User:E99F94EED8228520EAA1772C1A821E67D20E72D35ECDD54A716829F504F32D87
User Enrollment: NonePosted Notes:4
-HELPFUL:0
-NOT HELPFUL:2
-NEEDS MORE RATINGS:2
Posted Ratings:0
-HELPFUL:0
-SOMEWHAT HELPFUL:0
-NOT HELPFUL:0
Posted Notes
2024-08-10 17:42:34
Since 50+yo Muhammad married Aisha when she was 6yo and consummated that marriage at 9yo, why would anyone be surprised that adherents to that religion wouldn't at least be confused about ch!ld r@pe? He was no prophet at all, just a warlord who adopted symbol of a pagan moon god
CURRENTLY_RATED_NOT_HELPFUL(3-1-10)
Related notes[11]
Since 50+yo Muhammad married Aisha when she was 6yo and consummated that marriage at 9yo, why would anyone be surprised that adherents to that religion wouldn't at least be confused about ch!ld r@pe? He was no prophet at all, just a warlord who adopted symbol of a pagan moon god
CURRENTLY_RATED_NOT_HELPFUL(3-1-10)
Related notes[11]
2024-08-14 03:28:34
There is no such thing as a "fact-checker". The MSM has coined this term after a majority of Americans no longer believe in the MSM's lies, which went insane after 2016. "Fact Checker" was not needed by Walter Kronkite. There is only propaganda now. That is what the experts say.
CURRENTLY_RATED_NOT_HELPFUL(2-0-2)
Related notes[22]
There is no such thing as a "fact-checker". The MSM has coined this term after a majority of Americans no longer believe in the MSM's lies, which went insane after 2016. "Fact Checker" was not needed by Walter Kronkite. There is only propaganda now. That is what the experts say.
CURRENTLY_RATED_NOT_HELPFUL(2-0-2)
Related notes[22]
2024-07-29 07:09:59
Hustler Magazine, Inc. v. Falwell, 485 U.S. 46 (1988), is a landmark decision by the US Supreme Court in which the Court held that parodies of public figures, even those intending to cause emotional distress, are protected by the 1st & 14th Amendments to the US Constitution: [Link]
NEEDS_MORE_RATINGS(8-1-4)
Related notes[57]
Hustler Magazine, Inc. v. Falwell, 485 U.S. 46 (1988), is a landmark decision by the US Supreme Court in which the Court held that parodies of public figures, even those intending to cause emotional distress, are protected by the 1st & 14th Amendments to the US Constitution: [Link]
NEEDS_MORE_RATINGS(8-1-4)
Related notes[57]
2024-08-10 17:24:44
I find it disgusting that those posting notes here complaining that this article is 11 years old and thus irrelevant, in the same breath these same people will still drone on incessantly about the evil of slavery in the West...though that ended in the 18th & 19th centuries.
NEEDS_MORE_RATINGS(21-5-15)
Related notes[13]
I find it disgusting that those posting notes here complaining that this article is 11 years old and thus irrelevant, in the same breath these same people will still drone on incessantly about the evil of slavery in the West...though that ended in the 18th & 19th centuries.
NEEDS_MORE_RATINGS(21-5-15)
Related notes[13]
Rated Notes
