Thank you fren for touching on so many key point.

I my view, the bulk of what we product here should not be reaction driven narrative. In other words only following the path upon which we are directed by news events. We should be looking to discover facts, posit credible narrative that lie outside of the laid down path.

How our enemy operates to keep us within the circle of their narrative. Marxism attempts, using sophistry (sophist’s endeavor to deploy words in a way that is directly opposed to their purpose, namely, to mislead rather than to convey reality honestly and faithfully.) To convince us that something can be both an apple an not a apple at the same time.

Aristotle:

Law of Identity:

When A applies to the whole of B and of C, and is predicated of nothing else,    and B also applies to all of C, A and B must be convertible.  For since A is stated only of B and C, and B is predicated both of itself and of C, it is evident that B will also be stated of all subjects of which A is stated, except A itself.

Meaning: An Apple is an Apple

Law of the excluded middle:

And since the contradiction of a statement cannot be true at the same time of the same thing, it is obvious that contraries cannot apply at the same time to the same thing.  Nor indeed can there be any intermediate between contrary statements, but of one thing we must either assert or deny one thing, whatever it may be.

Meaning: You cannot be an Apple and an Orange.

Law of non-contradictions:

Let us next state what this principle is. "It is impossible for the same attribute at once to belong and not to belong to the same thing, and in the same relation"  This is the most certain of all principles, for it is impossible for anyone to suppose that the same thing is and is not

Meaning: You cannot be an apple and not an apple.

Marxist ideology, Lenin rejected the Law of Identity based on Hegel. Marxist ideology tells us and Apple can be an Orange. or an Apple and not an Apple

Marxist ideology attempts to create a pseudo reality that depends on us not being able to have any grounding in reality. Marxist relies on the total destruction of reality. And then by calling their view of the world Science (Scientism), anyone this disagrees with their Science does not agree with their reality, and does not have to be respected. "My view is scientific, you have a right to disagree with me, but not with the science" is their claim as they remove your authority to respond.

The above is some notes I made from the video I am linking to below, for my own understanding. I feel like the information presented in this video should underlie what we understand about the news given us, and how we respond to it.

I am running out of ability to focus (meds wearing off lol), and time to reply here, so I would like to ask you to view this video starting @1:48:56

The information perfectly and succinctly, I think, describes why we are always behind the curve, and it explains one of the key factors of why Q was a game-changer, and still is. "Q caused us to break off of, to leave the laid down narrative, to escape he circle of the reality defined for us.

What I am aiming to do with this reply is to add emphasis to some of your points that we should not unquestionably accept a story based on its appeal.

Thank you fren for touching on so many key point.

I my view, the bulk of what we product here should not be reaction driven narrative. In other words only following the path upon which we are directed by news events. We should be looking to discover facts, posit credible narrative that lie outside of the laid down path.

How our enemy operates to keep us within the circle of their narrative. Marxism attempts, using sophistry (sophist’s endeavor to deploy words in a way that is directly opposed to their purpose, namely, to mislead rather than to convey reality honestly and faithfully.) To convince us that something can be both an apple an not a apple at the same time.

Aristotle:

Law of Identity:

When A applies to the whole of B and of C, and is predicated of nothing else,    and B also applies to all of C, A and B must be convertible.  For since A is stated only of B and C, and B is predicated both of itself and of C, it is evident that B will also be stated of all subjects of which A is stated, except A itself.

Meaning: An Apple is an Apple

Law of the excluded middle:

And since the contradiction of a statement cannot be true at the same time of the same thing, it is obvious that contraries cannot apply at the same time to the same thing.  Nor indeed can there be any intermediate between contrary statements, but of one thing we must either assert or deny one thing, whatever it may be.

Meaning: You cannot be an Apple and an Orange.

Law of non-contradictions:

Let us next state what this principle is. "It is impossible for the same attribute at once to belong and not to belong to the same thing, and in the same relation"  This is the most certain of all principles, for it is impossible for anyone to suppose that the same thing is and is not

Meaning: You cannot be an apple and not an apple.

Marxist ideology, Lenin rejected the Law of Identity based on Hegel. Marxist ideology tells us and Apple can be an Orange. or an Apple and not an Apple

Marxist ideology attempts to create a pseudo reality that depends on us not being able to have any grounding in reality. Marxist relies on the total destruction of reality. And then by calling their view of the world Science (Scientism), anyone this agrees with their Science does not agree with reality, and does not have to be respected. "My view is scientific, you have a right to disagree with me, but not with the science" is their claim as they remove your authority to respond.

The above is some notes I made from the video I am linking to below, for my own understanding. I feel like the information presented in this video should underlie what we understand about the news given us, and how we respond to it.

I am running out of ability to focus (meds wearing off lol), and time to reply here, so I would like to ask you to view this video starting @1:48:56

The information perfectly and succinctly, I think, describes why we are always behind the curve, and it explains one of the key factors of why Q was a game-changer, and still is. "Q caused us to break off of, to leave the laid down narrative, to escape he circle of the reality defined for us.

What I am aiming to do with this reply is to add emphasis to some of your points that we should not unquestionably accept a story based on its appeal.

Thank you fren for touching on so many key point.

I my view, the bulk of what we product here should not be reaction driven narrative. In other words only following the path upon which we are directed by news events. We should be looking to discover facts, posit credible narrative that lie outside of the laid down path.

How our enemy operates to keep us within the circle of their narrative. Marxism attempts, using sophistry (sophist’s endeavor to deploy words in a way that is directly opposed to their purpose, namely, to mislead rather than to convey reality honestly and faithfully.) To convince us that something can be both an apple an not a apple at the same time.

Aristotle:

Law of Identity:

When A applies to the whole of B and of C, and is predicated of nothing else,    and B also applies to all of C, A and B must be convertible.  For since A is stated only of B and C, and B is predicated both of itself and of C, it is evident that B will also be stated of all subjects of which A is stated, except A itself.

Meaning: An Apple is an Apple

Law of the excluded middle:

And since the contradiction of a statement cannot be true at the same time of the same thing, it is obvious that contraries cannot apply at the same time to the same thing.  Nor indeed can there be any intermediate between contrary statements, but of one thing we must either assert or deny one thing, whatever it may be.

Meaning: You cannot be an Apple and an Orange.

Law of non-contradictions:

Let us next state what this principle is. "It is impossible for the same attribute at once to belong and not to belong to the same thing, and in the same relation"  This is the most certain of all principles, for it is impossible for anyone to suppose that the same thing is and is not

Meaning: You cannot be an apple and not an apple.

Marxist ideology, Lenin rejected the Law of Identity based on Hegel. Marxist ideology tells us and Apple can be an Orange. or an Apple and not an Apple

Marxist ideology attempts to create a pseudo reality that depends on us not being able to have any grounding in reality. Marxist relies on the total destruction of reality. And then by calling their view of the world Science (Scientism), anyone this agrees with their Science does not agree with reality, and does not have to be respected. "My view is scientific, you have a right to disagree with me, but not with the science" is their claim as they remove your authority to respond.

The above is some notes I made from the video I am linking to below, for my own understanding. I feel like the information presented in this video should underlie what we understand about the news given us, and how we respond to it.

I am running out of ability to focus (meds wearing off lol), and time to reply here, so I would like to ask you to view this video starting @1:48:56

The information perfectly and succinctly, I think, describes why we are always behind the curve, and it explains one of the key factors of why Q was a game-changer, and still is. "Q caused us to break off of, to leave the laid down narrative, to escape he circle of the reality defined for us.

What I am aiming to do with this reply is to add emphasis to some of your points that we should not unquestionably accept a story based on its appeal.