please xray this beautiful woman
>>14230964
1. The picture quality is too shitty.
2. The image resolution is too small.
3. On an individual basis, it's not possible to x-ray through either bras or multiple layers of clothing, let alone both at the same time. Which is the case with the pic you posted.
The image you provided could be used a 101 textbook example of what is not even remotely possible to x-ray. It's among the worst case scenario kind of pics.
is this better?
>>14230975
Warning this fag was posting earlier, he is bat shit crazy and claims the women are blackmailing him. He wants the pics to blackmail them back, so if you deliver there is a very good chance your pics are going to be part of a court case.
>>14231070
>Warning this fag was posting earlier, he is bat shit crazy and claims the women are blackmailing him. He wants the pics to blackmail them back, so if you deliver there is a very good chance your pics are going to be part of a court case.
see >>14230745
some people say im some asshole who was posting earlier. Im not im just tryna get my rocks off lol
>>14231079
>some people say im some asshole who was posting earlier. Im not im just tryna get my rocks off lol
riiight. and you just happen to post the same shit quality pics from the now deleted thread? fuck off tony.
>>14231079
>some people say im some asshole who was posting earlier. Im not im just tryna get my rocks off lol
>Blake
no no no, you seem to be confused, you are supposed to be Jacob in this thread remember?
