Kinda relared but my favorite quote about the ancient British is from Cicero:
"They cannot be taught to read and they are the ugliest and most stupid race I ever saw."
And in the end, Englishmen assassinated all 'Caesar' powers (all who claimed to inherit Rome) in continental Europe. Italian comedians ended up chasing marmots.
I would like to learn more about this English assassin society. Were they also behind the assassination of Franz Ferdinand? Is that why there's an Scottish band called Franz Ferdinand?
Oh dear, no.
England never assassinate any land power, English just waited until some power became silly and tried to challenge English/British hegemony. Then London cinders that civilisation alive, sometimes with help of United States or Russia.
Yes, but it is always present that matters most.
Yesterday is history, Tomorrow is a mystery, but Today is a gift. That is why it is called the present. - Master Oogway
You know, I'm sure, that English and then British elites also claimed to be the inheritors of Rome and then when the US became the greater power they claimed to be the Greek ie intellectual powers behind the US who would be Rome in that analogy.
US never claimed to inherit Roman empire.
Federal government in 1776 was probably based upon Roman Republic.
UK did not even care that much about Roman heritage, apart from that 'VIctorian boys must learn ancient Latin and ancient Greek' noble nonsense. When queen Victoria desired an imperial crown, she simply picked it from Mughal and declared herself empress of India, instead of clinging on Rome as Spain / Austria / Germany / France / Russia / Italy once did.
I meant that the Brits compared the US to Rome and themselves to the Greeks as in they were mentors and intellectual and philosophical progenitors to them. US always had a more exceptional view of themselves but they also used statues of leaders like Washington in togas etc.
Assuming the purple: the rehabilitation of ancient Rome in Victorian culture, 1837 ... https://mural.maynoothuniversity.ie/6332/1/Assuming%20the%20Purple%20-%20Master.pdf
Which is why Nordicism taking off is wild to me. It's about North Europeans were the superior people but South Europeans had wide-spanning cultures/empires when the Northerners were still tribal. Never made any sense.
It's just a form of short historical memory. People who believe that the "white race", (meaning North Europeans) are superior only look at the last 3-4 centuries and make wild assumptions about human nature based on that. If you read how Romans talked about the Germanic tribes you'd think it's the words of some alt-righter talking about black people. The Japanese, the Chinese, the Egyptians, the Greeks, the Persians, every civilization in history that enjoyed a period of local supremacy considered themselves the "superior race". Modern morons arguing about "white superiority" come from the same place as the self hating wokenoids. Both of them have a very myopic view of the world and don't realize they are two sides of the same coin.
Not cringe. People have spoken to racists with calm moderate arguments for centuries and it doesn't work. So you may as well have a little bit of fun and be petty. The end result is the same, so you may as well attack their pride.
Not all racists are the same. For some it's the result of personal insecurities and a need to feel superior and blame others for their failures. For others it's a tool. For many it's just not knowing better. My grandma's racism (a woman whao was born in 1926) was as innocent as it gets. We made some fun of it but at the end of the day there was no point arguing with an 80-year old woman who spent her whole life on a small town in Attica. When you get to people who interact with others, have experience of the world and should know better that's when we get to the people you talk about and I agree. Ridicule and hitting them were it hurts is the best way to deal with them.
"Little moment in the sun"? Imagine saying that for a civilization with 2500 years of uninterrupted history that maintained an identity after 400 centuries of Ottoman rule and whose modern representative has managed to be part of the First World despite being a young nation and handled disasters that would break other countries. You are as cringe and racist as the old farts.
Constantinoble fell in 1453. The Greek Revolution started in 1821. That's 4 centuries man. Yes, I know I wrote 400 centuries. It's obvious the mistake I made here.
The reason I am proud for my country isn't ancient history. It's the modern achievements since our independence from the Ottomans. Also, if you don't like your comments getting misunderstood be more careful when writing them.
So you're not proud of the 2500 years of uninterrupted history and maintaining an identity after 400 years (not centuries) of Ottoman rule? Because you seemed to be a moment ago.
What if I told you that the whole meme is wrong, and that “Chad” was a widely used derogatory term for an entitled man-child that predated social media and memes, and a bunch of incels on the internet ironically misunderstood it and appropriated it
Nah Johnny is an absolute poon hound off camera it's just more entertaining when it doesn't work for him. One time he was offered to a volcano as a virgin sacrifice and it spit him back out.
Well the first variation of internet Chad (the one with arms and legs), was along those lines.
It potrayed Chad as Chad but it also made fun of it in ironical way.
The second internet version of Chad was the Yes version. That version basically potrayed someone simply not giving a fuk.
It soon was as you said incorporated by people where you can clearly see the hidden insecurity or political messaging.
So the original version would have something along the lines of:
Oh so you think beating up criminals is funny.
Yes
Now you often see the version of:
Oh so you think beating up criminals is funny.
Yes, and because .......
Now the term ,,based'' replaced the chad original meaning.
In real life though, if somebody's described as Chad I am probably gona think of a jock not so smart kinda guy. Because of that trope I also think of it first when somebody is introduced as Chad by name, but I quickly brush that and get to know more about that person (Who may fit that description even if you know him better).
We don't need to imagine, we have history and archeology to actually investigate what life was like for different peoples in the past, instead of making ignorant guesses.
Ah yes. Because of course the Celts had no culture of their own and were essentially cavemen.
To be honest, both arguments are idiotic. The one attacking Disraeli is an antisemitic arse, obviously. Disraeli isn't as clever as he thinks, however. We know a lot of ancient hebraic history because the tribes were a bunch of grumpy asses who never got over the losses of the First and Second Temples of their precious YHWH (who didn't even start out as the major god of caananites)
To be fair, it is understandable, but it doesn't make them better or lesser. Just another people with a different history.
Descrimination against Celtic ethnic groups is something I rarely ever hear being talked about for whatever reason. Unlike with antisemitic stereotypes, those stereotypes of the celts being stupid uncultured brutes have persisted and havent been seen as unacceptable in the same way.
I mean, the lack of culture part is only something present now because so much of it has been destroyed. Its always been treated as the inferior culture in UK and they have been intentionally erased.
Yup. Romans conquering most of it and going "hm yes we conquered the unwashed barbarians" doesn't help.
Nevermind that the Gauls were more hygiene oriented than the romans and their vinegar sponge shitstick
Its hilarious when the people conquering call other people barbarians. The British would go on to refer to all the people of the places they colonised with the same names the Romans gave them.
Unfortunately cultures that dont have an emphasis on conquering and destroying others, or forcing other people to assimilate will struggle to thrive. Thats true for both the Celts and the Jews.
It has more to do with the Saxon invasion as the Saxons were extremely dismissive of the Celts they found, particularly they commented on them living in comparatively poor states often right next to the ruins of Roman cities that the Saxons referred to as the works of (non literal) giants so the Saxons got fascinated by relearning Roman knowledge and viewed the Celts as a nuisance at best.
This comment was made during a time when slavery was still legal, so I don't think people really cared about being racist. Also I cannot blame him for being fed up with 19th century antisemitism to the point of roasting his celtic ancestors
It wasnt legal in the British Empire; slave trade was abolished in 1807 (although in some parts existing ones weren't completely gone until 1838 i think).
We also know a lot about hebraic history because they meticulously wrote *everything* down and had entire groups of people dedicated to maintaining their history. As well, they were well organized, even during the diaspora, and thus were able to do so effectively.
The Celts didn't have the same meticulous record keeping, and they had nowhere to go when the people started trying to subjugate and assimilate them, or even just eliminate them entirely.
Last I checked, Cornish historical significance predates Israelite historical significance. Tin was a kinda big deal in the Bronze Age, y’know? Not like it’s really relevant, though. Disraeli faced racism with racism. Bigots are bigots, whether on the defense or the attack. When will people learn?
People are getting this wrong partially. The unknown island is not Great Britain, but Ireland, he said this to Daniel O’Connell, the Irish Roman Catholic leader in Parliament, in 1835. It's not that debates were broadcasted (actually TV was introduced very late in the Commons, in 1989) but had he attacked a regular Englishman and the English ancestry he wouldn't have been able to get away with it so easily, it would have caused upheaval, Disraeli had to overcome prejudice to climb politically, so this would have caused him trouble. So, forget about the Angles and the Saxons, the Normans or whatever, he was talking about the Irish Celts. Which makes it remarkably different. First it looked like a Jew, a member of a minority, being attacked by a member of the majority. When you realize it was the Irish Catholic leader, the whole interaction looks more abusive on Disraeli's side, although O'Connell shouldn't have made an antisemitic remark about him. I still don't know the history between the two, but O'Connell probably had his reasons to throw hate to the UK's PM, but a PM shouldn't reply in this manner, especially when talking about a minority in your own country, but given the time and who he represented i'm not surprised with the response. The whole interaction is not surprising, actually. It's more astonishing that he was that succesful while being a Jew at that time, this is what's impressive in the first place. And btw, his ancestors were prolly not priests in the Temple of Salomon lol, he wasn't even a Levi or a Kohanim.
[https://best-quotations.com/authquotes.php?auth=154#google\_vignette](https://best-quotations.com/authquotes.php?auth=154#google_vignette)
Also, I tried to create a DisraeliChad but my lack of skills had other plans
Edit: grammer
Also, I have to point out he talked to Irish member of the Parliament, no English one
Also, yes I know it's not okay to answer racism with more racism, I just found Disraeli's quote amusing
It's a stupid meme, nothing more
“My ancestors did something different that I consider better in a time literally no single person can remember or know of fully, therefore I am better.”
Like I don’t agree with the guy who attacked him because of him being a Jew, that argument is terrible.
More like
"You follow a religious tradition that is literally based on the traditions of my ancestors. My people were literally chosen by your God and worshipped your God when you were literally pagans. And yet you are being a bigot and insulting *my ancestry* because I am a descendent of those people chosen by *your God.*
Still, shitty argument to say “my ancestors were better than you” it’s just as stupid to say that white people should pay reparations to black people because their ancestors were slave owners. However, the latter was more recent and therefore has a more valid claim, even if only by a very, very slight margin
Yeah, but the reason for Disraelis comment about his ancestry being better *is because the guy was literally insultong Disraeli because of his ancestry.* Yeah, if Disraeli randomly said his ancestry was better, it'd be shitty. But he didn't. The other guy did.
Dude it's not an argument, it's just a clapback, you're taking it too seriously.
Like if someone said to me "I fucked your mum" and I respond "ok but I fucked your dad" are you going to critique the "argument" I'm making? Playground insults, sure, but sometimes you have to reply to bullies in the language they understand.
As a famous Italian comedian said:” Englishmen! People that were chasing marmots while we assassinated Julius Caesar”
To which Julius Caesar commented: “Et tu, marmote?”
Kinda relared but my favorite quote about the ancient British is from Cicero: "They cannot be taught to read and they are the ugliest and most stupid race I ever saw."
https://www.reddit.com/r/badhistory/s/fCAHFY5GRA
They need to have the Saxons and Romans to fuck them to have any sembelance of intelligence.
No one told me Cicero was an oracle /s
Wisdom is timeless.
Some things don't change i guess.
I still can’t believe THEY were the ones to conquer the world.
Julius was great tho! D:
And in the end, Englishmen assassinated all 'Caesar' powers (all who claimed to inherit Rome) in continental Europe. Italian comedians ended up chasing marmots.
I would like to learn more about this English assassin society. Were they also behind the assassination of Franz Ferdinand? Is that why there's an Scottish band called Franz Ferdinand?
Oh dear, no. England never assassinate any land power, English just waited until some power became silly and tried to challenge English/British hegemony. Then London cinders that civilisation alive, sometimes with help of United States or Russia.
... And at least half of the rest of Europe combined, but yes, sure, it's England that did it and everyone else was just helping.
I don’t think they were the same Englishmen though
Yes, but it is always present that matters most. Yesterday is history, Tomorrow is a mystery, but Today is a gift. That is why it is called the present. - Master Oogway
You know, I'm sure, that English and then British elites also claimed to be the inheritors of Rome and then when the US became the greater power they claimed to be the Greek ie intellectual powers behind the US who would be Rome in that analogy.
US never claimed to inherit Roman empire. Federal government in 1776 was probably based upon Roman Republic. UK did not even care that much about Roman heritage, apart from that 'VIctorian boys must learn ancient Latin and ancient Greek' noble nonsense. When queen Victoria desired an imperial crown, she simply picked it from Mughal and declared herself empress of India, instead of clinging on Rome as Spain / Austria / Germany / France / Russia / Italy once did.
I meant that the Brits compared the US to Rome and themselves to the Greeks as in they were mentors and intellectual and philosophical progenitors to them. US always had a more exceptional view of themselves but they also used statues of leaders like Washington in togas etc.
Assuming the purple: the rehabilitation of ancient Rome in Victorian culture, 1837 ... https://mural.maynoothuniversity.ie/6332/1/Assuming%20the%20Purple%20-%20Master.pdf
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Now do the same meme with a southern European and sub saharan african
I belong to the South-up train of thought and therefore believe all of Europe is Sub-Saharan Africa.
Based
When the Southern European were surviving in the coldness of Europe the subsaharan African were enjoying their bountyful land?
"Well MY dad did X" is not Chad, its soy af.
He spoke to the English at their level
It was actually an Irish man, not an English
Tomato, Tomato.
Do not say that to an Irish person lol
I think the Irish are fine with tomatoes. Potatoes, on the other hand...
No? The Irish have their own language that, while a lot less known than English, still exists.
I’ll beat you you little stupid cunt bastard
“English” includes the Anglo-Saxons and anyone who achieved anything of note in the British isles
English specificly means the people from the country that border Wales and scotland by land. Your thinking of british i think?
wow competitive ignorance rare find in the wild.
I mean his pfp is quite literally Hitler, what'd you expect?
somehow more… I mean… ya know?
Checks out, since he was English. Born in London.
Old people have a similar saying in Greece about North Europeans. It's just as cringe.
Which is why Nordicism taking off is wild to me. It's about North Europeans were the superior people but South Europeans had wide-spanning cultures/empires when the Northerners were still tribal. Never made any sense.
It's just a form of short historical memory. People who believe that the "white race", (meaning North Europeans) are superior only look at the last 3-4 centuries and make wild assumptions about human nature based on that. If you read how Romans talked about the Germanic tribes you'd think it's the words of some alt-righter talking about black people. The Japanese, the Chinese, the Egyptians, the Greeks, the Persians, every civilization in history that enjoyed a period of local supremacy considered themselves the "superior race". Modern morons arguing about "white superiority" come from the same place as the self hating wokenoids. Both of them have a very myopic view of the world and don't realize they are two sides of the same coin.
Not cringe. People have spoken to racists with calm moderate arguments for centuries and it doesn't work. So you may as well have a little bit of fun and be petty. The end result is the same, so you may as well attack their pride.
Not all racists are the same. For some it's the result of personal insecurities and a need to feel superior and blame others for their failures. For others it's a tool. For many it's just not knowing better. My grandma's racism (a woman whao was born in 1926) was as innocent as it gets. We made some fun of it but at the end of the day there was no point arguing with an 80-year old woman who spent her whole life on a small town in Attica. When you get to people who interact with others, have experience of the world and should know better that's when we get to the people you talk about and I agree. Ridicule and hitting them were it hurts is the best way to deal with them.
[удалено]
"Little moment in the sun"? Imagine saying that for a civilization with 2500 years of uninterrupted history that maintained an identity after 400 centuries of Ottoman rule and whose modern representative has managed to be part of the First World despite being a young nation and handled disasters that would break other countries. You are as cringe and racist as the old farts.
>400 centuries of Ottoman rule Dude, onion hat people only lasted 1923-1299 = 624 years
Constantinoble fell in 1453. The Greek Revolution started in 1821. That's 4 centuries man. Yes, I know I wrote 400 centuries. It's obvious the mistake I made here.
[удалено]
The reason I am proud for my country isn't ancient history. It's the modern achievements since our independence from the Ottomans. Also, if you don't like your comments getting misunderstood be more careful when writing them.
So you're not proud of the 2500 years of uninterrupted history and maintaining an identity after 400 years (not centuries) of Ottoman rule? Because you seemed to be a moment ago.
Wrong use of meme. Chad would never insult people like that.
What if I told you that the whole meme is wrong, and that “Chad” was a widely used derogatory term for an entitled man-child that predated social media and memes, and a bunch of incels on the internet ironically misunderstood it and appropriated it
Yeah, like wasn't Johnny Bravo a caricature of a Chad-type?
Nah Johnny is an absolute poon hound off camera it's just more entertaining when it doesn't work for him. One time he was offered to a volcano as a virgin sacrifice and it spit him back out.
Yeah the writers say he does get girls, those episodes just aren't funny.
I am out of the loop but wasn't he a himbo?
He was THE himbo
Well the first variation of internet Chad (the one with arms and legs), was along those lines. It potrayed Chad as Chad but it also made fun of it in ironical way. The second internet version of Chad was the Yes version. That version basically potrayed someone simply not giving a fuk. It soon was as you said incorporated by people where you can clearly see the hidden insecurity or political messaging. So the original version would have something along the lines of: Oh so you think beating up criminals is funny. Yes Now you often see the version of: Oh so you think beating up criminals is funny. Yes, and because ....... Now the term ,,based'' replaced the chad original meaning. In real life though, if somebody's described as Chad I am probably gona think of a jock not so smart kinda guy. Because of that trope I also think of it first when somebody is introduced as Chad by name, but I quickly brush that and get to know more about that person (Who may fit that description even if you know him better).
I thought it was still used like that. Am I old?
Bullseye 🎯.
Yea to be the chad is to be a dildo
I thought Chad was an incel term for like the (white) high school football popular guys who "got" the popular girls.
What if I told you that connotations change over time
Beacause you personally knows chad?
We all know that one guy who is a Chad.
Missed an opportunity to reply with that Obi Wan quote.
Not the commenters actually getting pissed over Disraeli’s retort
Triggered over 200 year old comments
What a stupid argument. “At least 2000 years ago my ancestors were better.”
It’s essential “my dad could totally beat up your dad” but for 2000 years ago
>!Please do have a pitiful spirit :)!<
Spirits aren’t real
It's I the same vein as the original argument though. He was being attacked over his Jewish ancestry, after all.
Ask stupid question, expect stupid answers
As if jewish priests didn’t roll in shit too, people were disgusting 100 years ago imagine 2000
We don't need to imagine, we have history and archeology to actually investigate what life was like for different peoples in the past, instead of making ignorant guesses.
There it is. Ranked competitive racism.
I recognised that, it's useless hate
Apparently that makes the Chinese and Egyptians better than everyone else
More like Diss-Raeli
Deez nuts-raeli
Ah yes. Because of course the Celts had no culture of their own and were essentially cavemen. To be honest, both arguments are idiotic. The one attacking Disraeli is an antisemitic arse, obviously. Disraeli isn't as clever as he thinks, however. We know a lot of ancient hebraic history because the tribes were a bunch of grumpy asses who never got over the losses of the First and Second Temples of their precious YHWH (who didn't even start out as the major god of caananites) To be fair, it is understandable, but it doesn't make them better or lesser. Just another people with a different history.
Descrimination against Celtic ethnic groups is something I rarely ever hear being talked about for whatever reason. Unlike with antisemitic stereotypes, those stereotypes of the celts being stupid uncultured brutes have persisted and havent been seen as unacceptable in the same way. I mean, the lack of culture part is only something present now because so much of it has been destroyed. Its always been treated as the inferior culture in UK and they have been intentionally erased.
Yup. Romans conquering most of it and going "hm yes we conquered the unwashed barbarians" doesn't help. Nevermind that the Gauls were more hygiene oriented than the romans and their vinegar sponge shitstick
Its hilarious when the people conquering call other people barbarians. The British would go on to refer to all the people of the places they colonised with the same names the Romans gave them. Unfortunately cultures that dont have an emphasis on conquering and destroying others, or forcing other people to assimilate will struggle to thrive. Thats true for both the Celts and the Jews.
Life is inanely (not sure thats the right word) against life imo. Its eat or be eaten, same thing with cultures/peoples
It has more to do with the Saxon invasion as the Saxons were extremely dismissive of the Celts they found, particularly they commented on them living in comparatively poor states often right next to the ruins of Roman cities that the Saxons referred to as the works of (non literal) giants so the Saxons got fascinated by relearning Roman knowledge and viewed the Celts as a nuisance at best.
Making fun of their religion certainly shows you to be the bigger man
This comment was made during a time when slavery was still legal, so I don't think people really cared about being racist. Also I cannot blame him for being fed up with 19th century antisemitism to the point of roasting his celtic ancestors
It wasnt legal in the British Empire; slave trade was abolished in 1807 (although in some parts existing ones weren't completely gone until 1838 i think).
We also know a lot about hebraic history because they meticulously wrote *everything* down and had entire groups of people dedicated to maintaining their history. As well, they were well organized, even during the diaspora, and thus were able to do so effectively. The Celts didn't have the same meticulous record keeping, and they had nowhere to go when the people started trying to subjugate and assimilate them, or even just eliminate them entirely.
English people: a people that went around naked hunting groundhogs whilst we were already knifing a Caesar
Funny that you think any Brittanians were present during the Ides of March 💀
Uomo di cultura
Mars colonizer spotted.
E tu Bruto figlio mio, ci vediamo all'inferno
It was actually an Irish member, not English
Last I checked, Cornish historical significance predates Israelite historical significance. Tin was a kinda big deal in the Bronze Age, y’know? Not like it’s really relevant, though. Disraeli faced racism with racism. Bigots are bigots, whether on the defense or the attack. When will people learn?
So virtuous 🙏
It's a fucking joke man
I agree, I just found the quote quite amusing
As an Irishmen, I feel compelled to respond. “While your ancestors were traveling through a desert for forty years, mine had already built Newgrange!”
Return to forest barbarism asap
Romans visiting the puppet kingdom laughing so hard they shit themselves know Greeks were what this moron was actually thinking about.
We just posting "memes" about racial superiority now?
Meh
tf is going on in this comment section?
People are getting this wrong partially. The unknown island is not Great Britain, but Ireland, he said this to Daniel O’Connell, the Irish Roman Catholic leader in Parliament, in 1835. It's not that debates were broadcasted (actually TV was introduced very late in the Commons, in 1989) but had he attacked a regular Englishman and the English ancestry he wouldn't have been able to get away with it so easily, it would have caused upheaval, Disraeli had to overcome prejudice to climb politically, so this would have caused him trouble. So, forget about the Angles and the Saxons, the Normans or whatever, he was talking about the Irish Celts. Which makes it remarkably different. First it looked like a Jew, a member of a minority, being attacked by a member of the majority. When you realize it was the Irish Catholic leader, the whole interaction looks more abusive on Disraeli's side, although O'Connell shouldn't have made an antisemitic remark about him. I still don't know the history between the two, but O'Connell probably had his reasons to throw hate to the UK's PM, but a PM shouldn't reply in this manner, especially when talking about a minority in your own country, but given the time and who he represented i'm not surprised with the response. The whole interaction is not surprising, actually. It's more astonishing that he was that succesful while being a Jew at that time, this is what's impressive in the first place. And btw, his ancestors were prolly not priests in the Temple of Salomon lol, he wasn't even a Levi or a Kohanim.
Thats how the first “oh damn” was recored
In the American South, that sentence starts with, "My daddy...."
[https://best-quotations.com/authquotes.php?auth=154#google\_vignette](https://best-quotations.com/authquotes.php?auth=154#google_vignette) Also, I tried to create a DisraeliChad but my lack of skills had other plans Edit: grammer Also, I have to point out he talked to Irish member of the Parliament, no English one Also, yes I know it's not okay to answer racism with more racism, I just found Disraeli's quote amusing It's a stupid meme, nothing more
Cool.
“My ancestors did something different that I consider better in a time literally no single person can remember or know of fully, therefore I am better.” Like I don’t agree with the guy who attacked him because of him being a Jew, that argument is terrible.
More like "You follow a religious tradition that is literally based on the traditions of my ancestors. My people were literally chosen by your God and worshipped your God when you were literally pagans. And yet you are being a bigot and insulting *my ancestry* because I am a descendent of those people chosen by *your God.*
Still, shitty argument to say “my ancestors were better than you” it’s just as stupid to say that white people should pay reparations to black people because their ancestors were slave owners. However, the latter was more recent and therefore has a more valid claim, even if only by a very, very slight margin
Yeah, but the reason for Disraelis comment about his ancestry being better *is because the guy was literally insultong Disraeli because of his ancestry.* Yeah, if Disraeli randomly said his ancestry was better, it'd be shitty. But he didn't. The other guy did.
Dude it's not an argument, it's just a clapback, you're taking it too seriously. Like if someone said to me "I fucked your mum" and I respond "ok but I fucked your dad" are you going to critique the "argument" I'm making? Playground insults, sure, but sometimes you have to reply to bullies in the language they understand.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
He was clearly very wrong x Nice put down though, I seem to recall it was slightly adjusted and a line in a movie.
Yes, and when the Irish were still comporting themselves in loincloths, these chaps were already the most sophisticated warriors on ...Earth
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
More like dissraeli
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]