Who are tho most unintentionally funny people in the world?

who are tho most unintentionally funny people in the world?

my vote goes to indians. Bonus points for self loathing indians

...

That guy as a good head, I like him.

...

...

>wow wow wow wow wow
>are you an ambulance

literally chaos

dont get the sense of their humors

When Indians mix English with their local language, like:
"Today I eat Biryani boo papa leka moona Peace&Velocity"

That was actually genuinely funny.

I'm glad they managed to work things out

Indians/Gypsies and Abbos

Kek

Honourable mention goes to black United Statesians.

Damn dude, Asif getting really philosophical with us here.

There was further update where Mudasir dumps Asif

didnt expect it desu

I wish they were Indians, turns out they were pakis

I agree. There is an unintentional aspect to it too though.

>turns out they were pakis

What does "dnt" mean?

don't

Pakis are just Durka Indians no?

indians are fedora pakis more like.
minus the whole "death to the west" thing, pakis are pretty based.

They're really good at raping under age girls in the UK.

So if you think that's based I can see where you're coming from.

>this flag
hmm

Its not rape if it's consented

It is if they're 12 you fucking child molester.

t. nonce

So do 12 year olds rape each other when they're fiddling around?

So you're saying that if a 45 year old paki sticks it to some 12 year old British girl, it's not rape? Is that the position you're going to take?

If she consented to it, yes

And if a 10 year old consented to it?

Still yes

...

legally, underage people cannot give consent.

What about 6?

You're not only sick, but also wrong. The Paki fucks poured petrol on some of the girls and threatened to set them on fire if they ever said anything, - consent wasn't needed for the pakis.

They can depending on the scenario

>muh sickness
Cry me a river. The girl consented the second she got involved. Why did she sneak out to meet the man if she didn't want it

No joke it brought a tear to my eyes

Look up the definition of rape.

Because they threaten their families? Because they get them hooked on drugs? You can go and read all about it you know.

Americans truly are some fucking sick scumbags desu.

Yeah, and according to our laws underage people are not able to give consent, which in turns means that they can't consent to having sex - which is the definition of rape.

If you don't like our laws, you can go back to the middle east and marry a 9 year old, just dont do it here.

>threaten their families
Empty threats without credit, were you all not taught critical thinking at 6?
>hooked on drugs
See consent

a 12 year old cannot legaly give consent

He's Paki diaspora. Sick fuck should be put down. Americans for how stupid and wrong we usually, are at least for the most part vehemently anti paedophilia

>Paki diaspora
Not really but keep the hivemind
>paedophilia
You're the Paki diaspora aren't you

He's a fucking Moroccan or something.
>see consent
Which they cannot give according the the law - which makes it rape even if they wanted it.

wow ur so edgy. what's it like spending your best years baiting people with a modicum of ethics on a Taiwanese tap dancing forum?

>authority logical fallacy
No, because when one accepts something as damaging as a drug, knowing full well the consequences of the action and cannot purchase it through normal means they consent to whatever method is required in order to receive their daily high

Paedophiles, ladies and gentlemen.

Algerian go back to /mena/

you look like the kind of guy who visitis r/incels and r/truecels

Yes, it is worse than r/asianmasculinity

>You will never have friendship like this.

Prove me wrong. She consented to sex

It's literally not a fallacy because we're talking about a term used as legal definition of a crime.

She the society where they are, she is unable to give consent - which in turn means that if you have sex with her it's rape.

This has nothing to do with vague philosophy - but law.

Just like if you take someone else's possessions without consent you're either a thief or a robber - because that's what the law says.

classic raj

Unfortunately the law doesn't take into account that as a child of lower class British society she has already more experience in the concept of sex and such as her surroundings are strongly influenced by the slags that have raised her. In this scenario she knows and can properly give consent when it comes to sex as she more often than not has had it and sees nothing wrong with it. Because of this it is a logical fallacy to use the law as a metric when it doesn't properly fit the scenario of the case at hand

Not funny, just weird.

>pakis are pretty based
t. rasheed

What if a child rapes an adult, who is in the wrong

The law is the law - you could (and probable already have) rape a 8 year old and teach her all about sex, just because she knows all about it at 9 doesn't mean it's not rape. Your argument is a fucking stupid.

The law which determines if someone is a rapist or not says that they are rapists - the law shapes the definition of what the word ''rape'' means in the UK - and according to that definition - which is relevant because it was in the UK where this happened - they're rapists, and the only logical fallacy here is the one your mom made when she didn't abort your ass.

The adult for calling it rape.

...

>you will never have a friend like prasanth
>prasanth will never show up in your messages randomly and give you life advice

At which point? I don't think kidnapping, grooming, stalking, drugging and raping means you consented

Indians followed by Slavs and Turks. These three are the funniest ones.

>all the raped children actually wanted it

t. Paki

ONE OF US

Whats up with indians taking photos in front of a store? Also they never smile, but this I understand

Seen this phenomenon in many cunts

That has happened before, and the adult can't be punished for it. Just like you can't be punished if you hit someone in the face because someone is holding you at gunpoint telling you to do it or he'll blow your head off.

At least that's how it works in Sweden, there was a story only this year about a 14 year old girl having sex with a man who was ''passed out'' by inserting his cock herself. He got off because they couldn't prove that he'd been in on it.

I like the cut of your jib.

...

Stop feeding him.

...

So no crime was committed.

Really makes you think..

>insults
>ad hom
Perhaps you're too young for this place, if so I'll pity you and continue this argument at which you are losing.
The child can consent to sex whether or not the law says so. This is evident in the child knowing what it is, how it works, and the consequences thereafter. In the same way a child can give consent of whether they want free candy or not, the child in this scenario made a decision of which she was fully informed. According to your understanding of the law there is a double standard when it comes to activities deemed natural for a child and though you would be correct if said child was a member of a higher class of British society than of what she was, she was not however. In lower class British society, sex is as natural to a child as candy and because of this the law cannot be an arbitrary code that can judge both parties. Both parties had given consent and thus no one was raped or was deemed a rapist

...

>kidnapping
She left and took the drugs willingly and thus consented to the rest and therefore was neither groomed nor raped.

>logical fallacy
Typical European, incapable of higher thought

Awh, sad to say that it's impossible to argue that something that is literally defined as rape and treated as rape - that defines the word rape, isn't rape.

Higher or lower class has no relevance to this because the law does not mention anything about the lower classes being allowed to consent to sex earlier than anyone else.

According to UK law, a 12 year old is unable to consent to sex, and because they're in the UK, the that laws applies to them - which in turn makes him a rapist, and her a rape-victim, even if she said yes - because her yes is irrelevant because she is unable to give consent even if she wanted to.

The fact is that they were deemed to be rapists and convicted as such, and that's the reason why several of the offenders that were indeed proven to be rapists are now behind bars in English prisons.

No where during these trials did the court take girl's ''lower class'' into consideration - because it's irrelevant.

You halfwit.

Thus they were tried and convicted of a crime they did not commit. Both parties consented and in the natural definition of rape no one was raped. Now what you're saying is wrong because you're using a definition, which is not only outdated but also inefficient. By definition in traditional terms the accused, sadly as events have followed, is not a rapist. But because you and others in the British legal system are disconnected with the society they judge cannot fathom this. This is where the law is wrong and needs to be amended for a classless law in a class based society makes no sense whatsoever. Seeing as such and I will repeat my case again, the "victim" consented and thus was not raped

t. pajeet

Expect a lot more of that in the future

Maybe we should reintroduce chemical castration for pedophilia, seems to be the only cure.

Also didn't the Taliban kill the pedophiles in Afghanistan? Did they engage in it as well?

According to the law of the land where they reside they are indeed rapists, and that's why they were put in prison for what in any civilized western country would be considered a crime.

You might think the laws are outdated because of you personal interest in children - but the vast majority of people weren't outraged over the fact that grown men who abused little girls were put in prison - which goes to show that the law isn't outdated or ''disconnected'' from society - because British society agrees with it.

Both parties did not consent, because one party simply can't consent to it - a fact that is supported by not only the law, but by society at large.

>he thinks only pajeets hate pakis

>appeal to authority logical fallacy
Not even going to waste my time with the first point
>accusations
Once again are you 16 and is this the only way you can argue?
>the reaction of the public
Irrelevant, the public didn't commit said "crime"
>appeal to authority
Now I'm curious are you illiterate?

Teri Ma Ko Kuttey Chodein

I really don't want to get into this right now bhai.

>appeal to authority
You're so fucking stupid, in this case the authority is literally what gives the word ''rape'' a set definition.

And according to that definition they're rapists.
>Dodging the fact that he doesn't think it's fine for grown men to fiddle little kids
Kek you're such a fucking mess.
>Irrelevant
Yet again you're fucking stupid. You said that it's disconnected from society, which it's not, because the British society (except for a few pakis) agrees with the law. That literally means that it's a law that is currently relevant to the society where that law is enforced.
>more platitudes
You're using logical fallacies incorrectly, and it's transparent how fucking shallow your opinions are because your argument is literally only argued from the authority of what YOU believe to be true.

How come?

I see you're mad. Thus I win

>u mad
I was annoyed, but then I realized that you don't really believe this yourself - you only want to win.

You lose, unless you want to continue :)

>admitting you're mad
I win faggot and nothing you say can change it :)

Anyone has the screenshot from the "indian daddies" homo page?

every time

>I point you out on your bs so obviously I want to rape girls

Average IQ reasoning at work.

Of course sex between an adult and underage person isn't always rape, whether you get triggered so hard it puts you in complete a complete state of denial or not.

...

>annoyed
>mad

Only thing you win is nothing, because I won this round.

>denial
Lmao no

Actually if the girl is ''underage'' it's always rape.
Because if you're underage you can't give consent, and sex without consent is rape.

You dirty Moroccan.

it's considered as rape by the law, as it should, but it's really not proper rape

>delusional
top kek