Well,in a way it makes sense:
Georg = earth-worker, tiller of the earth. By extension: plougher, sower, harvester = farmer.
GAW is all about farming the hearts and minds ...
immutable.....
Is there a country called This? What do they speak in This? Thissish?
When ever they fail being specific, go from the position of them meaning something else than you think.
They mean: their disease ridden Pedo Temple.
State Department deep shit .... He does qualify for playing along.
Who needs enemies with such an "ally"
They showed part of a picture from a book (Peter Navarro has that book). If I am not mistaken,there is a train or something in there with the name: Trump.
My memory is a bit hazy ...
I'll see if I can dig it up, maybe I've got it on an old backup (archive offline and all that). If any of you guys know what I am talking about, your help in bringing it back will be appreciated.
I think we discussed it here on GAW in 2019/2020/2021.
I seem to remember, it was connected by the writer of a blogpost on the Prussian state to Prussian secret services.
added: Walter Bosley | NYMZA, The Sonora Aero Club
No wonder he was shagging Lisa ......
Is he a medical doctor all of a sudden? If not, he is not covered by that label.
Snakeoil salesmen as a label is the least of his troubles: conspiracy to deprive and deprivation of rights under the color of law with deadly consequences
25 years in prison or death penalty.
18 USC 241/242
hahahaha, the irony,
Kholomoisky is known for his 5.5. billion dollar Ukranian state money abduction
further reading:
- https://archive.searchvoat.co/v/GreatAwakening/3950758/24973021
- https://archive.searchvoat.co/v/GreatAwakening/3694692/22809109
- https://archive.searchvoat.co/v/GreatAwakening/3638151/22352632
- Keep the name Jamal Kashogi in mind ( arms dealer -> Benghazi, Las Vegas)
- https://archive.searchvoat.co/v/GreatAwakening/3445258
- https://archive.searchvoat.co/v/GreatAwakening/3463976/20888745
Kholomoiski, MH17, Burisma, Arms Trade, ISIS, EU Energy Security.
Sometimes, the rear view mirror yields interesting views ....
The guy has too many chairman positions .....
Why is understanding important here? Can one act acknowledging such a temporary station (comprehension) without "supporting (standing under") it?
As samurai: Mayamoto Mushashi said: to perceive the things for what they are.
This leads me to one simple yet difficult matter:
In strategy, you have effectively won when you forestall the enemy.
We have seen this practiced over these last 8 years, and we will see more of it.
Trump:
BRICS currency? Dumping USD? Fine, here is the tariff on your shit. Good luck with that.
And, we know from these past 80 years, military strength is always temporary and dependent on the moral factor of the people making up that military.
In terms of weaponry, yes, it is an awesome sight to behold.
But, when you look closely at the way things are going: why is Sirky in the Sumi region so powerful? Why is it, that Doug McGregor announced the demise of the Ukro army, yet, the resistance is, despite overpowering weaponry and manpower, stiff and resilient? Why is Russia swapping Generals?
There is more to this game than meets the eye. Certainly, the Russian army should not be underestimated. It's weaponry is awesome. But to demand that Trump "understands" that?
But I do appreciate the call to take into account, that a landwar, at the end of the logistical feasibility, especially in the face of the gargantuan resources Russia has in place, it foolish and should be stopped.
And that is a reality Trump perceives. What I notice is how Trump emphasizes the human factor, the costs in human lives, the destruction of infrastructure, the suffering of the civilian population. This is reason enough to end a war that is based on a lie and not a just one.
Thanks for your views.
It reminds me of the discussions we have had about Mueller and Rosenstein.
Q:
if Mueller is dirty, Rosenstein is Dirty
and
if Rosenstein is dirty, Mueller is dirty
Fly RR, Fly.
We have been going back and forth about it, since the onset, without a real resolution, as any view can be places next to the opposing view.
I feel that we have the same situation here. Is Wray a patriot? You bring up some very good points!
I also am conscious about a view expressed by a dutch comedian called Herman Finkers in his show: After the break: (he was diagnosed with cancer and had to take a break). He had written a song called: A Friend:
https://youtube.com/embed/PF1yG-ljoTk
An enemy is not so bad, you can handle an enemy
But if a friend is going to hit.......
An enemy, love him quietly, forgive him everything,
For he knows not what he does, but a friend knows all that he does
An enemy hits you, that's what an enemy is for, you give him another cheek,
You feel holy and life goes on
An enemy does what he stands for; it's your friend who betrays you
You are grieved to death and Peter's eyes grow weary
While you bleed from pure fear your apostle is most afraid
When you are condemned to death he says he denies you
If you hang on the cross and die, he stays in his house for fear
And if you want to hide from danger he has a quick excuse ready
Because yes he has a family too so no you can't get in
He closes his door quickly and says “You do understand”.
When you get to the beef of it the friendship is quickly dies
But an enemy is always loyal, an enemy is so attached to that life of yours
That he gladly gives his if with it he has yours
He dons a vest with dynamite because he doesn't care about his own
He blows himself up without remorse, he does it all for you
And at your place of execution an enemy is not so crazy either
He cares about your fate, you gifts you the 'coup de grace'
So therefore: will you be my enemy?
I need something I can truly depend on
Someone I can always trust
And then you do something unexpected that I never expected from my enemy
Then I'll say: “Well, hey, you're so easy on me”
Because an enemy is one thing, but a friend;
you wouldn't wish it on your worst enemy.
At least you get the gist, certain idiom is typically language dependent. At any rate, it allows for the following consequence as a supposition, opposite to what you considered:
- controlled
- doing what needs done.
- the price for former indiscretions/ redemption. (conditional upon delivery?)
Q:
Trust Wray
and
Wray is a sleeper.
From what position? Can you trust an enemy to do what an enemy does?
This bring us to the question of likelihood of either supposition. Which, I think, currently is difficult to answer.
What does that say about the standing France has?
It's hidden package has an impact
For those having some time on their hands, because the the rest of the family decided to take the Mock Rats advice:
https://archive.org/details/b20442580/page/n13/mode/2up?view=theater
I can only accept those as free who are neither a slave of someone else or their lusts - Oera Linda Bok-2193 bce.
Interesting. Pre-setting the conditions of contract.
Question: how about now clicking: I agree to something you have not read, or even fully agree to?
The same goes for bill of exchange. You do not have to use their debt bill. ....
Clap for them.......
Jerusalema dance ...
He needs high heels to play the piano with his dick ....
was german just a few years ago.
It was still German, but under Polish administration under the auspices of the League of Nations.
Poland had other plans. and the German-Poland relation deteriorated vast after 1937 when a new Polish government came in.
After the WOII these areas were again part of Poland's administration based on the agreements made but ... still part of the German Reich ....
2 q-proofs in one post:
- senators 53-47
- in come Pam Bondi.
I like the green screen ......
Just imagine having to wear a teal Mao coat .....
quite telling ....
First off: do not ask permission to the government to marry in the first place. That gives the .gov the jurisdiction to order you around.
Instead, do as it has been for ages: the decision and act of marriage is a matter between a man and a woman: it is contractual.
Prenuptial can function for good things, since the government is the biggest gold-digger no one sees coming.
I' ve been looking for that quote. Has any pede here found it in the records of Nuremberg?
To me it seems elusive.
That said, I would go a step further, since the premise here is a government is allowed to take the property of someone else without proper contractual premise but based on the idea of the common good and other utilitarian arguments, and say: no one is obliged to pay taxes since it is theft.