It is rare that you can find something written by someone genuinely inflicted with immense mental illness, ... I savour such masterpieces when I run across them. Here is a gem I discovered on the image board ichan today and feel deserves a permanent home on the internet (image boards don't archive permanently) :
What you can't see that wants the stadium lights left all night and an attack dog ban by the year 2011,abducts 38,000 children each year,suffocates people who sleep alone and attacks their genitals,may be planning an anal attack when your naked or in your bathrobe.I wonder how many gun lock keys are going to vanish mysteriosly this year and if the alarm is going to get pulled down when I'm wearing that sound amplifier that I bought.By the way many people you'd least suspect, big mouths,bossers and most of the other creepfaces are being run by women who tell them what to do and say.The thing your living with is leaving the windows and doors open so they can get in,if they don't already have the keys and may be planning to attack you.That's why they don't want people on the streets at 1 or 2 in the morning bothering what you can't see at the stores you think are closed.How many pensioned seniors are going to get popped
this week from a bullet that comes out of nowhere.That's where the creeps you look at are hiding every night,skip out for a few minutes from our slower time.
4 Dec 2010
7 Nov 2010
Microsoft and their .Net BULLSHIT, rejection of spirituality
.Net literature (propaganda) brags on and on about how you can use an integer and polymorphise it across languages into C# due to the root class System.Object, but is this not extremely physical realm biased? What use is it to half of the human existence which is in the spiritual realm, what support is there for spiritual energy or a soul?
MICROSOFT HAS NO SOUL, MICROSOFT FUNDAMENTALLY REJECTS THE CONCEPT OF SOLE IN A MORBID ATTEMPT TO ABSOLVE THE QUESTIONS THEY POINT ON THEMSELVES WITH THEIR MOTHERCUNTING .NET TECHNOLOGY.
MICROSOFT HAS NO SOUL, MICROSOFT FUNDAMENTALLY REJECTS THE CONCEPT OF SOLE IN A MORBID ATTEMPT TO ABSOLVE THE QUESTIONS THEY POINT ON THEMSELVES WITH THEIR MOTHERCUNTING .NET TECHNOLOGY.
5 Nov 2010
Cry me a fucking river...
Well bloody hell, you could buy a lot, I bet, in Africa for a hootin' dollar. How about in BUMFUCK America where I am? I am lucky if I can get away with charging a $.99 episode of 24 to my mom's credit card on iTunes. On the odd weekend she lets me borrow the car and I can get a $.99 parfait and $.99 sweat tea at McDonalds. A dollar a MOTHER FUCKING DAY? I WISH I HAD THE LUXURY.
So how about some consideration for us Americans who have to live on less than a dollar a day? Where is the fucking sympathy, CRY ME A RIVER, STARTING NOW!
28 Oct 2010
Jackoff License
Two important questions about jacking off that are on my mind these days:
(1) Isn't part of the money we pay to purchase porn a sort of license for even the sickest, ugliest, most slothful fuck of society to get to see the pussy of the most beautiful girl being hammer, and so from it jack off and gain pleasure he never could have been afforded 200 years ago (before the existence of good porn)? In essense, I propose that you are paying for the girl to get naked on video so that you will be blessed with access to viewing pussy that you don't have access to fucking. Also the girl knows what is going to happen with that porn, so she is, through the passage of money, giving sanction to what you will do with it. There should be not guilt involved -- unless you are a fucking pirate.
On the other hand -- this definitely means it is wrong, fucking wrong and immoral to be jacking off to Facebook photos, like so many of teenagers do these days. Those girls did not friend you to implicitly give sanction to your jacking off on their photos, they had no fucking CLUE that is what your intentions were you mother fucking dweeb!!!
Now the other thing... jacking off to underage girls, by no goddamn stretch of the imagination whatsoever should the faggots that read my blog thing this implies *I* would do such a thing, but I have a theory that I wonder if you fucking perverts can confirm or deny, a law of masturbation, which I propose as below:
[By the way, I am talking about FULLY CLOTHED, not illegal images.]
(masturbation postulate #3): The wrongness of jacking off to underage girls is wrong to the degree that the girl is young and NOT A CELEBRITY. Celebrity status "virtually" increases a girl's age by 8 years, so jacking off to a 10 year old celebrity would be the equivalent, morally, to jacking off the a non-celebrity 18 year old's Facebook photo.
(1) Isn't part of the money we pay to purchase porn a sort of license for even the sickest, ugliest, most slothful fuck of society to get to see the pussy of the most beautiful girl being hammer, and so from it jack off and gain pleasure he never could have been afforded 200 years ago (before the existence of good porn)? In essense, I propose that you are paying for the girl to get naked on video so that you will be blessed with access to viewing pussy that you don't have access to fucking. Also the girl knows what is going to happen with that porn, so she is, through the passage of money, giving sanction to what you will do with it. There should be not guilt involved -- unless you are a fucking pirate.
On the other hand -- this definitely means it is wrong, fucking wrong and immoral to be jacking off to Facebook photos, like so many of teenagers do these days. Those girls did not friend you to implicitly give sanction to your jacking off on their photos, they had no fucking CLUE that is what your intentions were you mother fucking dweeb!!!
Now the other thing... jacking off to underage girls, by no goddamn stretch of the imagination whatsoever should the faggots that read my blog thing this implies *I* would do such a thing, but I have a theory that I wonder if you fucking perverts can confirm or deny, a law of masturbation, which I propose as below:
[By the way, I am talking about FULLY CLOTHED, not illegal images.]
(masturbation postulate #3): The wrongness of jacking off to underage girls is wrong to the degree that the girl is young and NOT A CELEBRITY. Celebrity status "virtually" increases a girl's age by 8 years, so jacking off to a 10 year old celebrity would be the equivalent, morally, to jacking off the a non-celebrity 18 year old's Facebook photo.
You decide:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)