John 9:31 "Now we know that God heareth not sinners: but if any man be a worshipper of God, and doeth his will, him he heareth." As long as she's supporting the things she supports, she's wasting her time. Unless she's praying to SOMETHING ELSE.
The chief defect of all previous materialism (that of Feuerbach included) is that things [Gegenstand], reality, sensuousness are conceived only in the form of the object, or of contemplation, but not as sensuous human activity, practice, not subjectively. Hence, in contradistinction to materialism, the active side was set forth abstractly by idealism — which, of course, does not know real, sensuous activity as such. Feuerbach wants sensuous objects, really distinct from conceptual objects, but he does not conceive human activity itself as objective activity. In Das Wesen des Christenthums, he therefore regards the theoretical attitude as the only genuinely human attitude, while practice is conceived and defined only in its dirty-Jewish form of appearance [2]. Hence he does not grasp the significance of “revolutionary”, of “practical-critical”, activity.
2
The question whether objective truth can be attributed to human thinking is not a question of theory but is a practical question. Man must prove the truth, i.e., the reality and power, the this-worldliness of his thinking in practice. The dispute over the reality or non-reality of thinking which is isolated from practice is a purely scholastic question.
3
The materialist doctrine concerning the changing of circumstances and upbringing forgets that circumstances are changed by men and that the educator must himself be educated. This doctrine must, therefore, divide society into two parts, one of which is superior to society.
The coincidence of the changing of circumstances and of human activity or self-change can be conceived and rationally understood only as revolutionary practice.
4
Feuerbach starts out from the fact of religious self-estrangement, of the duplication of the world into a religious world and a secular one. His work consists in resolving the religious world into its secular basis. But that the secular basis lifts off from itself and establishes itself as an independent realm in the clouds can only be explained by the inner strife and intrinsic contradictoriness of this secular basis. The latter must, therefore, itself be both understood in its contradiction and revolutionised in practice. Thus, for instance, once the earthly family is discovered to be the secret of the holy family, the former must then itself be destroyed in theory and in practice.
5
Feuerbach, not satisfied with abstract thinking, wants [sensuous] contemplation; but he does not conceive sensuousness as practical, human-sensuous activity.
6
Feuerbach resolves the essence of religion into the essence of man. But the essence of man is no abstraction inherent in each single individual. In its reality it is the ensemble of the social relations.
Feuerbach, who does not enter upon a criticism of this real essence, is hence obliged:
1. To abstract from the historical process and to define the religious sentiment [Gemüt] by itself, and to presuppose an abstract — isolated — human individual.
2. Essence, therefore, can be regarded only as “species”, as an inner, mute, general character which unites the many individuals in a natural way.
7
Feuerbach, consequently, does not see that the “religious sentiment” is itself a social product, and that the abstract individual which he analyses belongs to a particular form of society.
8
All social life is essentially practical. All mysteries which lead theory to mysticism find their rational solution in human practice and in the comprehension of this practice.
9
The highest point reached by contemplative materialism, that is, materialism which does not comprehend sensuousness as practical activity, is the contemplation of single individuals and of civil society.
10
The standpoint of the old materialism is “civil” society; the standpoint of the new is human society, or social humanity.
11
The philosophers have only interpreted the world in various ways; the point is to change it.
Gentlemen:
There are striking analogies in history. The Jacobin of 1793 has become the communist of our day. When Russia, Austria, and Prussia partitioned Poland among themselves in 1793, the three powers relied on the Constitution of 1791 which they had unanimously condemned for its alleged Jacobin principles.
And what did that Polish Constitution of 1791 proclaim? Nothing but a constitutional monarchy: legislative power in the hands of the representatives of the country; freedom of the press; freedom of conscience; open court proceedings; abolition of serfdom, etc. And all that was then called Jacobinism! Thus, gentlemen, you see that history was moved forward. What was then Jacobinism has today become liberalism, and in its most moderate form at that.
The three powers marched with history. In 1846, when they incorporated Krakow into Austria and robbed the Poles of their last vestige of independence, they designated as communism what had previously been called Jacobinism.
But, what did did the communism of the Krakow revolution consist of? Was it communist because it wanted to restore the Polish nationality? One could as well say that the war which the European Coalition waged against Napoleon was communistic and that the Congress of Vienna [1815] was made up of crowned communists. Or was the Krakow revolution communistic because it wanted to install a democratic government? Nobody would accuse the millions of citizens of Bern and New York of communistic impulses.
Communism denies the necessity of the existence of classes; it wants to abolish all classes, all class distinctions. The Krakow revolution wanted to extirpate only the political distinctions among classes, it wanted to give equal rights to all classes.
So, in what respect, finally, was this Krakow revolution communistic?
Perchance because it wanted to break the chains of feudalism, to liberate property from feudal obligations and to transform it into modern property?
If one asked French property owners, “Do you know what the Polish democrats want? The Polish democrats want to introduce in their country the form of property that exists among you,” the French property owner would answer, “That is very good.” But if one says to the French property owner, as Guizot did, “The Poles want to abolish the form of property you established by your Revolution of 1789 and which still exists among you,” then they exclaim, “What! They are all revolutionists, communists! The scoundrels should be destroyed” The abolition of corporations and guilds, and the introduction of free competition – this is now called communism in Sweden. The [Paris daily] Journal des Debats [Politiques et Litteraires] goes even further: the abolition of revenues guaranteed to 200,000 voters by corrupt law as a source of income, which the Journal considers rightfully acquired property, this it calls communism. Undoubtedly the Krakow revolution wanted to abolish a certain kind of property. But what kind of property? The kind that in the rest of Europe can no more be abolished than the Swiss Sonderbund [federation] – because neither one exists any more.
Nobody will deny that in Poland the political question is tied up with the social one. For a long time they have been inseparable from each other.
Just ask the reactionaries about it! Did they fight during the Restoration purely against political liberalism and the Voltaireanism that was necessarily dragged along with it?
A very famous reactionary author has openly admitted that the loftiest metaphysics of a de Maistre and a de Bonald reduces itself in the last analysis to a money question – and is not every money question directly a social question? The men of the Restoration did not conceal the fact that in order to return to the policies of the good old days one must restore the good old property, the feudal property and the moral property. Everybody knows that fealty to the monarch is unthinkable without tithes and socages.
Let us go back further. In 1789, the political question of human rights absorbed in itself the social rights of free competition.
And what is it all about in England? Did the political parties there, in all questions, from the Reform Bill [June 7, 1830] to the abolition of the Corn Laws [June, 1846], fight for anything other than changes of property, questions of property, social questions?
Here in Belgium itself, is the struggle between liberalism and Catholicism anything else than a struggle between industrial capital and big landownership?
And the political questions that have been debated for 17 years, are they not at bottom social questions?
Thus no matter what position one takes – be it liberal or radical or conservative – nobody can reproach the Krakow revolution with having entangled a social question with a political one!
The men at the head of the revolutionary movement in Krakow were most deeply convinced that only a democratic Poland could be independent, and that a Polish democracy was impossible without an abolition of feudal rights, without an agrarian movement that would transform the feudally obligated peasants into modern owners. Put Russian autocrats over Polish aristocrats; thereby you have merely naturalized the despotism. In exactly the same way, in their war against foreign rule, the Germans have exchanged one Napoleon for 36 Metternichs.
If the Polish feudal lord no longer has a Russian feudal lord over him, the Polish peasant has not a less feudal lord over him – indeed, a free, in place of an enslaved, lord. The political change has changed nothing in the peasant's social position.
The Krakow revolution has set all of Europe a glorious example, because it identified the question of nationalism with democracy and with the liberation of the oppressed class.
Even though this revolution has been strangled with the bloody hands of paid murderers, it now nevertheless rises gloriously and triumphantly in Switzerland and in Italy. It finds its principles confirmed in Ireland, where O'Connell's party [the Irish Confederation, founded January 1847] with its narrowly restricted nationalistic aims has sunk into the grave, and the new national party is pledged above all to reform and democracy.
Again it is Poland that has seized the initiative, and no longer a feudal Poland but a democratic Poland; and from this point on its liberation has become a matter of honor for all the democrats of Europe.
She's an unrepentant Kenite. A child of Satan. Only Satan is interested in HER prayers. Just check her bank balance achieved through "sweetheart" insider trading (LEGAL for congress....no so much so for Martha whats her face).
has got to be more smug than calling someone buddy or sweety in a diaagreement, or smiling and waving at a road rager, even if you are in the right. This is coming from someone who used to say that very phrase and never followed through on it.
The consensus among my friends/family/acquaintances is that her statement was simply bizarre. After that, there were minor disagreements on whether she told the truth, and if so what was she praying to, did she expect an answer, or was she pandering to her audience. But IMHO, the small-g gods she serves are chewing her up and about to spit her out.
Her comment reminds me of Luke 22:31-32, when Jesus says "Simon, Simon, Satan has asked to sift each of you like wheat.But I** have prayed for you**, Simon, that your faith will not fail. And when you have turned back, strengthen your brothers.”
They do have a god and they probably do pray to and worship him but, he is NOT the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and he will NOT be able to save them!
I vote Baal. Remember when ISIS blew up that temple arch in Palmira, then a replica was sent to major Western cities? And the MSM said it was in "protest"? That arch was from the temple of Baal. Where babies were sacrificed. And look at the dates where it was on exhibit.
Thank you! Some shills were trying to downplay the NP's 'intervention' comment, but I couldn't remember which other DS actor had made that comment, so I couldn't refute, now I can😎
Watch the loop of NoName and his slip. Now watch his face with the sound off knowing where he says intervention. This is the most convincing proof Kennedy was assassinated I have ever witnessed. Basically a verbal confession on camera.
Thanks for the reminder, and you're right, it's EXTREMELY obvious the Noname knew what really happened to JFK! And they thought they were going to get away with it! 😆😆😆
Dumbing it down for lurkers and newbies misses the points, which include but are not limited to (a) it's a Voldemort concept where we do not pollute ourselves by speaking such evil, (b) it's a Voldemort concept where we do not empower evil by giving it a name (Dumbledore always called him Tom), (c) all Q patriots know of no-name and find unity in our code-speak, which is most appropriate for a QRV board, (d) newbies will feel part-of-the-group by learning this simplest of "comm," (e) continuing to be cryptic even after he is dead immortalizes him as a traitor, (f) a surname roots us in history, and a traitor deserves to be removed from history, so removal of a name is a way to acknowledge his affiliation with America, (g) names convey authority, so removal of a name removes authority.
For all these reasons and more, I don't plan to dumb-it-down for the newbies. Patriots can be held to high standards.
Why purpously make a high barrier to entry? All you end up doing is calling people shills for asking questions, then making sure people lurking and reading can't follow along so no one new can actually follow the Q stuff even if they want to.
I thought the exact same thing. Remember Pelosi speaking about "the spark of divinity" when referring to MS13 gang members, trying to make us believe that they were human beings created by God, and not animals as Trump had called them. How about the "spark of divinity" in every child who is ripped from it's mother's womb, sometimes deliberately murdered after birth? Fucking dementia-addled bitch must have forgotten about that part...we might hope that she gets gang-raped by the animals, but I don't think even THEY would want a piece of that. Time for the old nag to retire...maybe get a gig endorsing Depends undergarments or those "I've fallen and can't get up!" Life-Alarm units.
If she continues as she is, and does not repent, there is NOTHING in this life that we can do to her that will come close to the eternal suffering and punishment that awaits her.
The mirror is some mechanism that is suddenly flipping all their black magic against them. Also psychological projection (accusing others of your own faults). And also it has something to do with alphanumeric codings and the reversing of words and dates. Oh and also mirrors from what i gather are a really important concept in MK Ultra programming.
You know what, there are a lot of meanings for "mirror"!
Everything in the occult turns everything in Christianity upside down. For ex. they say Jesus isn't God but Lucifer. Lucifer really helped Adam and Eve Jesus wanted to keep knowledge from them. To a Christian who has zero knowledge of this can sit through a worship ceremony and never know it is satanic because they co-opt the same words. A Christian will say that God is light in the occult they say Lucifer is light.
Yes I get that - they've flipped everything. Even beyond Christianity to include other beliefs, symbols, pyramid technology and so on. Just saying there is much more going on here with respect mirrors than just the fact that things have been inverted. The mirror seems to be a fundamental tool of spiritual warfare, and Q is using it against them.
18832181? ago
The party of infanticide knows all about preying.
18818241? ago
Kek
18817168? ago
Prey (upon) she really meant
18812731? ago
She is praying but to WHOM?
18815746? ago
John 9:31 "Now we know that God heareth not sinners: but if any man be a worshipper of God, and doeth his will, him he heareth." As long as she's supporting the things she supports, she's wasting her time. Unless she's praying to SOMETHING ELSE.
18823217? ago
Yup. "and doeth his will" is the key phrase.
18812065? ago
1
The chief defect of all previous materialism (that of Feuerbach included) is that things [Gegenstand], reality, sensuousness are conceived only in the form of the object, or of contemplation, but not as sensuous human activity, practice, not subjectively. Hence, in contradistinction to materialism, the active side was set forth abstractly by idealism — which, of course, does not know real, sensuous activity as such. Feuerbach wants sensuous objects, really distinct from conceptual objects, but he does not conceive human activity itself as objective activity. In Das Wesen des Christenthums, he therefore regards the theoretical attitude as the only genuinely human attitude, while practice is conceived and defined only in its dirty-Jewish form of appearance [2]. Hence he does not grasp the significance of “revolutionary”, of “practical-critical”, activity. 2
The question whether objective truth can be attributed to human thinking is not a question of theory but is a practical question. Man must prove the truth, i.e., the reality and power, the this-worldliness of his thinking in practice. The dispute over the reality or non-reality of thinking which is isolated from practice is a purely scholastic question. 3
The materialist doctrine concerning the changing of circumstances and upbringing forgets that circumstances are changed by men and that the educator must himself be educated. This doctrine must, therefore, divide society into two parts, one of which is superior to society. The coincidence of the changing of circumstances and of human activity or self-change can be conceived and rationally understood only as revolutionary practice. 4
Feuerbach starts out from the fact of religious self-estrangement, of the duplication of the world into a religious world and a secular one. His work consists in resolving the religious world into its secular basis. But that the secular basis lifts off from itself and establishes itself as an independent realm in the clouds can only be explained by the inner strife and intrinsic contradictoriness of this secular basis. The latter must, therefore, itself be both understood in its contradiction and revolutionised in practice. Thus, for instance, once the earthly family is discovered to be the secret of the holy family, the former must then itself be destroyed in theory and in practice. 5
Feuerbach, not satisfied with abstract thinking, wants [sensuous] contemplation; but he does not conceive sensuousness as practical, human-sensuous activity. 6
Feuerbach resolves the essence of religion into the essence of man. But the essence of man is no abstraction inherent in each single individual. In its reality it is the ensemble of the social relations. Feuerbach, who does not enter upon a criticism of this real essence, is hence obliged: 1. To abstract from the historical process and to define the religious sentiment [Gemüt] by itself, and to presuppose an abstract — isolated — human individual. 2. Essence, therefore, can be regarded only as “species”, as an inner, mute, general character which unites the many individuals in a natural way. 7
Feuerbach, consequently, does not see that the “religious sentiment” is itself a social product, and that the abstract individual which he analyses belongs to a particular form of society. 8
All social life is essentially practical. All mysteries which lead theory to mysticism find their rational solution in human practice and in the comprehension of this practice. 9
The highest point reached by contemplative materialism, that is, materialism which does not comprehend sensuousness as practical activity, is the contemplation of single individuals and of civil society. 10
The standpoint of the old materialism is “civil” society; the standpoint of the new is human society, or social humanity. 11
The philosophers have only interpreted the world in various ways; the point is to change it.
18812032? ago
Gentlemen: There are striking analogies in history. The Jacobin of 1793 has become the communist of our day. When Russia, Austria, and Prussia partitioned Poland among themselves in 1793, the three powers relied on the Constitution of 1791 which they had unanimously condemned for its alleged Jacobin principles. And what did that Polish Constitution of 1791 proclaim? Nothing but a constitutional monarchy: legislative power in the hands of the representatives of the country; freedom of the press; freedom of conscience; open court proceedings; abolition of serfdom, etc. And all that was then called Jacobinism! Thus, gentlemen, you see that history was moved forward. What was then Jacobinism has today become liberalism, and in its most moderate form at that. The three powers marched with history. In 1846, when they incorporated Krakow into Austria and robbed the Poles of their last vestige of independence, they designated as communism what had previously been called Jacobinism. But, what did did the communism of the Krakow revolution consist of? Was it communist because it wanted to restore the Polish nationality? One could as well say that the war which the European Coalition waged against Napoleon was communistic and that the Congress of Vienna [1815] was made up of crowned communists. Or was the Krakow revolution communistic because it wanted to install a democratic government? Nobody would accuse the millions of citizens of Bern and New York of communistic impulses. Communism denies the necessity of the existence of classes; it wants to abolish all classes, all class distinctions. The Krakow revolution wanted to extirpate only the political distinctions among classes, it wanted to give equal rights to all classes. So, in what respect, finally, was this Krakow revolution communistic? Perchance because it wanted to break the chains of feudalism, to liberate property from feudal obligations and to transform it into modern property? If one asked French property owners, “Do you know what the Polish democrats want? The Polish democrats want to introduce in their country the form of property that exists among you,” the French property owner would answer, “That is very good.” But if one says to the French property owner, as Guizot did, “The Poles want to abolish the form of property you established by your Revolution of 1789 and which still exists among you,” then they exclaim, “What! They are all revolutionists, communists! The scoundrels should be destroyed” The abolition of corporations and guilds, and the introduction of free competition – this is now called communism in Sweden. The [Paris daily] Journal des Debats [Politiques et Litteraires] goes even further: the abolition of revenues guaranteed to 200,000 voters by corrupt law as a source of income, which the Journal considers rightfully acquired property, this it calls communism. Undoubtedly the Krakow revolution wanted to abolish a certain kind of property. But what kind of property? The kind that in the rest of Europe can no more be abolished than the Swiss Sonderbund [federation] – because neither one exists any more. Nobody will deny that in Poland the political question is tied up with the social one. For a long time they have been inseparable from each other. Just ask the reactionaries about it! Did they fight during the Restoration purely against political liberalism and the Voltaireanism that was necessarily dragged along with it? A very famous reactionary author has openly admitted that the loftiest metaphysics of a de Maistre and a de Bonald reduces itself in the last analysis to a money question – and is not every money question directly a social question? The men of the Restoration did not conceal the fact that in order to return to the policies of the good old days one must restore the good old property, the feudal property and the moral property. Everybody knows that fealty to the monarch is unthinkable without tithes and socages. Let us go back further. In 1789, the political question of human rights absorbed in itself the social rights of free competition. And what is it all about in England? Did the political parties there, in all questions, from the Reform Bill [June 7, 1830] to the abolition of the Corn Laws [June, 1846], fight for anything other than changes of property, questions of property, social questions? Here in Belgium itself, is the struggle between liberalism and Catholicism anything else than a struggle between industrial capital and big landownership? And the political questions that have been debated for 17 years, are they not at bottom social questions? Thus no matter what position one takes – be it liberal or radical or conservative – nobody can reproach the Krakow revolution with having entangled a social question with a political one! The men at the head of the revolutionary movement in Krakow were most deeply convinced that only a democratic Poland could be independent, and that a Polish democracy was impossible without an abolition of feudal rights, without an agrarian movement that would transform the feudally obligated peasants into modern owners. Put Russian autocrats over Polish aristocrats; thereby you have merely naturalized the despotism. In exactly the same way, in their war against foreign rule, the Germans have exchanged one Napoleon for 36 Metternichs. If the Polish feudal lord no longer has a Russian feudal lord over him, the Polish peasant has not a less feudal lord over him – indeed, a free, in place of an enslaved, lord. The political change has changed nothing in the peasant's social position. The Krakow revolution has set all of Europe a glorious example, because it identified the question of nationalism with democracy and with the liberation of the oppressed class. Even though this revolution has been strangled with the bloody hands of paid murderers, it now nevertheless rises gloriously and triumphantly in Switzerland and in Italy. It finds its principles confirmed in Ireland, where O'Connell's party [the Irish Confederation, founded January 1847] with its narrowly restricted nationalistic aims has sunk into the grave, and the new national party is pledged above all to reform and democracy. Again it is Poland that has seized the initiative, and no longer a feudal Poland but a democratic Poland; and from this point on its liberation has become a matter of honor for all the democrats of Europe.
18807320? ago
She be praying like rhis. Oh father satan help, Trump is coming for us.
18804400? ago
pelosi and the dems don't even care about america, let alone the people in this country ... of course they don't care about the unborn
18804152? ago
She's an unrepentant Kenite. A child of Satan. Only Satan is interested in HER prayers. Just check her bank balance achieved through "sweetheart" insider trading (LEGAL for congress....no so much so for Martha whats her face).
18803443? ago
has got to be more smug than calling someone buddy or sweety in a diaagreement, or smiling and waving at a road rager, even if you are in the right. This is coming from someone who used to say that very phrase and never followed through on it.
18815135? ago
"bless your heart"
18803329? ago
They prey
18801727? ago
The consensus among my friends/family/acquaintances is that her statement was simply bizarre. After that, there were minor disagreements on whether she told the truth, and if so what was she praying to, did she expect an answer, or was she pandering to her audience. But IMHO, the small-g gods she serves are chewing her up and about to spit her out.
18801531? ago
MEANWHILE
GOD sneaks in a Haymaker dropping Naddler ;>)
High five Jesus to Dad(GOD)
18801298? ago
pray for sagless tits you vampire.
18800210? ago
https://redd.it/bsjxgo
Hat Tip.
18799438? ago
Trump JR 2024
18797759? ago
Her comment reminds me of Luke 22:31-32, when Jesus says "Simon, Simon, Satan has asked to sift each of you like wheat.But I** have prayed for you**, Simon, that your faith will not fail. And when you have turned back, strengthen your brothers.”
18798219? ago
Jesus was not referring to your Greek pagan bullshit.
Peter was sifted in the same manner that Job was sifted.
18797612? ago
We have the BEST shit-posting family. Every one of them is incredible.
18797040? ago
When Don Trump Jr is sticking it in Kim Guilofolyes butthole with 5 kids under 10 years old. He wishes he had aborted them i'm sure at climax.
18797345? ago
u seriously need to PRAY to GOD for HELP with your DEMENTED MIND!😱 BET YOU'RE A NASTY PEDOPHILE TOO!🤮🤮🤮
18797396? ago
I am actually a pedophile. I have a young child and a long straw and their Adrenochrome is strong.
18797510? ago
Even if you're just playing a part, you're a demented fuck who will be eliminated in coming HARVEST 👹💀👹
18797534? ago
I'm not. Come get me. I'm literally on here admitting. No VPN or anything.
18796947? ago
They do have a god and they probably do pray to and worship him but, he is NOT the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and he will NOT be able to save them!
18815611? ago
I vote Baal. Remember when ISIS blew up that temple arch in Palmira, then a replica was sent to major Western cities? And the MSM said it was in "protest"? That arch was from the temple of Baal. Where babies were sacrificed. And look at the dates where it was on exhibit.
18812769? ago
Amen!
18796977? ago
My thoughts exactly
18796931? ago
She's praying for an intervention. Remember 'no name' calling the JFK assassination and intervention? She's praying to Moloch.
18797281? ago
Thank you! Some shills were trying to downplay the NP's 'intervention' comment, but I couldn't remember which other DS actor had made that comment, so I couldn't refute, now I can😎
18797688? ago
Watch the loop of NoName and his slip. Now watch his face with the sound off knowing where he says intervention. This is the most convincing proof Kennedy was assassinated I have ever witnessed. Basically a verbal confession on camera.
18810327? ago
Thanks for the reminder, and you're right, it's EXTREMELY obvious the Noname knew what really happened to JFK! And they thought they were going to get away with it! 😆😆😆
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mPZHh11gNI4
18805012? ago
Do you have a link to this video?
18805929? ago
https://www.bitchute.com/video/EST4VeoXMmF6
18817035? ago
Thanks.
18797622? ago
Just say McCain. No reason to cryptic 100% of the time.
18799615? ago
Don't you know anything about HOW humans learn?? 🤔
18798085? ago
You must be new. We don't say that name here, he is referred to only as NoName.
18798112? ago
Not new but there are more new eyes looking at the Q thing, especially since the decalss yesterday. Just want it to be easy to digest for lurkers.
18802284? ago
Dumbing it down for lurkers and newbies misses the points, which include but are not limited to (a) it's a Voldemort concept where we do not pollute ourselves by speaking such evil, (b) it's a Voldemort concept where we do not empower evil by giving it a name (Dumbledore always called him Tom), (c) all Q patriots know of no-name and find unity in our code-speak, which is most appropriate for a QRV board, (d) newbies will feel part-of-the-group by learning this simplest of "comm," (e) continuing to be cryptic even after he is dead immortalizes him as a traitor, (f) a surname roots us in history, and a traitor deserves to be removed from history, so removal of a name is a way to acknowledge his affiliation with America, (g) names convey authority, so removal of a name removes authority.
For all these reasons and more, I don't plan to dumb-it-down for the newbies. Patriots can be held to high standards.
18798343? ago
We had to figure it out, they will too. No need to show respect to noname when none is deserved.
18803273? ago
Why purpously make a high barrier to entry? All you end up doing is calling people shills for asking questions, then making sure people lurking and reading can't follow along so no one new can actually follow the Q stuff even if they want to.
18797884? ago
No name is the name given to traitors, it is not meant to be cryptic.
18796919? ago
I thought the exact same thing. Remember Pelosi speaking about "the spark of divinity" when referring to MS13 gang members, trying to make us believe that they were human beings created by God, and not animals as Trump had called them. How about the "spark of divinity" in every child who is ripped from it's mother's womb, sometimes deliberately murdered after birth? Fucking dementia-addled bitch must have forgotten about that part...we might hope that she gets gang-raped by the animals, but I don't think even THEY would want a piece of that. Time for the old nag to retire...maybe get a gig endorsing Depends undergarments or those "I've fallen and can't get up!" Life-Alarm units.
https://twitter.com/CaptainCaleb2
18815644? ago
If she continues as she is, and does not repent, there is NOTHING in this life that we can do to her that will come close to the eternal suffering and punishment that awaits her.
18798784? ago
Cracking up thinking of the commercial, Nancy laying on the kitchen floor with a pained expression on her face...
"I've fallen, and I can't get up!"
Trump walks in, kicks the old bat in the head and says, "Good!"
18802375? ago
Trump is a gentleman; He would not kick her. He would try to negotiate with her to call the paramedics and she'd refuse out of spite.
18798330? ago
Her and Bernie are a walking advertisement for A Place for Mom
18797988? ago
Yes. Very well stated and it shows her hypocrisy very well.
18796548? ago
They are praying to their demons.
18802619? ago
They're. They're demons.
18801529? ago
Hijacking top comment to remind real users of the following.
https://voat.co/v/GreatAwakening/3208705
https://voat.co/v/GreatAwakening/3208696
Spread the information about the tech at least if you are unwilling to believe that (((Q))) is not working with POTUS.
18799235? ago
This. Think mirror. They pray to Moloch and instead of help they ask for harm.
18806497? ago
The mirror is some mechanism that is suddenly flipping all their black magic against them. Also psychological projection (accusing others of your own faults). And also it has something to do with alphanumeric codings and the reversing of words and dates. Oh and also mirrors from what i gather are a really important concept in MK Ultra programming.
You know what, there are a lot of meanings for "mirror"!
The movie "annihilation" comes to mind.
18812763? ago
Everything in the occult turns everything in Christianity upside down. For ex. they say Jesus isn't God but Lucifer. Lucifer really helped Adam and Eve Jesus wanted to keep knowledge from them. To a Christian who has zero knowledge of this can sit through a worship ceremony and never know it is satanic because they co-opt the same words. A Christian will say that God is light in the occult they say Lucifer is light.
18816683? ago
Yes I get that - they've flipped everything. Even beyond Christianity to include other beliefs, symbols, pyramid technology and so on. Just saying there is much more going on here with respect mirrors than just the fact that things have been inverted. The mirror seems to be a fundamental tool of spiritual warfare, and Q is using it against them.
18823203? ago
I'll have to ponder that.
18796497? ago
Absolutely right Jr.
18796102? ago
Check the Gematria anon
18796075? ago
https://www.bitchute.com/video/9gyYxooibfAk
18796022? ago
There’s a left-to-the-head-and-right-to-the-jaw retort.