some of us at the time called him out on that.....but that is old history - tis in the record. What matters now is Scott Ritter after making so many false calls still seems to have the "pulse" of the situation especially being how poorly he has been treated lately - I think that sharpens a man's mind.
Now I'm working my way down this article and while I don't care for narrative "pushers" do you deny the folks in Gaza a bit of fun in the sun on the beach? Cause that video seems to me - just adds to the confusion - in a way I find it offensive to the 30000 + that are dead.
Some dipshit posting on the boob-tube of some folks enjoying some beach time infers from that - that its all a tactical situation?
I'd like an explanation please on why you felt that video fit in the narrative of this article. I've already said I find it offensive - are you saying the 30000 + are not dead - the host of the video in the comfort of wherever he resides seems to suggest as such - I find that offensive.
My take on it is it is sort of statement - that we refuse to leave and "fuck you" - bomb us on the beach you bastards.
Maybe that is what you were trying to suggest, but the way it was presented didn't read as such. Maybe I'm just confused, but do you deny over 30000 have died? Or is that just another lie?
I think it shows resolution of the folks there to stay put and defend their homeland. I consider it wise in behavior and likely the act of folks suffered so much that now they are fearless.
If I was in a trench it would be folks of this nature I'd just assume be in the trench with.
With respect but indignation upon all the harm - that having a bit of fun in the beach does not dismiss. I'll read the rest in full later, stew on this a bit, and maybe post again.
In fact, I find myself confused after watching that - and now I choose not to read the rest until I understand why that video is in this article. I don't deny the veracity of it, but the narrative of it leaves me speechless.
P&S Sir:
"pederast" - that is a new word for me, but in context at the start of the article I deduced and inferred it...but still - I had to check the new word and this is what.....
A pederast is: A man who has sexual relations, especially anal intercourse, with a boy - just to put it on the table and be explicit and frank about it.
I sort of deduced it already in context, but nonetheless hadn't read that word before - so thanks for adding a word to the vocabulary.
Seems to me these faggots are a pile a sticks effing a lot up - and they are shame upon those of us "gay" with joy in life.
~
I'll read the rest cause I'm learning about South Africa in your writing and South Africa tis one of the founding members of BRICS so probably be advisable to understand the history from the perspective of somebody floated their boat globally and now settled peacefully one can hope when they are in their 9th decade!
~
BK
Thanks, Ken, yes it was a new word for me too when researching SA history and I was shocked and so sad about these horrid deviants. There is no hope for them being eternally damned IMHO.
Thank you for being one of the few who cares to read and learn.
Blessings
AP
I try to read all of your articles.....they are chock full of info.
I appreciate them ---- even if sometimes they trigger a bit of a reaction.
...... sometimes I come back and read them again after I've slept on it.
Ken
Thanks, Ken for your dedication. I often go back a year looking at what was going on then and see how it panned out - hindsight is 20/20 Ha ha! :-)
Perhaps - you were just facetiously presenting an counter point to this from the link previous:
From Scott Ritter - of all folks - the fella predicted "war" upon Iran so many times that I refuted - but lately I concur mostly with his "take" on the situation at hand - he said this:
~
First and foremost, Iran has been engaged in a strategic policy premised on a pivot away from Europe and the United States, and toward Russia, China, and the Eurasian landmass. This shift has been driven by Iran’s frustration over the US-driven policy of economic sanctions, and the inability and/or unwillingness on the part of the collective West to find a path forward that would see these sanctions lifted. The failure of the Iranian nuclear deal (the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, or JCPOA) to produce the kind of economic opportunities that had been promised at its signing has been a major driver behind this Iranian eastward pivot. In its stead, Iran has joined both the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) and the BRICS forum and has directed its diplomatic energies into seeing Iran thoroughly and productively integrated into both groups.
If that is the case, then maybe I understand the video presented - but I still think that video didn't merit a mention and if me and my family were stuck in effing Gaza - I'd say - "fuck it" - lets go to the beach.
ps - P&S - it is in the record - many times Scott Ritter was the boy who called "wolf" when it never happened, and some of us at the time called him out on that.....but that is old history - tis in the record. What matters now is Scott Ritter after making so many false calls still seems to have the "pulse" of the situation especially being how poorly he has been treated lately - I think that sharpens a man's mind.
Now I'm working my way down this article and while I don't care for narrative "pushers" do you deny the folks in Gaza a bit of fun in the sun on the beach? Cause that video seems to me - just adds to the confusion - in a way I find it offensive to the 30000 + that are dead.
Some dipshit posting on the boob-tube of some folks enjoying some beach time infers from that - that its all a tactical situation?
I'd like an explanation please on why you felt that video fit in the narrative of this article. I've already said I find it offensive - are you saying the 30000 + are not dead - the host of the video in the comfort of wherever he resides seems to suggest as such - I find that offensive.
My take on it is it is sort of statement - that we refuse to leave and "fuck you" - bomb us on the beach you bastards.
Maybe that is what you were trying to suggest, but the way it was presented didn't read as such. Maybe I'm just confused, but do you deny over 30000 have died? Or is that just another lie?
I think it shows resolution of the folks there to stay put and defend their homeland. I consider it wise in behavior and likely the act of folks suffered so much that now they are fearless.
If I was in a trench it would be folks of this nature I'd just assume be in the trench with.
With respect but indignation upon all the harm - that having a bit of fun in the beach does not dismiss. I'll read the rest in full later, stew on this a bit, and maybe post again.
BK
In fact, I find myself confused after watching that - and now I choose not to read the rest until I understand why that video is in this article. I don't deny the veracity of it, but the narrative of it leaves me speechless.