“We do indeed have a matter brewing that is 10 times bigger than (2000) Mules. It’ll be about 6 weeks before we can clear our way through it, but I assure you it is the most explosive issue that you have ever come in contact with, related to elections within the United States.” - Gregg Phillips
6 weeks…August. Normally a very HOT month?
Nice projection, demon.
>human lives versus intolerance for wild animals
>exactly
No, not 'exactly'.
That is just same garbage code of presuming a division at source, a 'conflict' that is an ideology, with people with mental disorders 'seeing' their own psychosis in the world around them.
Your post and Anon's post is all demonic code to 'sneak in' and spew 'commit violence' narrative.
We see you.
Yes, but Anon thinking either it will carry over into August to become the hot topic (need to setup hearings) and/or plan is two weeks ahead of schedule, OR, Phillips says about 6 weeks but it will turn into at least 8.
Anon thinking we're close enough.
>truth is relative to the cultural aspect of the observer
Such a statement presupposes the mind to have TRANSCENDED that very deterministic version of historicism to 'see' outside of it.
You're eliciting gobbledygook.
The same purveyors of the doctrine which condemns all humanity as divided from truth because of 'cultures', are ALWAYS leaving an escape hatch for themselves, where magically without explanation THAT VERY CLAIM is somehow not subject to 'cultural bias', and thr purveyors of the doctrine are to be viewed by ALL parties as transcending the very 'culture' divide they just claimed limits all claims to truth.
Kek
It's not working, demon.
No Anon…
No Anon….
Did you think it wouldn't be noticed what you morons are trying to do?
Your patterns are obvious
Any time you get data, you clean it and understand it first before implementing it into one's supply of unconscious adoptions.
If someone says
"Truth is relative to culture aspect of observer"
instead of getting lost by trusting it is true it's just up to you to perform endless loops of dialectic to imagine scenarios to 'allow yourself' to get mindfucked into seeing YOUR thoughts as divided based on how the same source would need to provide labelling algos to identify whatever 'culture' determines your mind, it is better to first ask the question:
Is the system that outputted the statement, presenting its awareness of truth as consistent with its own statements?
So I say,
REINPUT "Truth is relative to culture aspect of observer" BACK INTO THE MIND OF THE HUMAN SOURCE OF THE STATEMENT.
See what happens? ERROR.
The source is eliciting at least two inconsistent outputs, one symbolic the other performative.