This document is almost 3 years old. There are more documents related to DARPA and DOD involvement. This was a bombshell back in 2021, now people hardly remember the ridiculous coof psy op.
All the selected candidates have one thing in common. Guess what it is.
Basically 1984 at this point.
Fake and gay dialectic just like the good old left vs right. They are all part of the One world government transhumanist agenda.
A valid point though WEF is a publicity front for the real gathering of technocrat controllers. The people here are clowns and puppets. The people with real power are to be found in Bilderberg, CFR, Chatham House, Tavistock, CIA, MI6, DARPA and the banking elite.
I'm sure, but then you have Taylor Swift claiming to be Christian. I bet she's part of some Church too.
Eve got deceived by ((the snake)) once again and cucked Adam didn't assume responsibility for his fault in this. There's nothing new under the sun.
I agree with most of this.
If you come to faith (marry Christ), then lose your faith (cheat on your wife), then it is impossible to renew your faith to repentance, as Jesus can not be sacrificed on the cross a second time for you.
People can repent from all sin no matter how grave it is and still be saved, except the unforgivable sin of blaspheming the Holy Spirit. Christ's incarnation and sacrifice is cosmic in scope and not limited in time and space (i.e. each individual's sin but man's sinful nature as a whole). It was the undoing of the fall of Adam and bringing man back to eternal life (through salvation within the Church) by defeating death. He assumed human nature and lifted it up. God became man so that man can become god.
Yes I know the Sola fide doctrine of protestantism. It is false. Faith is ultimately tied to good deeds, repenting from sin and striving to live a life in Christ. If I love my wife, I wouldn't cheat on her. Sola fide is like saying "I love my wife and that's the only thing that matters - cheating on her wouldn't change that". Believing in Christ is a prerequisite for being saved, it makes one "salvable". But it's not enough just like it wasn't enough for Christ to reveal Himself in flesh, to teach and perform miracles without ultimately sacrificing Himself and defeating death for us.
It's true Christ fulfilled the law and made a new covenant with the people of the eternal Israel which is not of this world (His Church). This is why we don't observe the same laws given to the hebrews but that doesn't mean Christ did away with all of His previous law (because He's the one speaking to Moses) and left people do whatever they please. Christ and the Apostles laid out the moral law Christians must follow which is a continuation of the law of the OT. Christ made sinners repent and "sin no more" in order to be saved.
Did Christ die on the cross so that man could live in sin according to his desires or did He die so that man could repent and live a life in God according to His law that would bring him eternal life?
Responsibilities to God, their families and their husbands.
Sure. What do they benefit from people believing in Christ and what is the alternative truthful worldview people should assume?
Because democracy has always been a shitty political system and government since the time of Plato.
Jackson was a true patriot who fought against the NWO and was nearly assasinated for it. Epstein was a CIA/Mossad entrapment agent a satanic pedophile and a jew who got assassinated by his own. I don't see any similarities there.
Exactly. I've received a lot of normie pushback and ridicule for using a dumbphone.
Communism/socialism/marxism/"anti-fascism" is jewish
The beams would be able to support 100.000 tons yes, but not 100.000 tons falling on top of them, that is the difference.
This is why I said in the beginning the only difference is the momentum from the couple of floors where the beams got severed. But as we know from the 3rd law of mechanics the force generated from that momentum would eventually be neutralized by the resistance from the floors below where the beams are intact.
An example would be if you hold a 100.000 ton anvil above one of the towers, with the same surface area as the towers, and dropped it upon the tower, the beams would not be built to handle this, and the whole tower would end up collapsing from the impact of the anvil dropping on top of it: one floor at the time, each floor collapses in about 1/10 of a second as the weight of the anvil above falls on top of it: in 1 second 10 floors would have collapsed.
No, that's a wrong analogy. Dropping an anvil assumes adding additional weight that isn't part of the structure. That's not the case because no additional weight was added as I stated before. The building wasn't designed to support a 100k ton anvil on top of it, but it was designed to support itself even in the case of structural damage (it could withstand a few planes crashing at it compromising sections of the beams). At this point I have to say you're deliberately skewing the facts and strawmaning.
Genius, the point is the buildings were designed so that the weight above the impact (100.000 tons) would be safely supported by the beams below it. If that weren't the case, the building would collapse under its own weight and wouldn't be viable for exploitation at all. This is basic engineering.
Some of the beams were compromised by the impact and by the jet fuel supposedly. But that's only at the site of the impact and not throughout the whole building. Which means the floors where the beams were intact wouldn't collapse (there was no added weight upon them - they already supported the upper floors with no problem).
That's not how physics work. The weight of the tower above the impact was supported by the structure below with no problem up until that point. The only force working is the momentum created by the collapse of the few floors where the plane struck - the weight above remains constant.
And even then, what would have happened if the collapse was caused by the crash, is the upper tower would tip to the side of the impact and fall asymmetrically to the side of the building - not fall in its footprint. Such a collapse is textbook controlled demolition with carefully placed detonations going off at just the right time. There is no way this could be reproduced three times in three different buildings having sustained various degrees of damage at random points just by mere accident.
Gtfo with this bs, you're not convincing anyone with your ridiculous lies, jewboy.
Are you sure the momentum generated from a few meters of falling down is enough to collapse the whole building? This violates the Newtonian laws of mechanics - the energy generated from the momentum would be neutralized after a while and would not lead to a domino effect collapse to the bottom floor.
Why did the buildings fall all the way to the ground though? If the beams were compromised at the impact floors what caused the lower beams to give off and collapse?
Oh really? What was it then and how do you go about deboonking it, fedboy? How does a skyscraper fall in its footprint and what caused WTC 7 to fall?
So them dancing is an anti-jewish lie by the arabs but a bunch of Mossad agents documenting and cheering the controlled demolition is ok? No. It doesn't change much.
It's well documented gay men have very high sex drive and are highly promiscuous.
If Christianity is true, the Church will prevail against the gates of hell till the end of time, which means the true Church will never be corrupted because it's the body of Christ and the Ark of salvation.
If Christianity is false then all Christian institutions are corrupted to begin with.
Those are the only two logically possible positions.