>>17950196 pb
>I talk to myself all the time.
>I can't get myself to shut up.
that's what LSD is for. it silences the internal dialog, and then you become aware of all the sensory input your internal dialog has been blocking. so have some… TODAY!
Nixon knew who killed JFK, specifically a black op group called the S-team. Nixon was paranoid and decided to dismantle the S-team, and the CIA controllers. he fired ~ 600 top CIA senior admin. so they decided to get rid of him. another assassination so soon after JFK was deemed too dangerous (sheep might notice). so they went for character assassination instead. they exploited his paranoia and entrapped him into authorizing the watergate break-in, with the intent of deliberately bungling it so that Nixon would be implicated. he was handed his hat and shown the door, backed by threats against his family if he resisted. one of the first official acts of Gerald Ford after he was sworn in was to rehire every single CIA admin and agent that Nixon had fired.
>shit-tier boomer memes $99 each
ain't a single boomer gonna piss away their SS check on that shit. that kinda crap appeals to youngsters too stupid to understand the value of a dollar saved. boomers be looking to SELL the the shit they have to supplement their retirement income, 'cause they can no longer ignore their own mortality, and realize that NONE of this shit has any meaning. so GFY, you dumbass fucking millennial tard, and hate on boomers somewhere else (like gary's sex dungeon).
IDK about musk. imma go with putin and xi.
>moran
objects in mirror are CLOSER than they appear.
the DS is global, so the takedown has to be global. three biggest powers. putin has publicly said the DS are satanists. rothschild has called putin a traitor. WTF is WRONG with you? you some kind of faggot leatherneck with you head up mueller's ass? russia russia russia? MORAN yourself, fucktard.
>I don't mean /ourboomers/.
then WHY mention boomers at all? EVERY generation has its share of fuckwits. you are evidence of that.
>You're the one trying to ID the Q team rather than researching the Q material
ackshully… i was NOT the OP who posed the question. i merely tossed my speculation into the convo. GET OVER YOURSELF, faggot.
you must be a riot at parties.
rrrriiiiiight. boomers collectively were responsible for the national debt. not the uniparty in congress who fucked us all.
seems like you just wanna find a scapegoat to blame for all YOUR inadequacies.
learn a trade. BUILD something. REPAIR something. CREATE some ACTUAL WEALTH with your own two hands.
if you don't do value-added labor, but you still collect a paycheck, YOU'RE one of the thieves that caused this. FUCKWIT.
REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE harder, stupid twat.
> I realized I piss off the demons by merely existing
OMG. what kind of megalomanic psychopath could say something that arrogant. is that you, hillary?
>WE KNOW!!
you don't know jack shit. if your brains were plutonium, you couldn't blow your nose.
if we put your brain on the edge of a razor blade it would look like a BB rolling down a 12-lane highway.
reading comprehension not your strong suit?
>>17952213
>"We are all socialized in Western society to resist judging any individual by his or her ethnic/group association. It's a noble ideal: Why prejudge anyone about anything? Let any individual be completely evaluated upon his or her respective merits. America is educationally, and legally, configured as a "tolerant" society, champion of a variety of multicultural perspectives. As reasonable as this may seem, however, there can be a profound double standard subliminally at work here. What about when the "individual we must not prejudge" is part of a subcommunity that itself prejudges all who are not part of that group's boundaries of identity, a group that consistently acts by its self-protective, self-expansive biases? Is it "prejudicial" to criticize individuals who maintain actively or passively such group allegiance, within, and transcending, the American matrix? And is it not morally reasonable, and in fact morally necessary, to criticize any collectivity, to the degree it deviates, at core, from the inter-ethnic tolerant, and universalistic, ethic of the American sociopolitical framework? And what about when such a group can, alternately or collectively, self-configure as a racial, ethnic, religious, nationalist, and political organization? Does such a community merit categorical immunity from criticism?"
HIGH IQ POST