Anonymous ID: e164ce Oct. 26, 2020, 8:20 a.m. No.11287771   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>7947 >>7969 >>8308

Q is indeed a magnificent bastard!

 

Q not only cracked the deep state's information firewalls by uniting military with civilian population for the first time ever, but, and incredibly:

 

==All attacks from the shills who pretend to be outraged and upset about 'no arrests' up until this particular day, out of the next 4 years at least, is that they are all logically suggesting they have KNOWLEDGE AND AWARENESS of the evil activities they themselves are claiming the evil doers 'got away with it' because of 'no arrested' up until this particular day!

 

What they are ADMITTING TO THE WORLD is that they all agree Q succeeded in getting the information out into the general public, including the shill's own minds.

 

In other words, every future attack on Q's 'arrests' activities can only ever be people attacking their own minds from having learned what was learned precisely because of the Q project that made them capable of complaining in the first place.

 

The FRAMEWORK of the shills' entire possible syntax is and can only be INTERNALIZED by the shills themselves for even positing the information that got out there because of Q (and Anons, and Patriots, and the digital army of citizen journalists worldwide).

 

We're already past the point of no return.

Anonymous ID: e164ce Oct. 26, 2020, 8:53 a.m. No.11288212   🗄️.is 🔗kun

Ludwig Von Mises' discovery of DIVISIVE LOGIC INHERENT IN MARXISM:

 

>Neither the Marxians nor the racists nor the supporters of any other brand of polylogism ever went further than to declare that the logical structure of mind is different with various classes, races, or nations. They never ventured to demonstrate precisely in what the logic of the proletarians differs from the logic of the bourgeois, or in what the logic of the Aryans differs from the logic of the non-Aryans, or the logic of the Germans from the logic of the French or the British. In the eyes of the Marxians the Ricardian theory of comparative cost is spurious because Ricardo was a bourgeois. The German racists condemn the same theory because Ricardo was a Jew, and the German nationalists because he was an Englishman. Some German professors advanced all these three arguments together against the validity of Ricardo's teachings. However, it is not enough to reject a theory wholesale by unmasking the background of its author. What is wanted is first to expound a system of logic different from that applied by the criticized author. Then it would be necessary to examine the contested theory point by point and to show where in its reasoning inferences are made whichalthough correct from the point of view of its author's logicare invalid from the point of view of the proletarian, Aryan, or German logic. And finally, it should be explained what kind of conclusions the replacement of the author's vicious inferences by the correct inferences of the critic's own logic must lead to. As everybody knows, this never has been and never can be attempted by anybody.

 

https://mises.org/library/human-action-0/html/pp/657