Comments by "KrissowskiM" (@KrissowskiM) on "TIKhistory" channel.

  1. 7
  2. 6
  3. 5
  4. 5
  5. 5
  6. 5
  7. 4
  8. 4
  9. 4
  10. Ad hominem is when an interlocutor states that your arguments are irrelevant BECAUSE you are ‘this’ and ‘this’ and ‘that’. Like you attempted it with ‘antisemitism’ towards my statement about Jews welcoming Germans and commies in 1939 because what I stated are undeniable facts. That was an ‘ad hominem’ argument in its purest form! I am not doing this. First of all - I am not argumenting against you because your statements about 1919/1920 war are pure nonsense. They are not worth debunking as anybody with historical knowledge chokes and spits whatever they are drinking at the time when they encounter them in your posts... they are that ahistorical it’s pointless to discuss anything with you like it’s pointless to discuss religion of feminism with a feminist or a geode with an flatearther. You created your own ‘version’ of history and you are attempting to manipulate your interlocutors into argumenting within that false frame. No thank you, manipulative grifters like you don’t deserve validation through being taken seriously. There are dozens of professional historians who agree with hundreds of other authorities and institutions about history of Poland and they are all claiming entirely different points than yours. As far as I remember from skimming through your bs - you are even denying Lenin and his statements about bolsheviks plans. In other words you claim you know better what Lenin was attempting to do than Lenin himself! Do you see what a pathetic clown you are? Second - I am stating that because your arguments are basically lies, half truths and manipulations - you are a hater and your religion is hate towards Poland. Not the other way round - that you are a hater and your arguments are therefore invalid. That would be ad hominem. Now let me follow your path (but it’s justified in my case as opposed to your statement) and express satisfaction from enabling you to learn something from me today. From now on you will know what ad hominem is and will make less of a douche out of yourself in your Internet ‘discussions’, ok? Or you could check the definition with Aristotle’s works if you distrust me...
    4
  11. 4
  12. 3
  13. 3
  14. 3
  15. 3
  16. 3
  17. 3
  18. 3
  19. 3
  20. 3
  21. 2
  22. 2
  23. 2
  24. 2
  25. 2
  26. 2
  27. 2
  28. 2
  29. 2
  30. 2
  31. 2
  32. 2
  33. 2
  34. 2
  35. 2
  36. 2
  37. 2
  38. 2
  39. 2
  40. 2
  41. 1
  42. 1
  43. 1
  44. 1
  45. 1
  46. 1
  47. 1
  48. 1
  49. 1
  50. 1