Why is it called the Department of Defense when the last time we actually defended our country was in 1812?
Why is it called the Department of Defense when the last time we actually defended our country was in 1812?
It is. The jews are playing with the world.
It is. The jews are playing with the world.
see, wouldn't Russia have declared war on just about the entire NATO by now?
fucking hell, this alliance shit is what kicked off WWI
see, wouldn't Russia have declared war on just about the entire NATO by now?
fucking hell, this alliance shit is what kicked off WWI
It is normal in the clown world we now live in.
It is normal in the clown world we now live in.
Historically not a declaration of war. It is a declaration of sides and alignment. It means the US is a legitimate military target, without requiring a declaration of war.
Historically not a declaration of war. It is a declaration of sides and alignment. It means the US is a legitimate military target, without requiring a declaration of war.
Because sending goyim to fight goyim in order to reduce the population of fighting age Aryan men in countries you control is not a war, it's genocide.
Because sending goyim to fight goyim in order to reduce the population of fighting age Aryan men in countries you control is not a war, it's genocide.
The only thing happening is this. Everything else is a lie.
The only thing happening is this. Everything else is a lie.
Not to mention the supplies and arms likely being ferried over on commercial airlines as human shields. Lusitania 2.0 incoming
Not to mention the supplies and arms likely being ferried over on commercial airlines as human shields. Lusitania 2.0 incoming
It is. But if Russia calls (((America's))) bluff, it instantly means nuke war. Which is what (((America ))) wants
It is. But if Russia calls (((America's))) bluff, it instantly means nuke war. Which is what (((America ))) wants
I've seen parallels in Australia with speech.
- They don't "censor" because that draws negative attention.
- They instead "refer" posts to the company for review to see if it "breaches their acceptable use policy"
- Translation: "Censor this, but make up a plausible reason"
- End result: Government tells social media companies what to censor, with 100% success rate; but they have plausible deniability. The government is not censoring anyone!!
It's like the slimy arguments they make about "we didn't force you to get the vaccine".
I've seen parallels in Australia with speech.
- They don't "censor" because that draws negative attention.
- They instead "refer" posts to the company for review to see if it "breaches their acceptable use policy"
- Translation: "Censor this, but make up a plausible reason"
- End result: Government tells social media companies what to censor, with 100% success rate; but they have plausible deniability. The government is not censoring anyone!!
It's like the slimy arguments they make about "we didn't force you to get the vaccine".
(post is archived)