https://t.me/EricStrikerTRS/11299
White liberals are getting some strongly conflicting messages here. They are taught to defer to blacks and defer to experts, but here they have hit a contradiction: 70% of blacks in NYC aren't vaccinated and they are calling any attempt to immunize them through mandates racist.
How they deal with this dilemma will be interesting to watch.
PROTEST', verb intransitive [Latin protestor; pro and testor, to affirm it.] The few suggest protests to deceive the many into each other; which in return maintains what both sides think they protest against.
It's pro-life versus pro-choice that so far sustained suggested "abortion" for over half a century; and both sides are so ignorant that they don't even comprehend that LIFE equals CHOICE.
Consent to any suggestion causes the conflict of reason between choice of want versus choice of not want aka both "sides" represent consent to the same suggestion by choosing want over need. The parasitic few then suggest brands to both sides (pro-life vs pro-choice) to further deceive the many to ignore who made the suggestion they are reasoning about; what sustains the suggested, and of course to insolently hold the mirror to ignorance by deceiving the many to fight over life vs choice.
Once consented to suggestion, and stuck within conflict of reason (want vs not want; true vs false; good vs bad; left vs right etc.) the few who made the suggestion causing the division (reason) among the many; then sustain reason by suggesting contradiction (conflicting messages) to both sides to keep them reasoning in perpetuity. This is call talmudic reasoning aka control of reason by suggestion of contradiction.
Meanwhile; the so called talmud encourages to use of implication (if/then) over reason (want vs not want; true vs false; good vs bad etc.); which keeps them out of reasoning; while they feed the ignorance of the many what they want or not want to hear, which tempts them to start reasoning afresh for every bite of contradiction they consent to.