Fucka you cow, and fucka you chicken! @DemonCBR

I only eat live food

DONT LOOK THAT UP

if you don't know what it is

Quit spamming propaganda here

who? lol

i was wondering that too

Guess you both should stop then if you're wondering who

<:emoji_10:723010351150661655>

What?

Huh?

What is propaganda?

Who?

Gah.

lol

Nah

<:Idiots:720119404020367390>

In regards to Wikipedia and flat-earthers:

Yes

Also 80% of Wikipedia pages that you can 'reliably' quote are stubs and do not contain a verifiable signature as a reference from actors involved, usually just Journalism. Journalism is never a good source, and is always over-ostentatious TO AN EXTENT. Even the best journalism has the same flaws as any other secondary source.

*bush committed Titanic, icebergs can’t melt steel hauls*

wait. They actually do quote wikipedia? lol

Arguing with them is like arguing with a commie

It's not a reasonable belief

lol

never heard of it

neither have I

conservapedia makes a good read though

that means it's probably good

The truth is for those who seek it

doies SPLC say they're a hate group? if so, 99% chance they're not

okay, on a SERIOUS note

"Metapedia is an online wiki-based encyclopedia which contains authoritarian far-right, white nationalist, white supremacist, anti-feminist, homophobic, Islamophobic, antisemitic, Holocaust-denying, and neo-Nazi points of view. The site describes itself as focusing on European culture, art, science, philosophy, and politics." geez lol

The problem with wikipedia is that a writer can fuck around with the letters that the original actor intended to reach an audience with. Wikipedia should have a checkmark announcing the Author wrote the article.

I'm trying to find someone who installed Scotchshield auto glass tint

it resists rioters trying to break in

who installs I mean

whoever described that site used all of the sjw accusations lol

ah yeah, wikipedia, tha'ts right

lol

use duckduckgo