while(1) {
print "((())) goy, kike, moshe, schlomo, rabbi";
wait_for_reply();
if(reply == high_iq) { $myreply = "pilpul";}
else {$myreply = "jidf, what time is it in tel-aviv";}
echo $myreply;
}
while(1) {
print "goy, kike, moshe, schlomo, rabbi";
wait_for_reply();
if(reply == high_iq) { $myreply = "pilpul";}
else {$myreply = "jidf, what time is it in tel-aviv";}
echo $myreply;
}
shill ip hopping intensifies.
while(1) {
print "goy, kike, moshe, schlomo, rabbi";
wait_for_reply();
if(reply == high_iq) { $myreply = "pilpul";}
else {$myreply = "jidf, what time is it in tel-aviv";}
echo $myreply;
}
while(1) {
print "goy, kike, moshe, schlomo, rabbi";
wait_for_reply();
if(reply == high_iq) { $myreply = "pilpul";}
else {$myreply = "jidf, what time is it in tel-aviv";}
echo $myreply;
}
already 10 ip hops in an early bread?
while(1) {
print "goy, kike, moshe, schlomo, rabbi";
wait_for_reply();
if(reply == high_iq) { $myreply = "pilpul";}
else {$myreply = "jidf, what time is it in tel-aviv";}
echo $myreply;
}
while(1) {
print "goy, kike, moshe, schlomo, rabbi";
wait_for_reply();
if(reply == high_iq) { $myreply = "pilpul";}
else {$myreply = "jidf, what time is it in tel-aviv";}
echo $myreply;
}
do you always ip hop so much?
It is an endlessly pushed, fake and gay shill garbage.
this link debunks all the shill garbage:
http://talmud.faithweb.com/
oh wait, what's this? all that garbage is taken from the "book" called "talmud unmasked"!
>talmud unmasked, a book published in 1892 by Justinas Bonaventure Pranaitis (1861–1917).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Talmud_Unmasked
The author is the same clown that was exposed as a complete fraud in the Beilis trial.
He was brought over as an "expert", and got completely exposed as a fraud:
>One prosecution witness, presented as a religious expert in Judaic rituals, was a Catholic priest, Justinas Pranaitis from Tashkent, well known for his antisemitic 1892 work Talmud Unmasked. Pranaitis testified that the murder of Yushchinsky was a religious ritual, associating the murder of Yushchinsky with the blood libel, a legend believed by many Russians at the time.
>Pranaitis' credibility rapidly evaporated when the defense demonstrated his ignorance of some simple Talmudic concepts and definitions, such as hullin,[1]:p.215 to the point where "many in the audience occasionally laughed out loud when he clearly became confused and couldn't even intelligibly answer some of the questions asked by my lawyer."[3]
>A Beilis Defense Committee advisor, a writer named Ben-Zion Katz, suggested countering Father Pranaitis with questions like "When did Baba Bathra live and what was her activity" which he described as the equivalent of asking an American "Who lived at the Gettysburg Address?" There were enough Jews in the court for the resultant laughter to negate Pranatis' value to the prosecution.[1]:pp.214-216
KEK!
>A Tsarist secret police agent is quoted, reporting on Pranaitis' testimony, as saying: Cross-examination of Pranaitis has weakened evidentiary value of his expert opinion, exposing lack of knowledge of texts, insufficient knowledge of Jewish literature. Because of amateurish knowledge and lack of resourcefulness, Pranaitis' expert opinion is of very low value.
KEK!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Menahem_Mendel_Beilis
oh and here is more:
>The identification of Yeshu as Jesus is problematic. For example, the Talmud mentions Yeshu ben Pandera/ben Stada's stepfather, Pappos ben Yehuda, speaking with Rabbi Akiva,[3] who was executed at the climax of the Bar Kokhba revolt in 135 CE.[4][5] Furthermore, Yeshu the Pharisee student is described as being a student of the second-century BCE nasi Joshua ben Perachiah, as well as being among the exiled Pharisees returning to Israel following their persecution[6][7] by John Hyrcanus,[8], an event which occurred in 74 BC. Additionally, Yeshu the sorcerer was executed by the royal government which lost legal authority in 63 BC. These events would place the lifetime of either Yeshu decades before or after the birth and death of Jesus.[9][10] Still, there are numerous other passages pertaining to an individual named "Yeshu" that either don't provide a specific time period or else specify a time where it is reasonable to assume mentioning of Jesus would even be possible (take for example a notable passage, Gittin 57a mentioning the nobleman Onkelos conjuring the tormented spirit of "Yeshu" – Onkelos lived more than a century after Jesus, thus making it possible the Yeshu mentioned could indeed be Jesus, though the likelihood of this is still questionable) still opening the possibility that whichever Yeshu mentioned might be Jesus. '
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_in_the_Talmud
let the shill kvetching begin!
<I KNOW BOSS! I'll use standard protocol! kvetching, projecting and ip hopping tag teaming!
>EXCELLENT HOMO!
<Yeah! We got the script right here:
while(1) {
print "goy, kike, moshe, schlomo, rabbi";
wait_for_reply();
if(reply == high_iq) { $myreply = "pilpul";}
else {$myreply = "jidf, what time is it in tel-aviv";}
echo $myreply;
}
>EXCELLENT GAYLORD! THE SCRIPT ALWAYS WINS! REMEMBER - KVETCH, PROJECT, AND IP HOP TO START A TAG TEAM! USE AS MANY MUHJEW KEY WORDS AS POSSIBLE! SAY THAT Q SAYS IT THE JEWS ALTHOUGH HE SAID IT ISN'T ABOUT RACE OR RELIGION! ANYTHING GOD DAMMIT!
<YO BOSS! THE RABBI MEMES ARE READY!
>THAN POST THEM FAGGOT!
<BUT THEY ARE THE JOKE OF QRESEARCH!
>JUST FUCKING POST THEM OR BROCK GETS TO PLAY WITH YOUR REPRODUCTIVE ORGAN!
<ON IT BOSS! DON'T TELL BROCK PLEASE!
this shit again?
It is an endlessly pushed, fake and gay shill garbage.
this link debunks all the shill garbage:
http://talmud.faithweb.com/
oh wait, what's this? all that garbage is taken from the "book" called "talmud unmasked"!
>talmud unmasked, a book published in 1892 by Justinas Bonaventure Pranaitis (1861–1917).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Talmud_Unmasked
The author is the same clown that was exposed as a complete fraud in the Beilis trial.
He was brought over as an "expert", and got completely exposed as a fraud:
>One prosecution witness, presented as a religious expert in Judaic rituals, was a Catholic priest, Justinas Pranaitis from Tashkent, well known for his antisemitic 1892 work Talmud Unmasked. Pranaitis testified that the murder of Yushchinsky was a religious ritual, associating the murder of Yushchinsky with the blood libel, a legend believed by many Russians at the time.
>Pranaitis' credibility rapidly evaporated when the defense demonstrated his ignorance of some simple Talmudic concepts and definitions, such as hullin,[1]:p.215 to the point where "many in the audience occasionally laughed out loud when he clearly became confused and couldn't even intelligibly answer some of the questions asked by my lawyer."[3]
>A Beilis Defense Committee advisor, a writer named Ben-Zion Katz, suggested countering Father Pranaitis with questions like "When did Baba Bathra live and what was her activity" which he described as the equivalent of asking an American "Who lived at the Gettysburg Address?" There were enough Jews in the court for the resultant laughter to negate Pranatis' value to the prosecution.[1]:pp.214-216
KEK!
>A Tsarist secret police agent is quoted, reporting on Pranaitis' testimony, as saying: Cross-examination of Pranaitis has weakened evidentiary value of his expert opinion, exposing lack of knowledge of texts, insufficient knowledge of Jewish literature. Because of amateurish knowledge and lack of resourcefulness, Pranaitis' expert opinion is of very low value.
KEK!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Menahem_Mendel_Beilis
oh and here is more:
>The identification of Yeshu as Jesus is problematic. For example, the Talmud mentions Yeshu ben Pandera/ben Stada's stepfather, Pappos ben Yehuda, speaking with Rabbi Akiva,[3] who was executed at the climax of the Bar Kokhba revolt in 135 CE.[4][5] Furthermore, Yeshu the Pharisee student is described as being a student of the second-century BCE nasi Joshua ben Perachiah, as well as being among the exiled Pharisees returning to Israel following their persecution[6][7] by John Hyrcanus,[8], an event which occurred in 74 BC. Additionally, Yeshu the sorcerer was executed by the royal government which lost legal authority in 63 BC. These events would place the lifetime of either Yeshu decades before or after the birth and death of Jesus.[9][10] Still, there are numerous other passages pertaining to an individual named "Yeshu" that either don't provide a specific time period or else specify a time where it is reasonable to assume mentioning of Jesus would even be possible (take for example a notable passage, Gittin 57a mentioning the nobleman Onkelos conjuring the tormented spirit of "Yeshu" – Onkelos lived more than a century after Jesus, thus making it possible the Yeshu mentioned could indeed be Jesus, though the likelihood of this is still questionable) still opening the possibility that whichever Yeshu mentioned might be Jesus. '
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_in_the_Talmud
let the shill kvetching begin!
It is an endlessly pushed, fake and gay shill garbage.
this link debunks all the shill garbage:
http://talmud.faithweb.com/
oh wait, what's this? all that garbage is taken from the "book" called "talmud unmasked"!
>talmud unmasked, a book published in 1892 by Justinas Bonaventure Pranaitis (1861–1917).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Talmud_Unmasked
The author is the same clown that was exposed as a complete fraud in the Beilis trial.
He was brought over as an "expert", and got completely exposed as a fraud:
>One prosecution witness, presented as a religious expert in Judaic rituals, was a Catholic priest, Justinas Pranaitis from Tashkent, well known for his antisemitic 1892 work Talmud Unmasked. Pranaitis testified that the murder of Yushchinsky was a religious ritual, associating the murder of Yushchinsky with the blood libel, a legend believed by many Russians at the time.
>Pranaitis' credibility rapidly evaporated when the defense demonstrated his ignorance of some simple Talmudic concepts and definitions, such as hullin,[1]:p.215 to the point where "many in the audience occasionally laughed out loud when he clearly became confused and couldn't even intelligibly answer some of the questions asked by my lawyer."[3]
>A Beilis Defense Committee advisor, a writer named Ben-Zion Katz, suggested countering Father Pranaitis with questions like "When did Baba Bathra live and what was her activity" which he described as the equivalent of asking an American "Who lived at the Gettysburg Address?" There were enough Jews in the court for the resultant laughter to negate Pranatis' value to the prosecution.[1]:pp.214-216
KEK!
>A Tsarist secret police agent is quoted, reporting on Pranaitis' testimony, as saying: Cross-examination of Pranaitis has weakened evidentiary value of his expert opinion, exposing lack of knowledge of texts, insufficient knowledge of Jewish literature. Because of amateurish knowledge and lack of resourcefulness, Pranaitis' expert opinion is of very low value.
KEK!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Menahem_Mendel_Beilis
oh and here is more:
>The identification of Yeshu as Jesus is problematic. For example, the Talmud mentions Yeshu ben Pandera/ben Stada's stepfather, Pappos ben Yehuda, speaking with Rabbi Akiva,[3] who was executed at the climax of the Bar Kokhba revolt in 135 CE.[4][5] Furthermore, Yeshu the Pharisee student is described as being a student of the second-century BCE nasi Joshua ben Perachiah, as well as being among the exiled Pharisees returning to Israel following their persecution[6][7] by John Hyrcanus,[8], an event which occurred in 74 BC. Additionally, Yeshu the sorcerer was executed by the royal government which lost legal authority in 63 BC. These events would place the lifetime of either Yeshu decades before or after the birth and death of Jesus.[9][10] Still, there are numerous other passages pertaining to an individual named "Yeshu" that either don't provide a specific time period or else specify a time where it is reasonable to assume mentioning of Jesus would even be possible (take for example a notable passage, Gittin 57a mentioning the nobleman Onkelos conjuring the tormented spirit of "Yeshu" – Onkelos lived more than a century after Jesus, thus making it possible the Yeshu mentioned could indeed be Jesus, though the likelihood of this is still questionable) still opening the possibility that whichever Yeshu mentioned might be Jesus. '
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_in_the_Talmud
let the shill kvetching begin!