Anonymous ID: 77af80 Sept. 27, 2022, 6:19 a.m. No.17589502   🗄️.is 🔗kun

"The philosophers have hitherto only interpreted the world in various ways. The point, however, is to change it.”

 

The world can re-input that output back into itself, and reapply the logic that prompted it, to itself.

 

One possible addition:

 

If the NWO logic sees itself as not merely observing us, but seeks and acts towards CHANGING EVERYTHING, then it logically follows that THAT result itself must be changed and not merely contemplated, because it would itself become included in the everything that would by its own logic require changing and not just contemplation.

 

So, Kari Lake can be considered a 'historical figure' progressing the history of the world FORWARD, as ALL previously implemented sublations (aufhebens) are THEMSELVES righteously negated and transcended, thus negating the "negation of the negation" illogically seeking to become complete over itself. Three step iteration logic thesis antithesis synthesis, negating the negation of the negation.

 

We all have to DO something to prevent the DOING of the 'Praxis of Evil' from destroying the world according to its own logic of "negate the self".

 

https://truthsocial.com/@KariLake/posts/109067572089020395

Anonymous ID: 77af80 Sept. 27, 2022, 6:40 a.m. No.17589583   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>9659 >>9688 >>9964

>>17589487

>>17589540

>Mirror: Its actually amazing how far shills will go to "convince" Anons that the Qclock is wrong. When Q sanctioned the clock

 

Is your definition of "mirror" merely a 'negation' of your narrative?

 

Anon doesn't find any Q drops 'sanctioning' the specific clock image and structure that is being pushed in Q's name.

 

Could you point to the exact Q drop number(s) with direct reference to any image of the 'Qclock' to prove 'sanction' occurred?

 

All Anon has seen are lame brain excuses like

 

"Q said 'graphic', and 'clock', so this specific clock we invented with many specific axioms and structure is what Q was talking about, and if you disagree, if you become too 'belligerent', we will attack your character to coerce conformity."

 

The only logical proof is to source your claim by posting a Q drop that DIRECTLY TAGS a 'Qclock' image so that your choices out of all possible choices in the clock structure, have a Q confirmation.

 

Your INTERPRETATIONS of Q words like 'clock' and 'graphic' are insufficient, incomplete, absent of a Q confirmation, and all your words from the day Q posted what you're referencing, has only EVER been your own and not in any way condoned, sanctioned or confirmed by Q.

 

So, prove Anon wrong. Cite the exact Q drop number where the clock image meme was 'sanctioned'.

 

Anons will wait.

 

Oh, and just like the pattern of fake news you just implemented, Imma gonna get the last word with you and filter you so that everything you write afterwards will not be seen, considered or thought of.

Anonymous ID: 77af80 Sept. 27, 2022, 6:43 a.m. No.17589599   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>9608 >>9619

>>17589487

The repeated pattern of 'needing' to negate the negations of their memes, is the tell.

 

You can tell from their reactions that they are trying to impose authority over the dialogue instead of mutual reciprocal awareness of the truth.

 

>>17589559

>Q gave anons the original clock to use

Post the drop number to prove your statement correct.

 

>and said to track everything with it.Maybe not exact words, but the point is the same.

And there's the lieright there.

Anonymous ID: 77af80 Sept. 27, 2022, 6:50 a.m. No.17589632   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>17589608

>why not counter the people who attack it

Why not counter the countering of people who criticize it?

It slides and fills, but it also introduces more 'they know that we known that they know that we know' strange loops.

Anonymous ID: 77af80 Sept. 27, 2022, 6:55 a.m. No.17589656   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>17589635

Anon knows the why behind the intent (distract, deflect, etc) AND Anon can still recognize that such intent will never itself be a control mechanism denying Anon of what Anon wants to do regardless of the 'intent' of the mark thinking that mere consistent pattern of concatenations of events signals control over marks as such.

 

Analogue: A marker marks someone to, in some way, go to the grocery store. The 'mark' goes to the grocery store.

Q: What REALLY motivated Anon to go to the grocery store? The marker, or…?

Anonymous ID: 77af80 Sept. 27, 2022, 7:01 a.m. No.17589686   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>9713 >>9735

>>17589659

Explain how what you just posted is a 'confirmation' of the 'Qclock', because it's just the clock with Q drops superimposed and a bunch of haphazard lines this way and that.

 

>>17589668

No it isn't, it's just an old 'theory' advancing itself as what it isn't.