I can see you did not read my initial terms offer, since one of them is specifically inviting a set of so called Talmud quotes, which I have already refuted but you ignored, many times. Therefore and furthermore, your reiterated fake "offer" to exclude the quotes is proof of your lie, and wicked desire to make the Talmud look bad, while you imply that I avoid your lies (that you call quotes) about it, which I clearly do not.
I guess everyone in the world who knows what a republic is (lol at your assertion that I don't,) agrees with every (political) opinion that you have then! Rofl that you think your logic is valid, as well as the conclusion drawn from it. As if it were the crux of the question of law argued by Berkeley vs. your amazingly masterful, scholarly opinion anyways. What, did you just learn that the US is a republic and not a democracy? lol!
@contextualize Let's do it! I have given YOU the power to choose topics, but you still decline??? How sad is that? How telling is it of a person who makes remarks but refuses to defend them in an open and fair debate LOL
Here's a reminder of what you're attempting to defend
You're funny. I did clearly choose the topic, and the terms, and you ignore them, while claiming I'm declining. Accept my terms or negotiate new ones. Repeating "what time," and "what's your email" makes you sound like you are actually unable and unwilling to debate. The fact that I chose the topic and expressed it as a term of the debate, yet you ask me to chose again, proves you do not read properly, or just lie.
I defended the remarks I made as I made them, you ignored my rebuttals, hence my choice of debate topics. It is you who consistently ignores those rebuttals, i.e. won't defend your remarks. Once again, expressing your hypocrisy.
So while claiming I'm un-open to "fair and open" debates, and ignoring the rebuttals I have already made, which remain public for your refutation, "here's a reminder;" your quotes are all lies, taken out of context, or are intentionally misinterpreted. But you just want to spam them around without care for the truth.
Easiest one to disprove? So called Yalkut 245c... There is no side "c" of page 245... Gonna remove it from the vid?
LOL all of that and once again @contextualize you've ignored pointing out what TERMS are you referring to???? What more could you possibly want??? YOU have choice of subject, and on Qallout it's impossible to edit, so ONCE AGAIN what is this mysterious term you have been hiding behind????
I got to say it again, watching you try to squirm out of this is HILLARIOUS
The terms are in the message chain, I'm sorry you are unwilling to read, but everyone can see truth... I already chose the subject when your lies irritated me, and before you tried to look like a hero by fake offering me the then redundant choice of subjects. Again, sorry you are too lazy to read it...
It is you who is worming.
Just like how you just ignored the most basic rebuttal to your lies about the Talmud. Pages only have 2 sides, not 3. There is no "c..." Are you too proud to even accept this simplest rebuttal to your false claim? I doubt you'll accept it it since you've already ignored it once. As well as your seemingly wanting to believe the lies spread about Jews. (As per you past ignoring of my rebuttals.)
LOL you're right about one thing! The truth is out there as you have keep referring to mysterious TERMS while writing much except your TERMS :)
What more could anyone want, in an unedited online debate with power of topics @contextualize???
Do you really think you're fooling anyone??? Seems more like you're just trying to fool yourself
The truth is there. Just like pages in the Talmud (or any book for that matter) have only 2 sides, except in your world, where they can have 3, filled with a whole bunch of made up quotes!!!
Does "Yalkut 245c" exist @lecrazycanuckeh? Gonna double down? Or just ignore my rebuttal, AGAIN, for the third time?!!!
LMAO @contextualize you previously had accepted an online, unedited debate between us on Skype or Qallout, in which I had offered you total control of topic choices, but when asked for a good time for you, you no longer want to debate and keep referring to some mysterious TERMS that you refuse to mention!
Surely you can understand that this makes you look scared of defending your own stances, because no doubt you know! YOU don't have a leg to stand on in an open and fair debate!
Can we just agree on how pathetic that makes you appear???