Oh heavens me! Why would you suggest such a thing?? How could you expect little old me to do anything?

e (singular) be we (plural)? Does bein

How be we be le re see ve tea glee?

ommunicates whole (perceivable) towards partials (perceivin

When we see (perceive) we look (see) and we (me) be tea lee re gee vee bee

y...Louie Louie you're gonn

[ loo-ee ] - noun

1. a male given name, form of Louis.

weeting the 3 letters (J.E

let·ter - noun; plural noun: letters

1. a character representing one or more of the sounds used in speech; any of the symbols of an alphabet. "a capital letter"

Ah. So how do you know Janelle Monae has any, for sure?

I meant specifically for Janelle Monae. She is only mentioned once in this article. Has there been any sightings of two of her in one place?

ces by others tempts one to ignore conseque

tempt - verb, 3rd person present: tempts

1. entice or attempt to entice (someone) to do or acquire something that they find attractive but know to be wrong or not beneficial. "there'll always be someone tempted by the rich pickings of poaching"

outcomes) as to tempt con

tempt - verb, 3rd person present: tempts

1. entice or attempt to entice (someone) to do or acquire something that they find attractive but know to be wrong or not beneficial. "there'll always be someone tempted by the rich pickings of poaching"

esignated unit (partial ones) implies whole onen

one - number the lowest cardinal number; half of two;

1. "there's only room for one person"

OMPLETE (filled) hence as partial

hence - adverb

1. as a consequence; for this reason. "a stiff breeze and hence a high windchill"

sing aka expressed growt

growth - noun

1. the process of increasing in physical size. "the upward growth of plants"

; future) tempts one to ignore perceiv

to - preposition

1. expressing motion in the direction of (a particular location). "walking down to the mall"
2. approaching or reaching (a particular condition). "Christopher's expression changed from amazement to joy"

one to ignore where ones AT, because o

one - number the lowest cardinal number; half of two;

1. "there's only room for one person"

Yeah I'm sure the black hats just let that happen so everyone can find it so easily

(partial) within oneness (whole)

par·tial - adjective

1. existing only in part; incomplete.

can only exist within fall (ongoing process of dying)

ex·ist - verb

1. have objective reality or being. "there existed no organization to cope with espionage"

while being moved from inception towards death,

while - noun

1.a period of time. "we chatted for a while"

Similar: time, spell, stretch, stint, span, season, interval, period, period of time, length of time, duration, run, phase, stage, term, p,atch

2. at the same time; meanwhile. "he starts to draw, talking the while"

Plural

plu·ral - adjective

1. GRAMMAR (of a word or form) denoting more than one, or (in languages with dual number) more than two.

"the first person plural"

2. containing several diverse elements.

"a plural society"

response to origin

or·i·gin

noun 1. the point or place where something begins, arises, or is derived.

"the name is Norse in origin"

Similar: beginning, start, origination, genesis, birth, dawning, dawn, emergence, inception, launch, creation, birthplace, cradle, early stages, conception,inauguration, foundation, outset, source, basis, base, cause, root, roots, spring, mainspring, well head, fountainhead, fountain, fount, head, seat, seed, germ, fons et origo, commencement, wellspring, radix, derivation, provenance, etymology, provenience

Opposite: end, conclusion, termination

2. ANATOMY - the more fixed end or attachment of a muscle.

So has anyone seen 2+ clones in one place?

Currently? She most definitely is not.

She along with many thanked him in the context of winning awards. People were known to have worked with him in the movie business.

Is there proof of her paying to rape kids or not?

You didn’t reply with any evidence. A name alone on a flight log is not evidence for paying to rape a child.

What else has Meryl Streep done to warrant investigation into her?

“Without proof”? You made the claim that Chris Tucker, John Glenn, and Meryl Streep all paid to rape kids. I’m simply asking you to show your proof.

Do you have any or do you not?

I’ve already said numerous times now: a video is not the requirement for me, nor am I asking only about trump. The only “evidence” you seem to have is their name in a flight log.

I have done research on the topic. I’m well aware of trump’s associations with Epstein and Maxwell and I think it should be thoroughly investigated.

Now, what about Chris tucker? John Glenn? Is there any supporting information on them, similar to what you’ve listed here about trump? Or for them is it just the flight log?

So you think being invited on a pedophile Mosad agent is nothing that should never be investigated

Nope, that's not what I said.

I am asking if there's evidence other than their names on a flight log. You can absolutely help me, you are just outright refusing to.

It would be insane, for sure, if you were to actually have the evidence and are willingly not showing it for some malicious reason. IMO, that would honestly only be enabling those who are guilty to stay in hiding, because the evidence is being hidden by you.

You don't seem to be that bad of a person, so the other most logical explanation is that you have no awareness of any such evidence, and you have decided to take their names on a flight log as proof alone that they paid to rape children.

The main topic was what was this list of people who paid to rape children, and you said it was the Epstein flight list. So asking about Chris Tucker, and John Glenn, and Meryl Streep are still part of the main topic. Is there any actual evidence that these three paid to rape kids aside from just a name on a flight log?

Clearly there doesn’t seem to be, as you put up a very similar stonewalling tactic that’s just become so predictable at this point.

Oh I very much have, and have had this very same discussion with others. It usually hits a point much like this one where the person (you) refuses to answer a basic question because you claim I haven't jumped through the necessary number of hoops.

It makes it seem like you don't want discourse, you just want someone to agree with whatever you say.

And again, it's not just trump.

Is there more evidence than just a name on a flight log that Chris Tucker paid to rape children? Or John Glenn? Or Meryl Streep? Because in all the research I've done, the flight log is the only "evidence" of them raping kids. There is nothing else, no money trail, no testimony, no anything that links them to these acts.

If you think you have this answer, I'm happy to see it, but based on your behavior here it's clear that you just made up these accusations and choose to believe them

You think you should wait for Trump to rape a child in a video before you believe it?

Not necessarily a video, but it would require more than a name on a flight log. And it's not just him, it's every other name. I would need there to be more proof than that.

Is it confirmed that every flight included acts of pedophilia and rape by the members on the plane, and not just Epstein?

I agree it should be investigated, but there's no reason they should be arrested until there is evidence they participated in these acts.

Btw, there is a witness testimony that implicates Trump, Clinton and more.

Great, that's a start! If there are also testimonies for all of the other people on the plane too then there's good reason for people to be mad none of them have been arrested. Otherwise, it's just names on a flight log.

It's what the definition of sarcasm literally is.

But I digress, we can continue.

So every single person on the flight log has paid to rape children. Is their presence on this list the only available evidence, or is there something more concrete (like a money trail, or photo evidence, or some sort of witness testimony)?

Does this sufficient evidence exist for each and every person on the list, or is it only implied guilt through association?

It’s not about getting it or not getting it. Sarcasm is the antithesis of being genuine.

You didn’t give a genuine answer, you gave a sarcastic answer.

If you used sarcasm, then you didn’t give a genuine answer.

I asked you a question, that was the answer you gave. I came in with genuine intentions and I was (apparently wrongly) assuming you would give a genuine answer.

Do you have a genuine answer to my original question?

Well that was the point of my question. Your original post mentioned “every person who paid to rape children” and when I asked who that was you listed the flight logs. But now you’re saying some of those names don’t apply.

So, I’ll ask again: which of the names are people who paid to rape children? Is there a list that only includes the guilty ones and not anyone who fell into the plane without knowledge?

But trump is on the flight log. Did he pay to fuck kids? Is everyone on the flight log guilty of this or is it a more specific list?