Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
Then her underhand implication regarding Tom falls flat, doesn't it?
what underhand implication?
I would not leave them with my niece either.
Then her underhand implication regarding Tom falls flat, doesn't it?
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/02/...ry-preponderance-of-evidence-as-the-standard/
Really really great piece for thoughtful people, that means not for rape lovers, rapists, and rapists' best friends.
what underhand implication?
I would not leave them with my niece either.
Well, all I can conclude from all of this is that I wouldn't have Allen, Polanski, or Tom, within a mile of my niece.
Then you're making the same implication.
Why lump Tom in with Woody Allen and Roman Polanski unless the implication is that he is a pedophile?
Because I do not think any of the three should be left alone with a woman, because I don't trust any of the three.
Allen and Polanski aren't infamous for being untrustworthy with women, are they?
So by lumping Tom in with pedophiles, the implication is obvious, and does you no credit.
Gross
I guess I should be happy I can't read it!
Yes, they are not to be trusted with women.
Gross
There's only one poster using Tom's name and that word in same sentence on this thread, and that's you BM. I am starting to actually feel sorry for the poor rape apologist...I am seriously considering reporting you. But since you and Tom are buddies, I guess that's between you two and the mods. Whatever.
LOL It's a bit obsessive. But he (legion) is very weird.
I see what you did there.
Just establishing your credibility, Christiekins.
You didn't think it was gross when you accused Tom of pedophilia outright and got banned for it, did you?
No... YOU are.
I am suggesting that none of the three should be trusted with WOMEN... AT ALL. Because I do not think any of the three should be left alone with a woman, because I don't trust any of the three.