3
NotInFormation 3 points ago +3 / -0

“Our democracy “ at work.

Sadly for EUrocrats this probably either ends for them under a scimitar or a guillotine.

1
NotInFormation 1 point ago +2 / -1

The Jesuits have been sneaky underhanded schemers longer than there's been a USA. One can only tangentially call them Catholic at all.

Relevant to this board, consider the kind of people Jesuits persecuted back around the time this country was founded. That's some fun noodle baking and will get you labeled as far wierder than a mere Q enthusiast.

1
NotInFormation 1 point ago +1 / -0

No. We preserve our milkweed and get an excellent response from butterflies.

Took em a year to realize that the resource was going to be reliable.

4
NotInFormation 4 points ago +4 / -0

BuT iF we L3t mIgRaNtS in teh ArMy tHeY wIll b3 m0d3l Americans

3
NotInFormation 3 points ago +3 / -0

So many thin covers for overseas election fraud.

I can easily imagine the wave of populist wins around the world without these funds to prop up globalist politicians.

2
NotInFormation 2 points ago +2 / -0

Just like bad newbie 1LTs; by the book they’re trained to be confident and decisive which gets people killed until they have experience or unless they have enough brains to trust their sergeants and team.

Conversely the hardest thing to do in leadership is get that honest answer until trust is built; by default people give the answer that makes the boss go away, what they think boss wants to hear, or what they think will get the desired result.

Again, here Trump has built that over a lifetime, not least by getting shot!

8
NotInFormation 8 points ago +8 / -0

So: these rely on the general assumption about Nixon insofar as he never got charged -- and so the blanket was never put to a test.

There's one way to find out if a blanket pardon for an unspecified, not yet charged crime is valid.

As with so many other matters, you only want to put something important like this to the test when you're sure of the result. We don't want to accidentally lock into place a mechanism where evil can do whatever it wants to us and then pardon itself, laughing over the wreckage with impunity.

2
NotInFormation 2 points ago +2 / -0

Excellent. He committed many many crimes over his career. Maybe the LGBT crew would have a word or two.

3
NotInFormation 3 points ago +3 / -0

Recognise the pattern; just like the left moved into journalism so as to bleat out that the country wanted socialism, or had Tweets by the thousands all duckspeaking about the clot shot at once, so here.

2
NotInFormation 2 points ago +2 / -0

Many large institutions have leftists embedded in places where they can exercise undue volume.

On the ground, correct traditional thought surges, to the point where it worries Francis.

https://www.americamagazine.org/faith/2022/06/14/pope-francis-traditionalist-gag-243151

2
NotInFormation 2 points ago +2 / -0

It has always been thus. The elites create language to disparage the people.

“Vulgar” from the Latin for the regular people. “Villain” from Anglo-French (like after the Normans invaded) from Medieval Latin and back to Latin for a country person.

All our language is tuned by people who hate most people and want to rule unjustly.

1
NotInFormation 1 point ago +1 / -0

The second most dangerous data security risk is a disgruntled employee.

The most dangerous risk is an embattled C-suite exec, because then it’s a business transaction and not a crime.

3
NotInFormation 3 points ago +3 / -0

Yes, long before any Q stuff. I easily remember uses from a decade ago and in all likelihood the name dates from 17 :) seconds after they landed on the NSA name itself. Might even be the reason NSA was named that if anyone involved had our sense of humor.

3
NotInFormation 3 points ago +3 / -0

Observer: [discussing The Village] This place has been going for a long time.

Number 6: Since the war? Before the war? WHICH... WAR?

(this from 1967)

The awake have known all along what's up.

15
NotInFormation 15 points ago +15 / -0

And the farmers hold the land and the wells and in the end they either comply and perish, or do something else.

Then the bureaucrats can either accept that they’ll still have citizens and tax revenue, or do something else.

And in the end someone may be ordered to go out with a gun and use force, and they also can comply or do something else.

It takes a lot of people cooperating to destroy a people.

1
NotInFormation 1 point ago +1 / -0

Christ is a title but also a person and was a person before he Incarnated in humanity. The Holy Spirit is also described as a person.

While 'satan' is a title it's also more reasonable to presume that Christ and the Gospel writers weren't confused when referring to Satan as a person, and several millenia of people encountering evil and describing evil weren't all just taking orders to do so.

Conversely, in the modern era of critical theory which claims to read text de novo and always, always, lands on a godless Communist destructive meaning, it's more reasonable to assume that people like this Biglino, or Dan Brown trying to recast the gnostic BS as something that wasn't categorically disproven multiple times over the years, are following that path.

If that doesn't help, also remember that many titles, while adjectives, don't mean a thing without there being some class of persons, individual intelligences, to which they attach.

"Lawyer" is meaningless without their being a law and a person. "Accuser" presumes a law, a person, and also a role (and a second person who is accused).

In further reading I suggest, by way of allegorical fiction, "The Silver Chair" in the Narnia series by C.S. Lewis, specifically the part where the green witch interrogates Puddleglum. Her argument is Biglino's argument.

The enemy would love for us to think he's just a metaphor.

1
NotInFormation 1 point ago +1 / -0

Christ and the Holy Spirit are described throughout OT and NT as our advocate.

The Law exists to show us what is holy. None of us measures up to that standard perfectly, and so the enemy can accuse us before God. Give me Rardog900, the prosecution says, he's mine. He is guilty of innumerable errors (sins) before the Law.

Without Christ we have no advocate, one to speak for us. None of us can justify ourselves against the Law.

With Christ, He stands for us and says, Rardog900 is Mine. He believes in Me and is in Me, and I have paid his debt; and since Christ is holy, we are then free.

That's the metaphor, or the literal reality, or both.

3
NotInFormation 3 points ago +3 / -0

Two of three of the miraculous first-generation born of Paki or Odin parents.

The Irish one was replaced by a globalist drone. Let’s see what the planners intend here.

view more: Next ›