|
fREEDOM oF sPEECH 01/25/08 (pg. 3)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Lebezniatnikov |
| quote: | Originally posted by we_R_DNA
Ahh. . .ahhhhh. . .. wait caucus don't matter? Then why the fek do these political figures spend thousands of dollars on these psychological ad-campaigns? Oh yeah money doesn't matter and the FED just creates this sh!t out of their own bum.
Wait wait, lulz you almost had me believing you; seriously! |
Don't confuse primaries with caucuses. The only caucus that matters is the first - Iowa - and those that are binding - like Nevada. Louisiana is neither, so there isn't any money or time spent on it and the results are therefore an outlier anyhow. |
|
|
| DJ Shibby |
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
:stongue: :stongue:
wow. why does america produce so many freakin crazy people? oh, and sentences & paragraphs are your friend. |
I'd say that many, many human beings have parts of their cognizence decreed as 'corrupted' or crazy.
I'm not going to point fingers, because I applaud those who take active hand in their own thoughts and destinies as you are all doing here, but surely you don't think yourself completely sane without at least an explanation?
I know I don't, and I'll gladly explain if anyone ever wished to know. :) |
|
|
| Renegade |
| quote: | Originally posted by Trancer-X
Transfer. This is a technique of projecting positive or negative qualities (praise or blame) of a person, entity, object, or value (an individual, group, organization, nation, patriotism, etc.) to another in order to make the second more acceptable or to discredit it. This technique is generally used to transfer blame from one member of a conflict to another. It evokes an emotional response which stimulates the target to identify with recognized authorities.
Psychological Operations Field Manual No.33-1, Department of the Army, August 1979 |
Haha, oh you want to go down that path do you? You believe in the NWO, that 9/11 was orchestrated by the government and you support Ron Paul: do you really want to explore the psychology of other people? Just for fun, why don't we explore what might make your mind tick?
First of all, you seem largely incapable of creative or novel thought. Basically all your posts here are just the unparsed regurgitation of other peoples ideas. You're like the man in Searle's Chinese Room: receiving information from one side and passing it out the other with seemingly little conscious reflection.
Second of all, you seem to have a very narrow (one might almost say, obsessive?) scope of interest. Basically all your posts in this forum have been on the same extremely narrow field of subjects. I am going to speculate that your interests and behaviour outside of this forum are similarly narrow and obsessive.
Third of all, your world-view seems extremely inflexible and does not appear to have advanced or changed one iota in all the time you've been posting here. With everyone else here - even among posters I find myself continually disagreeing with - I can identify changes (for better or worse) in what they believe. Can you name one thing, in the five years or so that you've been posting here, that you have changed your mind about? I doubt it.
All these factors are indicitive of strong left-hemispherical cognitive dominance. And I'm not talking about hemispherical dominance in that "oh, I just did a test on the internet which says I'm right-brained which means I'm creative!" sense, I'm talking about you having a cognitive pathology which renders the potential for normal, sane thought impossible. Hence, the things you believe.
In chapter 7 of this book, the neurologist VS Ramachandran discusses people who have suffered trauma (usually during a stroke) to just the right side of their brain. Some of these people regularly engage in extreme, almost comical moments of cognitive dissonance and denial (he discusses one such instance in this video). Among other things, the left-hemisphere is responsible for the creation and maintenence of a "holistic" world-view: what we might call, in Freudian terms, the "ego". Under normal circumstances, the left-hemisphere is tempered by the functions of the right-hemisphere, which - using cognitive process closely tied to the emotional centers of the brain - is capable of "over-ruling" the left-hemisphere when it becomes clear that the world-view it has created is at odds with reality. When - as is the case with stroke patients - the right-hemisphere is incapable of performing these functions, extreme delusions (completely unrecognisable to those who hold them, of course) become impossible to resist and these patients can come to believe, for instance, that their paralysed arm is not actually paralysed and that it belongs to their father. The left-brain, left to its own devices, is capable of confabulating a picture of the world that at no point intersects with reality and it is incapable of realising the discrepancy.
But this is a fairly extreme example. I don't think (correct me if I'm wrong) that you are a stroke victim suffering from trauma in the right parietal lobe. From your posts here, I think it's likely that your problem is an undeveloped rather than a damaged right-brain.
There is increasing evidence that our beliefs and our capacity to distinguish truth from falsehood are shaped by the emotional centers of the brain. This study, for one, offers direct neurological support for the idea ("While many areas of higher cognition are likely involved in assessing the truth-value of linguistic propositions, the final acceptance of a statement as 'true,' or its rejection as 'false,' seems to rely on more primitive, hedonic processing in the medial prefrontal cortex and the anterior insula"). The child-psychologist Stanley Greenspan has developed an entire theory of cognition based around the importance of emotional development to higher cognitive functions such as reason and self-control. To put it simply, emotional interaction allows for the capacity to link actions or behaviour with specific outcomes, which potentiates symbolic thought, which potentiates language and reason. Children denied (or incapable of) such emotional interactions often suffer deficits in higher-cognitive thought that fall into consistent and predictable patterns.
On page 237 of this book, Greenspan outlines the sort of cognitive deficiencies that people with abnormal emotional development typcially display. Let's see how many of them apply to you, shall we?
| quote: | When there are compromises [in emotional development], we may see significant deviations in the levels of emotional health and intelligence growth attained. These can include:
- magical and irrational thinking;
|
I think this speaks for itself. You believe in a plethora of conspiracy theories that practically define "magical and irrational thinking".
| quote: | - impulsivity rather than reflectiveness;
|
I'm not sure how impulsive you are, but your propensity to regurgitate information without comment, summary or even redaction suggests a severe lack of reflectivity concerning the information you encounter.
| quote: | - polarized (all-or-nothing) thinking, rather than integrated reasoning;
|
You seem to believe that everyone can be classified either as an enlightened freedom-fighter (you), or as mere "sheeple", complicit by their inaction in the conspiracies around them (me and everyone else). There appears to be very little nuance in your dichotemic conception of the world.
| quote: | - rigid, concrete thinking (where only a few possibilities are held onto) rather than broad-based reflection;
|
You seem to only notice and comment on information that can be squeezed into your narrow, conspiracy-based paradigm and the scope of your thought and reflection appears to be extremely narrow.
| quote: | - various limitations in the breadth and scope of possiblities considered or analytic principles used;
|
Again, wide-ranging reflection, which takes a number of diverse possibilities into account, is not an ability I can ever remember you ever demonstrating.
| quote: | - thinking constricted to any limited or narrow domain.
|
As I have already said, "you seem to have a very narrow (one might almost say, obsessive?) scope of interest. Basically all your posts in this forum have been on the same extremely narrow field of subjects".
So, based on all this, I think it's fairly clear that you have a psychological construct consistent with abnormal right-brain, emotional development. The question (and this is where it gets fun) is how this abnormal development may have occurred?
I can think of two possibilites. The first is that you suffer from some form of ASD: in other words, you are psychologically impeded from engaging in the sort of social interaction necessary for healthy psychological development. This would explain your narrow, obsessive range of interests and your ability to memorize and regurgitate a lot of information without reflection, but it doesn't explain your emotion-laden responses when people call you on your bull.
Personally, I think a better explanation is that you have only ever enjoyed a small, narrow range of social experiences: in other words, you are socially impeded from engaging in the sort of social interaction necessary for healthy psychological development. Maybe you are a loner, maybe you have only ever allowed people who share your world-view into your social-circle. Either way, this is consistent with the abnormal range of emotional interactions that create the sort of cognitive problems you display and it is also consistent with your extremely negative perception of other people (or, should I say, "sheeple"?).
So remember, everyone. Next time you get attacked by Trancer-X, don't take it personally: he only acts that way because he doesn't have any friends. |
|
|
| DJ Shibby |
| quote: | Originally posted by Renegade
Haha, oh you want to go down that path do you? You believe in the NWO, that 9/11 was orchestrated by the government and you support Ron Paul: do you really want to explore the psychology of other people? Just for fun, why don't we explore what might make your mind tick?
First of all, you seem largely incapable of creative or novel thought. Basically all your posts here are just the unparsed regurgitation of other peoples ideas. You're like the man in Searle's Chinese Room: receiving information from one side and passing it out the other with seemingly little conscious reflection.
Second of all, you seem to have a very narrow (one might almost say, obsessive?) scope of interest. Basically all your posts in this forum have been on the same extremely narrow field of subjects. I am going to speculate that your interests and behaviour outside of this forum are similarly narrow and obsessive.
Third of all, your world-view seems extremely inflexible and does not appear to have advanced or changed one iota in all the time you've been posting here. With everyone else here - even among posters I find myself continually disagreeing with - I can identify changes (for better or worse) in what they believe. Can you name one thing, in the five years or so that you've been posting here, that you have changed your mind about? I doubt it.
All these factors are indicitive of strong left-hemispherical cognitive dominance. And I'm not talking about hemispherical dominance in that "oh, I just did a test on the internet which says I'm right-brained which means I'm creative!" sense, I'm talking about you having a cognitive pathology which renders the potential for normal, sane thought impossible. Hence, the things you believe.
In chapter 7 of this book, the neurologist VS Ramachandran discusses people who have suffered trauma (usually during a stroke) to just the right side of their brain. Some of these people regularly engage in extreme, almost comical moments of cognitive dissonance and denial (he discusses one such instance in this video). Among other things, the left-hemisphere is responsible for the creation and maintenence of a "holistic" world-view: what we might call, in Freudian terms, the "ego". Under normal circumstances, the left-hemisphere is tempered by the functions of the right-hemisphere, which - using cognitive process closely tied to the emotional centers of the brain - is capable of "over-ruling" the left-hemisphere when it becomes clear that the world-view it has created is at odds with reality. When - as is the case with stroke patients - the right-hemisphere is incapable of performing these functions, extreme delusions (completely unrecognisable to those who hold them, of course) become impossible to resist and these patients can come to believe, for instance, that their paralysed arm is not actually paralysed and that it belongs to their father. The left-brain, left to its own devices, is capable of confabulating a picture of the world that at no point intersects with reality and it is incapable of realising the discrepancy.
But this is a fairly extreme example. I don't think (correct me if I'm wrong) that you are a stroke victim suffering from trauma in the right parietal lobe. From your posts here, I think it's likely that your problem is an undeveloped rather than a damaged right-brain.
There is increasing evidence that our beliefs and our capacity to distinguish truth from falsehood are shaped by the emotional centers of the brain. This study, for one, offers direct neurological support for the idea ("While many areas of higher cognition are likely involved in assessing the truth-value of linguistic propositions, the final acceptance of a statement as 'true,' or its rejection as 'false,' seems to rely on more primitive, hedonic processing in the medial prefrontal cortex and the anterior insula"). The child-psychologist Stanley Greenspan has developed an entire theory of cognition based around the importance of emotional development to higher cognitive functions such as reason and self-control. To put it simply, emotional interaction allows for the capacity to link actions or behaviour with specific outcomes, which potentiates symbolic thought, which potentiates language and reason. Children denied (or incapable of) such emotional interactions often suffer deficits in higher-cognitive thought that fall into consistent and predictable patterns.
On page 237 of this book, Greenspan outlines the sort of cognitive deficiencies that people with abnormal emotional development typcially display. Let's see how many of them apply to you, shall we?
I think this speaks for itself. You believe in a plethora of conspiracy theories that practically define "magical and irrational thinking".
I'm not sure how impulsive you are, but your propensity to regurgitate information without comment, summary or even redaction suggests a severe lack of reflectivity concerning the information you encounter.
You seem to believe that everyone can be classified either as an enlightened freedom-fighter (you), or as mere "sheeple", complicit by their inaction in the conspiracies around them (me and everyone else). There appears to be very little nuance in your dichotemic conception of the world.
You seem to only notice and comment on information that can be squeezed into your narrow, conspiracy-based paradigm and the scope of your thought and reflection appears to be extremely narrow.
Again, wide-ranging reflection, which takes a number of diverse possibilities into account, is not an ability I can ever remember you ever demonstrating.
As I have already said, "you seem to have a very narrow (one might almost say, obsessive?) scope of interest. Basically all your posts in this forum have been on the same extremely narrow field of subjects".
So, based on all this, I think it's fairly clear that you have a psychological construct consistent with abnormal right-brain, emotional development. The question (and this is where it gets fun) is how this abnormal development may have occurred?
I can think of two possibilites. The first is that you suffer from some form of ASD: in other words, you are psychologically impeded from engaging in the sort of social interaction necessary for healthy psychological development. This would explain your narrow, obsessive range of interests and your ability to memorize and regurgitate a lot of information without reflection, but it doesn't explain your emotion-laden responses when people call you on your bull.
Personally, I think a better explanation is that you have only ever enjoyed a small, narrow range of social experiences: in other words, you are socially impeded from engaging in the sort of social interaction necessary for healthy psychological development. Maybe you are a loner, maybe you have only ever allowed people who share your world-view into your social-circle. Either way, this is consistent with the abnormal range of emotional interactions that create the sort of cognitive problems you display and it is also consistent with your extremely negative perception of other people (or, should I say, "sheeple"?).
So remember, everyone. Next time you get attacked by Trancer-X, don't take it personally: he only acts that way because he doesn't have any friends. |
I don't think an attack on his character is warranted, since he really does seem to genuinely be interested in a positive cause, as well as getting people at least *thinking* about events.
Q is also the same way, incapable of really understanding or appreciating information outside of his own constructed ideologies, but I'd say that it's fine to be this way as long as you're not injuring yourself or others.
I remember arguing with you a while back about some topic regarding science (one of my favorites), and though we disagreed, I respected your philosophy and dedication and knowledge, and expected nothing in return (or perhaps even enjoyed the challenge provided by a new psyche). I think you might want to stop for a moment and do the same with trancer or q, that is their actual ideas and not what they've been told or taught.
In the end very few of us are actually "individual" egos and ids at all, but rather this self-adjusting quantum web of memetic selves and ideas creating and destroying one another (itself) in every new moment... so let's embrace that and take it a step farther and try to manipulate our holographic informational universe into something less obfuscating and apathetically cold, and perhaps into something with some new routes for success.
Whatever "success" may be. |
|
|
| Trancer-X |
| quote: | Originally posted by Renegade
Haha, oh you want to go down that path do you? You believe in the NWO, that 9/11 was orchestrated by the government and you support Ron Paul: do you really want to explore the psychology of other people? Just for fun, why don't we explore what might make your mind tick?
First of all, you seem largely incapable of creative or novel thought. Basically all your posts here are just the unparsed regurgitation of other peoples ideas. You're like the man in Searle's Chinese Room: receiving information from one side and passing it out the other with seemingly little conscious reflection.
Second of all, you seem to have a very narrow (one might almost say, obsessive?) scope of interest. Basically all your posts in this forum have been on the same extremely narrow field of subjects. I am going to speculate that your interests and behaviour outside of this forum are similarly narrow and obsessive.
Third of all, your world-view seems extremely inflexible and does not appear to have advanced or changed one iota in all the time you've been posting here. With everyone else here - even among posters I find myself continually disagreeing with - I can identify changes (for better or worse) in what they believe. Can you name one thing, in the five years or so that you've been posting here, that you have changed your mind about? I doubt it.
All these factors are indicitive of strong left-hemispherical cognitive dominance. And I'm not talking about hemispherical dominance in that "oh, I just did a test on the internet which says I'm right-brained which means I'm creative!" sense, I'm talking about you having a cognitive pathology which renders the potential for normal, sane thought impossible. Hence, the things you believe.
In chapter 7 of this book, the neurologist VS Ramachandran discusses people who have suffered trauma (usually during a stroke) to just the right side of their brain. Some of these people regularly engage in extreme, almost comical moments of cognitive dissonance and denial (he discusses one such instance in this video). Among other things, the left-hemisphere is responsible for the creation and maintenence of a "holistic" world-view: what we might call, in Freudian terms, the "ego". Under normal circumstances, the left-hemisphere is tempered by the functions of the right-hemisphere, which - using cognitive process closely tied to the emotional centers of the brain - is capable of "over-ruling" the left-hemisphere when it becomes clear that the world-view it has created is at odds with reality. When - as is the case with stroke patients - the right-hemisphere is incapable of performing these functions, extreme delusions (completely unrecognisable to those who hold them, of course) become impossible to resist and these patients can come to believe, for instance, that their paralysed arm is not actually paralysed and that it belongs to their father. The left-brain, left to its own devices, is capable of confabulating a picture of the world that at no point intersects with reality and it is incapable of realising the discrepancy.
But this is a fairly extreme example. I don't think (correct me if I'm wrong) that you are a stroke victim suffering from trauma in the right parietal lobe. From your posts here, I think it's likely that your problem is an undeveloped rather than a damaged right-brain.
There is increasing evidence that our beliefs and our capacity to distinguish truth from falsehood are shaped by the emotional centers of the brain. This study, for one, offers direct neurological support for the idea ("While many areas of higher cognition are likely involved in assessing the truth-value of linguistic propositions, the final acceptance of a statement as 'true,' or its rejection as 'false,' seems to rely on more primitive, hedonic processing in the medial prefrontal cortex and the anterior insula"). The child-psychologist Stanley Greenspan has developed an entire theory of cognition based around the importance of emotional development to higher cognitive functions such as reason and self-control. To put it simply, emotional interaction allows for the capacity to link actions or behaviour with specific outcomes, which potentiates symbolic thought, which potentiates language and reason. Children denied (or incapable of) such emotional interactions often suffer deficits in higher-cognitive thought that fall into consistent and predictable patterns.
On page 237 of this book, Greenspan outlines the sort of cognitive deficiencies that people with abnormal emotional development typcially display. Let's see how many of them apply to you, shall we?
I think this speaks for itself. You believe in a plethora of conspiracy theories that practically define "magical and irrational thinking".
I'm not sure how impulsive you are, but your propensity to regurgitate information without comment, summary or even redaction suggests a severe lack of reflectivity concerning the information you encounter.
You seem to believe that everyone can be classified either as an enlightened freedom-fighter (you), or as mere "sheeple", complicit by their inaction in the conspiracies around them (me and everyone else). There appears to be very little nuance in your dichotemic conception of the world.
You seem to only notice and comment on information that can be squeezed into your narrow, conspiracy-based paradigm and the scope of your thought and reflection appears to be extremely narrow.
Again, wide-ranging reflection, which takes a number of diverse possibilities into account, is not an ability I can ever remember you ever demonstrating.
As I have already said, "you seem to have a very narrow (one might almost say, obsessive?) scope of interest. Basically all your posts in this forum have been on the same extremely narrow field of subjects".
So, based on all this, I think it's fairly clear that you have a psychological construct consistent with abnormal right-brain, emotional development. The question (and this is where it gets fun) is how this abnormal development may have occurred?
I can think of two possibilites. The first is that you suffer from some form of ASD: in other words, you are psychologically impeded from engaging in the sort of social interaction necessary for healthy psychological development. This would explain your narrow, obsessive range of interests and your ability to memorize and regurgitate a lot of information without reflection, but it doesn't explain your emotion-laden responses when people call you on your bull.
Personally, I think a better explanation is that you have only ever enjoyed a small, narrow range of social experiences: in other words, you are socially impeded from engaging in the sort of social interaction necessary for healthy psychological development. Maybe you are a loner, maybe you have only ever allowed people who share your world-view into your social-circle. Either way, this is consistent with the abnormal range of emotional interactions that create the sort of cognitive problems you display and it is also consistent with your extremely negative perception of other people (or, should I say, "sheeple"?).
So remember, everyone. Next time you get attacked by Trancer-X, don't take it personally: he only acts that way because he doesn't have any friends. |
I think it's probably because of having engaged in almost a decade of relentless study on the path of the truth, I feel that I have a limited amount of time that I can devote to worthlessly ungrateful, spiritually depraved, Pavlovian conditioned, self-centered, conspicuously consumptive dolts like yourself (someone who thinks that they know the first thing about what makes me tick just from reading something that I threw together as an afterthought.)
I have more friends than you have family and my family spans multiple continents so bite me. Is this my ego speaking, as I'm sure many on here would like to accuse me of? Maybe, or maybe I'm just speaking the plain f***ing truth because I'm tired of hearing from well educated but mindlessly indoctrinated idiots like yourself who took a few mid-level college classes and expect to conclude something that Sigmund Freud himself would not even be able to deduce. |
|
|
| Trancer-X |
| quote: | Originally posted by DJ Shibby
I don't think an attack on his character is warranted, since he really does seem to genuinely be interested in a positive cause, as well as getting people at least *thinking* about events.
Q is also the same way, incapable of really understanding or appreciating information outside of his own constructed ideologies, but I'd say that it's fine to be this way as long as you're not injuring yourself or others.
I remember arguing with you a while back about some topic regarding science (one of my favorites), and though we disagreed, I respected your philosophy and dedication and knowledge, and expected nothing in return (or perhaps even enjoyed the challenge provided by a new psyche). I think you might want to stop for a moment and do the same with trancer or q, that is their actual ideas and not what they've been told or taught.
In the end very few of us are actually "individual" egos and ids at all, but rather this self-adjusting quantum web of memetic selves and ideas creating and destroying one another (itself) in every new moment... so let's embrace that and take it a step farther and try to manipulate our holographic informational universe into something less obfuscating and apathetically cold, and perhaps into something with some new routes for success.
Whatever "success" may be. |
and just because I come off like a dick to some of you doesn't mean that I don't love you all :p
Call it tough love, if you will
but it's still love.
I guess I just wish people would wake up a lot faster, that's all. |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by DJ Shibby
I don't think an attack on his character is warranted, |
you reap what you sow. |
|
|
| Q5echo |
| quote: | Originally posted by DJ Shibby
Q is also the same way, incapable of really understanding or appreciating information outside of his own constructed ideologies, |
mutherfukker you don't know me other than anonymous political discourse on a internet forum.
sometimes i'm right, sometimes i'm wrong. the only subject i consistently get passionate about is defending Neoconservative foriegn policy, something that has yet to materialize fully in it's scope and consequence.
just because we don't do the same drugs, come from completely different socio-economic-geo-political backgrounds, separated by probably more than a decade in age doesn't mean you've got me pegged about "appreciating" jack squat, dig?
...and i bet i'm not the only one on TA thinking half of your posts aren't influenced by some drug induced psychosis. |
|
|
| LazFX |
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
you reap what you sow. |
plus when a poster such as Trancer has many a times boasted of his intellect and how smart he thinks he is....it was a long time coming...... (see the PDD Chill thread... start here http://www.tranceaddict.com/forums/...&pagenumber=494 then .... ;)
as for Q5 well ....... ;) we all can't be perfect lol |
|
|
| Trancer-X |
| quote: | Originally posted by LazFX
plus when a poster such as Trancer has many a times boasted of his intellect and how smart he thinks he is....it was a long time coming...... (see the PDD Chill thread... start here http://www.tranceaddict.com/forums/...&pagenumber=494 then .... ;)
as for Q5 well ....... ;) we all can't be perfect lol |
I know that you are intellectually insecure, Laz, but I wasn't boasting. That's just the way that you've either twisted it, misinterpreted it or conveniently misconstrued it (like that's any real surprise?)
I was merely answering all of you by stating the facts because you kept questioning me in regards to how I seemed to know about or understand certain things which others did not. You're the ones who asked me to focus on myself in order to give you some clarification so don't try twisting it around anymore than you already have.
While I might be exceptionally gifted, it's a curse just as much as it is a blessing because I seem to perceive things which you're apparently all too oblivious to and I'm not even talking about the apparent deceptions that have been continually advanced upon humankind throughout the ages. There's a lot more to it than just that.
Oh, and then to add further insult to injury, I feel like I have to revert to acting like an adolescent in order to see eye to eye with you, just to get through to you, which is quite painful for me at times. Don't make my life seem so easy because it's really not.
Also, we know that nobody is perfect and I don't see, nor have I ever seen anyone claiming otherwise. It's up to each of us to strive for it, though. So instead of narcissistically (and egotistically) inking a cheesy ass Om tattoo on your arm, maybe you could actually try practicing those patterns of thought ;) |
|
|
| LazFX |
| quote: | Originally posted by Trancer-X
Also, we know that nobody is perfect and I don't see, nor have I ever seen anyone claiming otherwise. It's up to each of us to strive for it, though. So instead of narcissistically (and egotistically) inking a cheesy ass Om tattoo on your arm, maybe you could actually try practicing those patterns of thought ;) |
ha ha nice try sparky.....
I don't really know what to think.....
I also have several other tats, a prince Albert and a constant throbbing pain in my left pinky toe.....(I think due to my toe nails grow in toward my toes....have stubby fat toes to be honest) am also about 15lbs over weight
please use your Wiki/Youtube education to tell me more about myself..... PLEASE!!!! :haha: |
|
|
| LazFX |
| quote: | Originally posted by Q5echo
just because we don't do the same drugs, come from completely different socio-economic-geo-political backgrounds, separated by probably more than a decade in age doesn't mean you've got me pegged about "appreciating" jack squat, dig?
|
what are you ..... the Asian Shaft?? ;)
DIG?? ha ha ha
do they still say Dig?? ha ha ha |
|
|
|
|
