Palestine v Israel.

[Cunt]

Again, you don't disagree with a single fact he raised.

Facts don't care about your feelings

[Seabass]

Again, you don't disagree with a single fact he raised.

Facts don't care about your feelings

He's such a doofus.

[Cunt]

Again, you don't disagree with a single fact he raised.

Facts don't care about your feelings

He's such a doofus.

...said the ignorant-sounding mid-wit, still not addressing any facts at all.

[Seabass]

Again, you don't disagree with a single fact he raised.

Facts don't care about your feelings

He's such a doofus.

...said the ignorant-sounding mid-wit, still not addressing any facts at all.

Does he have any historians on as guests to discuss actual history?

[Cunt]

Still don't disagree with any of the facts he presented, eh?

Must be frustrating for you. Try slander again. That should soothe you

[Seabass]

Again, you don't disagree with a single fact he raised.

Facts don't care about your feelings

He's such a doofus.

...said the ignorant-sounding mid-wit, still not addressing any facts at all.

Does he have any historians on as guests to discuss actual history?

Still don't disagree with any of the facts he presented, eh?

Must be frustrating for you. Try slander again. That should soothe you

I'll take that as 'no' then.

[Seabass]

Shapiro presented a history, with a pro-Isreal perspective.

All history is presented with bias, but to be this blatant about it tells you all you need to know. Aren't you guy who is always bitching about bias? And now you're peddling a "pro-Isreal" [sic] "history"? It's not history, Cunt.

[Cunt]

Which part did you take issue with?

[Seabass]

Which part did you take issue with?

The part where an insanely far-right jackass (so far right that he thinks British conservatives are leftists) "presents" "history" that is "pro"-something.

[Brian Peacock]

Again, you don't disagree with a single fact he raised.

Facts don't care about your feelings

I'm sure he feels he's right.

[Cunt]

Which part did you take issue with?

The part where an insanely far-right jackass (so far right that he thinks British conservatives are leftists) "presents" "history" that is "pro"-something.

He didn't say it was pro anything. I think he is pro-Israel, and don't mind saying so.

But go ahead and keep ignoring the facts he discussed. It makes you sound smart and fact-checky.

[Seabass]

Which part did you take issue with?

The part where an insanely far-right jackass (so far right that he thinks British conservatives are leftists) "presents" "history" that is "pro"-something.

He didn't say it was pro anything. I think he is pro-Israel, and don't mind saying so.

But go ahead and keep ignoring the facts he discussed. It makes you sound smart and fact-checky.

I'm also going to ignore the "facts" that Alex Jones discussed. I'm also going to ignore creationist musings on evolution and science in general. I guess that makes me closed minded.

[Cunt]

Why not post a pro-Palestine summary? If it conflicts with Shapiro's description, we could see just where.

Of course, you could just keep up with the impersonation, that's funny too...

[Seabass]

What is a "pro-Palestine summary"? Do mean a pro-Palestine argument?

[Cunt]

I meant a counter point to Shapiro. Of course, you haven't disagreed with anything he said, only who he is.

Impersonating ignorance, I guess.