6
SergeantSlaughter 6 points ago +6 / -0

En[g]lish and legalese are both fictional languages

u/#correct

Enhlish

Setnfornall

From where do you hail? Is it happy hour rn? Kekek

I'm not finding the book you're referencing - what is the title?

2
SergeantSlaughter 2 points ago +2 / -0

It's pronounced "doot"

The V sounds like a hard D, and the O is a hard U

2
SergeantSlaughter 2 points ago +2 / -0

um, if you think that controlled opposition does NOT exist, it might just be you that's the crazy!

Controlled opposition is just a shill, plain and simple. Sometimes they're easy to detect (tards) and other times they're not (you may agree with them about everything except this one little issue)

That said, perhaps we agree that some of the 'crazies' do go overboard in accusing everyone and everything as 'controlled opposition'.

It's not always a 1 or a 0. It's somewhere in between. One's own internal bias often leads them to shill for one cause, or another. Or, shill against one (Candace in this case)

13
SergeantSlaughter 13 points ago +13 / -0

This was transcribed from that lawyarfag in court who read it out loud. Let's at least give them a chance to release screenshots, or actual unmodified and timestamped data from the cellular carrier or app provider before we lose our minds over it.

3
SergeantSlaughter 3 points ago +3 / -0

I watched both Candace videos in full. I don't have any bias against any of the conservative commentators, I don't think any of them are "controlled opposition" or whatever the crazies are saying these days. She is simply asking for timestamps so we can piece together the timeline of events of 9-10. Makes perfect sense when you put your emotions to the side and look at it objectively.

Basically what I'm saying is your bias is why you're missing it.

6
SergeantSlaughter 6 points ago +6 / -0

Thats fine. I never watched Candace either until yesterday. I tried to before, but just couldn't get past the first few minutes of the video. But then yesterday she started pointing out all of these inconsistencies and given that she is semi-inner-circle, my ears perked up. Give it a chance, but start with yesterday's video. Put your emotions aside and listen to what she is saying (but fast forward through the commercial at the half-way point)

10
SergeantSlaughter 10 points ago +10 / -0

I'm from now on discounting anyone who says XYZ conservative is "controlled opposition" and also anyone who says "the idea that (insert-country-here) did XYZ is ludicrous" is also going to be ignored.

10
SergeantSlaughter 10 points ago +10 / -0

Agree 100% - this is not the same Candace we've seen up until this point. Something has lit a fire inside this woman.

4
SergeantSlaughter 4 points ago +4 / -0

interesting dots. there have been so many of these little coincidences in this case

by N0rds
4
SergeantSlaughter 4 points ago +4 / -0

They did this a month or so ago too, no ties

5
SergeantSlaughter 5 points ago +5 / -0

Zinn claimed to shoot Kirk

He was the guy that the "right-wing" police were supposed to shoot on scene so the whole thing could be wrapped up in a neat little package (like JFK)

Edit. I'm getting down dooted here so let me clarify the thought. Is it possible this guy was supposed to be the fall guy, and maybe murdered himself (like Jack Ruby killed LHO)?

12
SergeantSlaughter 12 points ago +12 / -0

I've never really listened to Candace before, I've tried to, but just couldn't make it past the first minute or so.

But this episode, I couldn't stop watching. Very good episode

4
SergeantSlaughter 4 points ago +4 / -0

there is none that doeth good, no, not one.

This part of the quote seems to reference the subject of the previous part "there is none that seeketh after God" so it is those who do no good. What did I miss?

view more: ‹ Prev Next ›